AAC

[Chief00]

We have some very good teams in our conference. Let’s embrace that.

American Athletic Conference power rankings: Week 8

 

[Adios]

The hardcore fans seem to be embracing the AAC, except in women's bball. Are the casual fans embracing the AAC, too?

This conference feels like in between a heavily roided up C-USA and the Big East, but is doing better in football in the years after Miami left. Florida schools and UH replaced Miami.

USF even seems to draw fans these days.

 

[FDNY99]

Outside of regional "name" recognition...BC, Syracuse, Rutgers and Pitt were avg to below avg members of the BE in football by the time UConn became a member. BC was probably the best of the bunch with Syracuse heading into decline, Pitt barely cresting .500 each season before they left and Shady had RU on the rise with one good season before he started stumbling along (he did have Edsall's number though). In hoops RU was a train wreck and BC never really moved the needle on the BE hoops radar their last few seasons before heading to the ACC. IMHO having season tickets form day 1 at the Rent...the AAC top to bottom is a much better football league in terms of the on-field product (outside of UConn of course) than the BE was. Basketball is another story...mainly due to UConn and Memphis not puling their collective weight.

 

[Hoophound]

Definitely better in football overall, but the names just don’t move the fan base yet. In fairness, it takes time to build some sense of rivalry and familiarity. At some point, we’ll probably learn to care about our conference games more if we win most of them.

 

[Dooley]

There is zero difference between the top half of the AAC and about 80%-90% of the P5. The divide starts when you start pitting the likes of us against the P5 bottom feeders. That'll change in time - a very long time - but that's where we're at now.

 

[BugsyCT]

Agreed. The football is good in this conference. As good as the Big East ever was (post-Miami, VTech, and someone else). But like Hoophound said, lack of regional rivals & familiar opponents hurts local fan interest, especially for us, and not just for football.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

This is a completely bogus narrative. The Big East was a far superior football league.

The teams we are playing look a whole lot better, because we look a whole lot worse! I posted this below in a different thread but let the numbers do the talking. I'll give you the Houstons or UCFs could contend with WVU, but the numbers don't lie.

Sagarin Conference Rankings: The AAC's highest conference ranking never eclipsed the Big East's lowest conference ranking.

Big East
2004 - 71.98 (UConn's first year)
2005 - 72.12
2006 - 79.57 (2nd overall)
2007 - 77.46 (4th overall)
2008 - 75.23
2009 - 77.33 (2nd overall)
2010 - 73.27
2011 - 72.41
2012 - 72.16

AAC
2013 - 65.15
2014 - 60.88
2015 AAC West - 67.31, AAC East 66.38
2016 AAC West - 69.87 AAC East 63.49
2017 AAC West - 67.87 AAC East 64.64

 

[jbdphi]

I'll admit that when Saturday comes around and it's time to pick a game to watch (if UConn isn't playing), I almost always will pick any AAC matchup because they are often competitive match-ups and the type of football they play is often pretty exciting. I don't know why anyone would choose to watch Alabama destroying Arkansas (or Ole Miss, or Missouri, or Louisiana-Lafayette, or Arkansas State, or Louisville) if you aren't a fan of Alabama / their victim, have money on the game or are an NFL scout.

 

[Slasher]

This is a completely bogus narrative. The Big East was a far superior football league.

The teams we are playing look a whole lot better, because we look a whole lot worse! I posted this below in a different thread but let the numbers do the talking. I'll give you the Houstons or UCFs could contend with WVU, but the numbers don't lie.

Sagarin Conference Rankings: The AAC's highest conference ranking never eclipsed the Big East's lowest conference ranking.

Big East
2004 - 71.98 (UConn's first year)
2005 - 72.12
2006 - 79.57 (2nd overall)
2007 - 77.46 (4th overall)
2008 - 75.23
2009 - 77.33 (2nd overall)
2010 - 73.27
2011 - 72.41
2012 - 72.16

AAC
2013 - 65.15
2014 - 60.88
2015 AAC West - 67.31, AAC East 66.38
2016 AAC West - 69.87 AAC East 63.49
2017 AAC West - 67.87 AAC East 64.64

What does this look like if you exclude the bottom 2-3 teams from the Big East and the AAC? I would agree that the bottom of the AAC is a LOT worse than the bottom of the Big East was.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

What does this look like if you exclude the bottom 2-3 teams from the Big East and the AAC? I would agree that the bottom of the AAC is a LOT worse than the bottom of the Big East was.

Not sure - but you're right I imagine it would bring up the AAC considerably.

 

[Adios]

We obviously did well in the Big East but lost traction through coaching changes into the AAC. We're definitely dragging down the rating, these days. The Big East being the 2nd best football conference twice as a member is an incredible feat.

 

[BlueDogs]

The type of football played by the AAC is more like the old WAC, whereas the Big East was much more of a Big10 powerful football style. The game has also changed and you could see that effect in the UCF Auburn game, where Auburn (despite being arguably bigger and better athlete vs athlete) simply couldn’t keep up with UCF’s offensive speed. This seems to be a trend where defenses are just not able to stem offensive attacks very well. Some of this is also due to the new safety rules ... no hands to the face, can’t go low or high on QBs, can’t hit “defenseless receivers”, can’t launch, can’t hit near the head, etc... basically turning the game into glorified flag football.

 

[ASweet3781]

We have some very good teams in our conference. Let’s embrace that.

American Athletic Conference power rankings: Week 8

It's a better football conference than the Big East when we playing Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse (when they were bad). Especially seeing most of the teams in our league are based on putting points on the board. Something we have historically struggled to do.

Our non conference schedule is so insanely stupid you can't make it up and yet most of our fans advocated for playing the toughest non conference schedule possible because they thought our league was so weak and beneath us. Whoops. Just another example of the series of poor judgment calls that put us in the position we now are in.

 

[Chief00]

It's a better football conference than the Big East when we playing Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse (when they were bad). Especially seeing most of the teams in our league are based on putting points on the board. Something we have historically struggled to do.

Our non conference schedule is so insanely stupid you can't make it up and yet most of our fans advocated for playing the toughest non conference schedule possible because they thought our league was so weak and beneath us. Whoops. Just another example of the series of poor judgment calls that put us in the position we now are in.

Of the tough teams, all but Boise State is in our league. So I don’t get your argument?

 

[ASweet3781]

Of the tough teams, all but Boise State is in our league. So I don’t get your argument?

Syracuse and BC with years of ACC recruiting and upward trajectories are not tough games for us right now? Series with Boise State, Virginia, Missouri, BYU? The argument I heard on here was we needed to beef up the non conference schedule to increase attendance and because our new league would be weak. It's not a weak league and those series did not help attendance. The point is we play too tough a non conference schedule based on where we currently are as a program and with a deceptively tough AAC league schedule that few on here anticipated.

 

[weyuo]

AAC football is fun to watch mostly. UConn will eventually gain traction and compete but like some in here have said it could be a year or two away from a winning season. The basketball will get better now that the men have a competent coach. I'm as confused as anyone how Ollie could go from winning a national title to getting canned for rules violations. You would have thought Ollie a good leader and teacher of the game. I don't know, just can't figure that one out.

Also, for such a young conference they are over achieving and making a legit claim of being considered with the top conferences in the country. Another men's national title in basketball could go a long way in making their argument. A football playoff berth might seal that deal. As unlikely as it may be a national title in football would leave no doubt. But.... I think the AAC is years away from that. You need a team or two competing for a #1 ranking before they'd be ready for a national championship.

 

[Chief00]

Syracuse and BC with years of ACC recruiting and upward trajectories are not tough games for us right now? Series with Boise State, Virginia, Missouri, BYU? The argument I heard on here was we needed to beef up the non conference schedule to increase attendance and because our new league would be weak. It's not a weak league and those series did not help attendance. The point is we play too tough a non conference schedule based on where we currently are as a program and with a deceptively tough AAC league schedule that few on here anticipated.

Where we currently stand as a program (nationally last in defense) any D1 team we play by definition comprises too tough a schedule.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

Syracuse and BC with years of ACC recruiting and upward trajectories are not tough games for us right now? Series with Boise State, Virginia, Missouri, BYU? The argument I heard on here was we needed to beef up the non conference schedule to increase attendance and because our new league would be weak. It's not a weak league and those series did not help attendance. The point is we play too tough a non conference schedule based on where we currently are as a program and with a deceptively tough AAC league schedule that few on here anticipated.

Boise, BYU, Cuse, UVA are all our highest attended games dating back to Diacos first year

 

[Adios]

Where we currently stand as a program (nationally last in defense) any D1 team we play by definition comprises too tough a schedule.

Next year, we have Indiana and Illinois. Same again the following season. We better show a lot of improvement over the next 2 years.

 

[Chief00]

It’s good to have teams to measure yourself against and attract some fan interest. There are plenty of D3 games in the area, if that’s what you wish to see.

 

[BugsyCT]

I don't think we anticipated we'd become this bad and non-competitive against most FBS schools, let alone when we scheduled Boise, BCU, Syracuse, BYU, Mizzou, Virginia, etc.

 

[Adios]

It’s good to have teams to measure yourself against and attract some fan interest. There are plenty of D3 games in the area, if that’s what you wish to see.

Coast Guard charges $10 for entry.

 

[uconnell]

The type of football played by the AAC is more like the old WAC, whereas the Big East was much more of a Big10 powerful football style. The game has also changed and you could see that effect in the UCF Auburn game, where Auburn (despite being arguably bigger and better athlete vs athlete) simply couldn’t keep up with UCF’s offensive speed. This seems to be a trend where defenses are just not able to stem offensive attacks very well. Some of this is also due to the new safety rules ... no hands to the face, can’t go low or high on QBs, can’t hit “defenseless receivers”, can’t launch, can’t hit near the head, etc... basically turning the game into glorified flag football.

Would you let your son (if you have one) play football, before the rule change, knowing what we know now about CTE? I wouldn’t and I have raised 4 boys. Only one played football and he wasn’t very good.

 

[Bezzz]

Would you let your son (if you have one) play football, before the rule change, knowing what we know now about CTE? I wouldn’t and I have raised 4 boys. Only one played football and he wasn’t very good.

If I had an athletic son (I raised two daughters who were competitive athletes) I'd tell him one word. Baseball.

 

[BlueDogs]

Would you let your son (if you have one) play football, before the rule change, knowing what we know now about CTE? I wouldn’t and I have raised 4 boys. Only one played football and he wasn’t very good.

Of course I would. Good grief, we are raising a generation of babies.