Big 12 Non-Expansion: What Does It Mean to the AAC and UConn?

[frankthetank]

For all that Oklahoma talent, Tulsa produces the lowest amount of NFL talent in the AAC, 5 to UConn's 20, which is amazing considering that UConn is in what you seem to describe as a talent wasteland.

So explain that one. I mean, Northeastern "bias" is a cheap card to play given that. There may indeed be a northeastern bias--against the northeast.

Besides, Oklahoma and UConn are similar population wise, the state of Connecticut has one land grant university. Just one. No pro sports.

Meanwhile, Oklahoma has the Oklahoma City Thunder, U. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.

I mean, are you seriously standing behind your post?

Standing behind that I think Tulsa is a good academic school and people seem to be discounting the size of Oklahoma itself? Yes, I will stand behind that. Do I think Tulsa is some type of world-beater? Of course not. I think the last two sentences of my post are a fair summary:

"Whether Tulsa delivers that market from a TV perspective is debatable, but the location in and of itself brings a ton of value to a conference from a football recruiting perspective.

Let's put it this way: there are LOT of G5 schools that are worth a whole lot less than Tulsa. On the metrics that university presidents purport to care about such as academics and demographics, Tulsa is actually near the top among G5 schools."

I mean, who is the AAC adding if it dropped Tulsa (which is effectively the statement that I was responding to)? The AAC in its current form hasn't been able to lure MWC schools, so you're looking at the pool of C-USA, MAC and Sun Belt schools. This isn't about whether Tulsa is more popular than the Sooners or Oklahoma State (which they obviously aren't in the vicinity of right now). My post was in response to the general question of "Why did the AAC add Tulsa?" Well, just look at the other options that the AAC has in C-USA, MAC and the Sun Belt. Outside of Rice (whose market is already covered by Houston in the AAC), it's pretty slim pickings whether you're talking about academics, location and branding.

 

[frankthetank]

Northeastern bias? I live in KC.

Now I remember why I stopped listening to you years ago. Your bias claim is always your first card.

Yeesh - OK, so the Northeastern bias reference obviously touched a nerve. Apologies as I meant no harm. That being said, I would disagree that a "bias claim" is my first card outside that I think fans are very biased by "What have you done for me lately?" results on the football field.

 

[ZooCougar]

Standing behind that I think Tulsa is a good academic school and people seem to be discounting the size of Oklahoma itself? Yes, I will stand behind that. Do I think Tulsa is some type of world-beater? Of course not. I think the last two sentences of my post are a fair summary:

"Whether Tulsa delivers that market from a TV perspective is debatable, but the location in and of itself brings a ton of value to a conference from a football recruiting perspective.

Let's put it this way: there are LOT of G5 schools that are worth a whole lot less than Tulsa. On the metrics that university presidents purport to care about such as academics and demographics, Tulsa is actually near the top among G5 schools."

I mean, who is the AAC adding if it dropped Tulsa (which is effectively the statement that I was responding to)? The AAC in its current form hasn't been able to lure MWC schools, so you're looking at the pool of C-USA, MAC and Sun Belt schools. This isn't about whether Tulsa is more popular than the Sooners or Oklahoma State (which they obviously aren't in the vicinity of right now). My post was in response to the general question of "Why did the AAC add Tulsa?" Well, just look at the other options that the AAC has in C-USA, MAC and the Sun Belt. Outside of Rice (whose market is already covered by Houston in the AAC), it's pretty slim pickings whether you're talking about academics, location and branding.

Standing by your Tulsa logic, maybe we should add La Tech and double down on Louisiana.

Tulsa doesn't give us much access. But I would punt Tulane first.

 

[ZooCougar]

Yeesh - OK, so the Northeastern bias reference obviously touched a nerve. Apologies as I meant no harm. That being said, I would disagree that a "bias claim" is my first card outside that I think fans are very biased by "What have you done for me lately?" results on the football field.

I live in this wind blown territory unfortunately.

I go to Tulsa for Tulsa Tough every other year or so, the school and it's sports really don't register much down there. They have a 30,000 seat stadium and they don't even fill it to 2/3ds as of late.

Imagine if Depauw played Division I. That's kind of what Tulsa seems to be in Oklahoma.

 

[Pudge]

My Problem with Frank ...

I have to first start - always - you B1G guys took RUTGERS. We have been around them so long that WE knew that they would fall flat on their face. Forever. Schiano was illusory; one or two good years ... and he consistently played Howard or Norfolk because he could lose easily to Lehigh or Villanova or UNH.

But ... the Northeast>? Nobody has harvested the demographics for truly talented football players with honestly solid opportunity at a Public State U. Syracuse and BC is not about that. UConn has an opportunity in raising talent that none of these had because we can really reach and develop raw speed/tenacity kids. Randy Edsall, actually, was doing a solid job of this. Diaco has this. Saying Oklahoma will always have more recruits for FBS is ignorant. They have 3 in-state schools playing. Many many kids are routed to the Colonial in our NY/NE + NJ + MD + PA corridor. The point: we are still relatively new to this. You can't have 5 times the population (actually more like 10) and get less than Oklahoma on raw talent. Our HS football also is a drawback. That is changing as the Prep route is becoming preferred as in hoop.

And ... HOOP. ZooCougar hit on it. UConn fans want to know that we are going to be in a solid hoop league. This AAC has UConn + Cincinnati this year. Memphis, Temple, SMU, Houston clearly can be damn good. But you have a bunch of dregs (USF, UCF, ECU, Tulsa (now that they lost 8 seniors), Tulane) that have not looked like they can pick it up. Dawkins, Dunleavy, Tubby, Sampson give you some hope.

USF and UCF ... Houston ... locked out of the Power 5 actually can consistently grow and therefore create market value far beyond.

Lastly to Frank: I have a continuing skepticism on where the "Conference" and "Network" and "Bowl" discussion is going. In Cord Cutting and new forms of distribution, the biggest idiocy was long term contracts. Enjoy the Rutgers Scarlet Knights.

 

[upstater]

Benedict's conversation with ESPN will be interesting. If it were me, I'd be telling them that either UConn gets its third tier rights to give them to SNY, or otherwise UConn/ESPN collaborate on a channel that is dedicated to UConn sports (you might want to call the channel Original ESPN or something along those lines), but ESPN wants absolutely nothing to do with this because it owns UConn sports for pennies on the dollar.

Does Benedict have ANY political support for these conversations?

I should hope he does.

Because that's the only way that UConn is going to be able to monetize its popularity within the state of Connecticut.

 

[frankthetank]

Standing by your Tulsa logic, maybe we should add La Tech and double down on Louisiana.

Tulsa doesn't give us much access. But I would punt Tulane first.

Tulane is a legitimately excellent academic school, though - that's what university presidents want. It's pretty instructive that Tulane got to round 2 of the Big 12 non-expansion process while Memphis didn't.

To me, schools like FIU, FAU and UTSA are probably going to be the most valuable non-MWC expansion options for the AAC to the extent that the league would even want to expand. Those are large schools in big markets and recruiting areas that aren't currently covered by the AAC. Whether any of these schools actually "deliver" their markets is almost beside the point - it's hard to expect any G5 school to actually "deliver" a market. As a result, the calculations are more toward recruiting areas, demographics, etc. UMass is also probably on that list (although UConn fans may or may not want to really help them out).

 

[ZooCougar]

I think there are a few issues with this:

(1) BYU isn't joining this type of league. I've noted this elsewhere. Suffice to say, they will die a fiery death as an independent before they would ever join anything less than a P5 league as long as Utah is in the Pac-12. Without BYU, the value of this potential league drops considerably.

(2) At a pure contractual level, being a "power conference" means that a league needs to have a guaranteed contractual tie-in with one of the New Year's Six bowls. Would any of those bowls want to lock in AAC/MWC hybrid school or would they rather just take whichever P5 school falls to them? I believe history indicates the latter. The NY6 (and previously the BCS) bowls have tried to avoid the non-power schools like a hot potato, so why would they lock themselves in contractually with any of those schools? Realistically, that's not going to happen, which means that there will never be a "P6". We're much more likely to see a P4 than a P6 in the future.

(3) The TV money might be a little better with a partial merger (essentially taking the best of each of the AAC and MWC together), but it's probably not going to be as much as fans of the applicable schools would hope. From a TV perspective, Boise State is really the lynch pin - if they're willing to make a move, then the networks would take notice and I could see them providing a slight bump in fees. Without Boise State, though, then it doesn't work. They're really the key from a national TV viewpoint. Once again, though, it's all circular. Without the power conference label and talent, TV networks essentially look at it as a lower tier product (think English Premier League versus MLS) and will pay it accordingly. MLS gets better deals than lower division soccer leagues, but they're not in the same universe as the top European leagues.

Actually, TV ratings drive what US networks pay for soccer.

If MLS had better ratings they would pay more.

EPL probably has the highest fees in the US but I bet Fox pays less for the Bundesliga than they do for MLS because it doesn't have the appeal of the EPL and because it goes up against the EPL in the same time slot.

 

[WestHartHusk]

Standing behind that I think Tulsa is a good academic school and people seem to be discounting the size of Oklahoma itself? Yes, I will stand behind that. Do I think Tulsa is some type of world-beater? Of course not. I think the last two sentences of my post are a fair summary:

"Whether Tulsa delivers that market from a TV perspective is debatable, but the location in and of itself brings a ton of value to a conference from a football recruiting perspective.

Let's put it this way: there are LOT of G5 schools that are worth a whole lot less than Tulsa. On the metrics that university presidents purport to care about such as academics and demographics, Tulsa is actually near the top among G5 schools."

I mean, who is the AAC adding if it dropped Tulsa (which is effectively the statement that I was responding to)? The AAC in its current form hasn't been able to lure MWC schools, so you're looking at the pool of C-USA, MAC and Sun Belt schools. This isn't about whether Tulsa is more popular than the Sooners or Oklahoma State (which they obviously aren't in the vicinity of right now). My post was in response to the general question of "Why did the AAC add Tulsa?" Well, just look at the other options that the AAC has in C-USA, MAC and the Sun Belt. Outside of Rice (whose market is already covered by Houston in the AAC), it's pretty slim pickings whether you're talking about academics, location and branding.

Maybe the disconnect is that you seem to think that we need to add someone to replace Tulsa and Tulane. We do not. So, the real question is, on a per team basis is the AAC more or less valuable with or without Tulsa and Tulane. To argue that we are more value with them, then you have to show me the 5 schools in the AAC that they are both more valuable then.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Interesting that merging with a league that makes less than we currently do would somehow increase our value. Seems like it would only devalue what we have.

More content? Sure. Better content? Aside from Boise State football who is it that is driving this content?

The AAC and MW in their current forms (without kicking members out) are in their best possible forms given the circumstances.

Doing something, just for the sake of it isn't always the best idea. You guys want to be in a league where we are flying to San Jose or Wyoming for games?

Are you out of your mind?

I just checked my mail. No Big 10 invitation. Maybe tomorrow.

 

[upstater]

it's hard to expect any G5 school to actually "deliver" a market. As a result, the calculations are more toward recruiting areas, demographics, etc.

 

[upstater]

Actually, TV ratings drive what US networks pay for soccer.

If MLS had better ratings they would pay more.

EPL probably has the highest fees in the US but I bet Fox pays less for the Bundesliga than they do for MLS because it doesn't have the appeal of the EPL and because it goes up against the EPL in the same time slot.

Also, Fox doesn't seem to have enough HD cameras.

I mean, what the hell??!

 

[ZooCougar]

Also, Fox doesn't seem to have enough HD cameras.

I mean, what the hell??!

They rely heavily on someone else's feed. Non HD channels are useless.

 

[frankthetank]

My Problem with Frank ...

I have to first start - always - you B1G guys took RUTGERS. We have been around them so long that WE knew that they would fall flat on their face. Forever. Schiano was illusory; one or two good years ... and he consistently played Howard or Norfolk because he could lose easily to Lehigh or Villanova or UNH.

Oh, there's no doubt that Rutgers has a dumpster fire athletic department. Here's the thing with respect to the Big Ten's intent for Rutgers: it doesn't matter. Adding Rutgers was never about actually "adding Rutgers". This was about (a) BTN cable households in the NYC market and (b) providing a NYC market vessel for all of the Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and other Big Ten fans that already live in that market. Rutgers only role is to be a conduit to connect the rest of the Big Ten to the NYC market - they were never intended to deliver the NYC market itself (because the reality is that no one can do that from a college sports perspective). This is the mistake I think a lot of people have made in evaluating the Big Ten addition of Rutgers. It's NOT about Rutgers itself bringing the NYC market to the conference. Instead, it's the "penumbra effect" of Michigan plus Ohio State plus Penn State plus Maryland plus Rutgers et. al in the NYC market that the conferences want to leverage into a "Big Ten market". We'll see if that actually happens in the long-term, but Rutgers certainly fulfilled its role in terms of delivering BTN cable households in the short-term.

But ... the Northeast>? Nobody has harvested the demographics for truly talented football players with honestly solid opportunity at a Public State U. Syracuse and BC is not about that. UConn has an opportunity in raising talent that none of these had because we can really reach and develop raw speed/tenacity kids. Randy Edsall, actually, was doing a solid job of this. Diaco has this. Saying Oklahoma will always have more recruits for FBS is ignorant. They have 3 in-state schools playing. Many many kids are routed to the Colonial in our NY/NE + NJ + MD + PA corridor. The point: we are still relatively new to this. You can't have 5 times the population (actually more like 10) and get less than Oklahoma on raw talent. Our HS football also is a drawback. That is changing as the Prep route is becoming preferred as in hoop.

OK, but what you're describing actually makes it seem even harder to produce more FBS recruits in the region in the future compared to a place like Oklahoma where high school is sacrosanct and concussion fears aren't having the same impact on youth participation as they are in affluent suburban areas in the North. You're effectively describing a sea change in participation at multiple levels in the middle of a time where parents are actually more concerned about kids playing football. That seems really difficult on its face.

And ... HOOP. ZooCougar hit on it. UConn fans want to know that we are going to be in a solid hoop league. This AAC has UConn + Cincinnati this year. Memphis, Temple, SMU, Houston clearly can be damn good. But you have a bunch of dregs (USF, UCF, ECU, Tulsa (now that they lost 8 seniors), Tulane) that have not looked like they can pick it up. Dawkins, Dunleavy, Tubby, Sampson give you some hope.

USF and UCF ... Houston ... locked out of the Power 5 actually can consistently grow and therefore create market value far beyond.

Well, the one upshot for UConn is that success in college basketball is less dependent on conference affiliation compared to college football (where conference affiliation can mean everything). Gonzaga is a consistent power in a league that has much less depth than the AAC. UConn basketball can definitely thrive outside of a P5 league. That is not true for UConn football, though.

Lastly to Frank: I have a continuing skepticism on where the "Conference" and "Network" and "Bowl" discussion is going. In Cord Cutting and new forms of distribution, the biggest idiocy was long term contracts. Enjoy the Rutgers Scarlet Knights.

Well, those are larger market forces that go beyond the realm of college football. That being said, the Big Ten was the wealthiest conference long before they created a conference network, just as the New York Yankees were the wealthiest baseball team long before they created their own network, too. I think a lot of people focus on the form (e.g. cable subscribers to the Big Ten Network) as being why the Big Ten is wealthy as opposed to the substance (e.g. the whole reason why the BTN worked in the first place was because people wanted their content, unlike, say, the Mountain West's old network). Premium content will find a way to be monetized no matter what format it's being delivered in. Maybe that makes Rutgers less valuable to the Big Ten for that particular content delivery format, but it was still important for the league to have a direct vessel in the NYC market for the fans of other Big Ten schools.

 

[Marty Jackson]

I think there are a few issues with this:

(1) BYU isn't joining this type of league. I've noted this elsewhere. Suffice to say, they will die a fiery death as an independent before they would ever join anything less than a P5 league as long as Utah is in the Pac-12. Without BYU, the value of this potential league drops considerably.

(2) At a pure contractual level, being a "power conference" means that a league needs to have a guaranteed contractual tie-in with one of the New Year's Six bowls. Would any of those bowls want to lock in AAC/MWC hybrid school or would they rather just take whichever P5 school falls to them? I believe history indicates the latter. The NY6 (and previously the BCS) bowls have tried to avoid the non-power schools like a hot potato, so why would they lock themselves in contractually with any of those schools? Realistically, that's not going to happen, which means that there will never be a "P6". We're much more likely to see a P4 than a P6 in the future.

(3) The TV money might be a little better with a partial merger (essentially taking the best of each of the AAC and MWC together), but it's probably not going to be as much as fans of the applicable schools would hope. From a TV perspective, Boise State is really the lynch pin - if they're willing to make a move, then the networks would take notice and I could see them providing a slight bump in fees. Without Boise State, though, then it doesn't work. They're really the key from a national TV viewpoint. Once again, though, it's all circular. Without the power conference label and talent, TV networks essentially look at it as a lower tier product (think English Premier League versus MLS) and will pay it accordingly. MLS gets better deals than lower division soccer leagues, but they're not in the same universe as the top European leagues.

That's bs. ESPN dictates the term P5.

Its a joke. The line isn't as clear as the networks would like so they are creating an artificial gap.

If there were means testing to be a P5 I might agree. In no way is Wake Forest more valuable than Uconn.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I just checked my mail. No Big 10 invitation. Maybe tomorrow.

So inviting 12 more mouths to feed from our already small revenue pie is the way to go?

The worst moves to date by the AAC were inviting Tulsa and Tulane due to athletic success, location and national appeal.

The Nelson plan is double down, check that 12x down that plan and get every school in the Mountains, Plains and California that the Pacific 12 and Big 12 won't even look at and somehow that raises the American's profile? Got it.

 

[Confident Carl]

How does the AAC stack up in terms of RPI? If it's better or equal to the Big East then I'll gladly shut up.

One less thing to worry about.

Again Big East #4, American #8, no question Big East better but American not atrocious!

Rank Conference Avg. RPI Avg. SOS SOS Rank Teams
1 Big 12 0.5883 0.5843 1 10
2 Pacific-12 0.5776 0.5777 2 12
3 Atlantic Coast 0.5715 0.5667 3 15
4 Big East 0.5606 0.5569 4 10
5 Big Ten 0.5514 0.5491 6 14
6 Southeastern 0.5496 0.5527 5 14
7 Atlantic 10 0.5361 0.5383 7 14
8 American Athletic 0.5349 0.5332 8 11
9 Colonial Athletic 0.5231 0.5188 9 10
10 Mid-American 0.5179 0.5129 11 12
11 Summit 0.5130 0.5012 13 9
12 Mountain West 0.5122 0.5164 10 11
13 Missouri Valley 0.4978 0.5021 12 10
14 West Coast 0.4953 0.4983 14 10
15 Big West 0.4912 0.4920 15 9
16 Ivy League 0.4897 0.4863 16 8
17 Sun Belt 0.4864 0.4838 17 11
18 Horizon League 0.4863 0.4808 19 9
19 Southern 0.4820 0.4797 20 10
20 Metro Atlantic Athletic 0.4814 0.4838 18 11
21 Ohio Valley 0.4741 0.4745 22 12
22 Conference USA 0.4730 0.4789 21 14
23 America East 0.4685 0.4634 25 9
24 Patriot League 0.4648 0.4658 23 10
25 Big South 0.4639 0.4621 26 11
26 Western Athletic 0.4589 0.4634 24 8
27 Big Sky 0.4538 0.4544 28 12
28 Atlantic Sun 0.4462 0.4596 27 9
29 Southland 0.4387 0.4434 29 13
30 Northeast 0.4377 0.4397 30 10
31 Southwestern Athletic 0.4309 0.4331 31 10
32 Mid-Eastern 0.4200 0.4315 32 13

 

[AZHuskiePop]

I feel you pain brother. Football has sucked for two long. Diaco and Staff have made some questionable calls but having said that, we are seeing improvement. In my opinion UCONN must finish 7-5 and go to a bowl this year. Otherwise all bets are off and Diaco will have to be concerned next year. The program just can't tolerate anymore crappy seasons.

I decided to comment on your points. I appreciate your service to our country and since you gave us your time, I decided to pay close attention to your thoughts and emotions.

-Basketball in this conference is still atrocious, and it's hard to see that changing much.

Big East is a better basketball conference but atrocious for the AAC is a bit too harsh. Seven of the American's 11 teams (UCONN, Cincy, Houston, Memphis, Temple, SMU and Tulsa) have some tradition in basketball. The Big East teams consisting of Butler, Creighton, Depaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. Johns, Seton Hall, Villanova and Xavier are sexier seasoned teams. USF and UCF are relatively new to big time Basketball. ECU being in North Carolina has never been a power but I can see them improving. The American has some really good coaches too. Although the Big East is better it is somewhat comforting to see that the NCAA tournament numbers are not that far apart. Obviously UCONN impacts the American's numbers considerably but non the less the comparison leaves some room for optimism.

AMERICAN..... BIG....EAST
NCAA CHAMPS ..6 ..4
NCAA RUNNER UP..... 5.. 9
NCAA FINAL 4.. 22..... 22
NCAA ELITE 8... 41..... 49
NCAA SWEET 16..... 69..... 87
NCAA APPEARANCES 175....228

-Football arguably is better than in it ever was in the New Big East (NBE). That alone should be enough to get the TV payout higher but probably not high enough.

I am in agreement here. Hoping Mike Aresco's experience in TV will help land a solid TV contract.

-With Big 12 expansion shut down should the AAC actually seize some initiative and raid the best two schools from the MWC?

I hear you but didn't we try that already with Boise State and San Diego State. They would only come if Aresco negotiates a better TV contract and if so, I doubt if the networks would want to pay out more dough similar to the recent Big 8 decision not to expand.

-If the AAC doesn't get serious about improving basketball and improving the members then UConn should give consideration to leaving.

Again I refer you to the numbers above. The American has some tradition but also some emerging teams. No reason why USF, UCF and ECU can't make strides in basketball. I have heard of adding Wichita State, and VCU for example. Not a bad idea but we had that in the Big East and having bball only teams caused problems. Also you may have to split revenue with more teams. Having said that fans would certainly come out to see Wichita State and VCU. If attendance sours they may have to do something dramatic like that.

-The AAC is not powerful enough to tell us to go pound sand if we removed basketball. We could probably get Cincy to go with us just to hold the conference hostage.

Doesn't make sense to leave the American. The American didn't hurt the girls, they still won three championships and the men won one. Basketball is still a big revenue earner for UCONN. The key is scheduling top notch high profile non conference games. I do agree that UCONN fans are not going
to get excited about, Tulane and ECU but then again, Nova and Georgetown are more exciting than Depau and Seton Hall. You are correct the American has to get better overall in basketball or UCONN's attendance numbers will suffer.

As for UConn it is time to stop fooling around with the football program. Diaco needs to feel some heat, and the admin needs to step up and find him some more money to hire some decent assistants.

If Diaco finishes 7-5 or better yet 8-4, Diaco is not going anywhere. He is building a program and Benedict just gave him a raise. If you want to kill the momentum fire these coaches but they are a tight knit group and it's not all on the coaches. The players make the plays.

I'm in the military, I used to plan R&R during combat deployments to see two home games. When I was in Germany for three years, ditto. Not too many other people have flown across the Atlantic as much as I have to watch home games.

Thanks for your service to our country it is much appreciated!

I regularly choose not to watch games now, because it's no longer fun to watch. The program is pretty close to losing me and I'm hardly alone.

I agree watching these games has been brutal and heartbreaking. However I see the program getting better. Diaco is too enamored with Bryant Sheriffs, however I believe he will get competition from Donovan Williams next spring. Diaco must have had to Redshirt him this year. I am sure he learned a great deal under Sheriffs.

-Hire an OC or someone capable of scouting and recruiting a few good quarterbacks and start playing attractive football. If this program ever developed some sex appeal it would be SO FRICKING EASY to dominate New England and the Region even with Syracuse and BC being P5. They've been around forever and haven't figured it out, that won't change anytime soon.

Perhaps a new OC will help although FV has opened up things lately. I would like to see us dominate the North East. I want to believe that BD and staff are working towards that. I am going to wait out the season. If we improve and go to a bowl, I will be satisfied but 2017 is a year when we are going to have to dominate. I would like to see us win the last 5 games in a row like USF did and then go on a tear next year.

-Restructure ticket pricing, make the best seats affordable to the most loyal fans. I'm sick of seeing the best seats empty. And while it's stupid to bitch about attendance, it's still terrible optics.

I have to admit that I have given some thought to giving up my blue chair backs and heavy seat donation but I do it partly to contribute to the University, plus I hold out hope that one day we will put it all together.

-This is an opportunity. Last time we were rejected football sucked, this time they raider opted to take an appetite suppressant and we dodged a bullet. And by the way FOOTBALL STILL SUCKS and there is very little reassurance that it will get any better.

-Bottom line, fix football and keep it fixed and we will make it back.

I couldn't agree with you more!

Navy is a football only and ECU was suppose to be. In this day and age G5 conferences have to be flexable and maximize a limited revenue stream
BB NCAA money is huge in the G5. If your a six bid conference that a minimum of close to $6 million over the distribution period without winning a game. UConn's Championship was worth $10million dollars to the AAC and were still being compensated for Louisville NC
The Big East was a power struggle between the basketball schools and the football schools each looking to further their own agenda.
That's much different than a marraige of convinence
UConn was very willing to park all sports but football in the Big East if the Big 12 selected us and apparently the Big East was willing to accommodate that model.

 

[frankthetank]

That's bs. ESPN dictates the term P5.

Its a joke. The line isn't as clear as the networks would like so they are creating an artificial gap.

If there were means testing to be a P5 I might agree. In no way is Wake Forest more valuable than Uconn.

Now, you might not like how the line is constructed, but it's actually a very clear line and there's nothing really artificial about it.

In the BCS era, there were 6 AQ conferences that were provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

In the CFP era, there are now 5 P5 conferences that are provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

That seems pretty clear. Maybe it's not "fair", but it's definitely clear.

Also, it doesn't matter whether Wake Forest is more valuable than UConn or not. Wake Forest is a founding member of the ACC and, just like the founding member of a successful company, they get to enjoy the fruits of that founding status as long as the ACC exists. They were in the right place at the right time. As a comparison, Mark Zuckerberg's personal assistant/secretary that was granted a bunch of Facebook options before their IPO and is surely wealthier now than all of us here on this board combined and then some. If you or I wanted to get the same amount of Facebook stock as a new employee, we'd essentially have to create an entire new line of business for Facebook that generated billions of dollars of revenue. Is that "fair" even if you had a PhD from MIT and an MBA from Harvard with genius math ability while Zuckerberg's PA just happened to answer the right Monster ad back when Facebook was a tiny startup? Well, the point is that first movers and founders get disproportionate rewards. This is a long-winded way of saying that being better than Wake Forest is NOT the standard to get into the P5. Instead, you have to compare yourselves to at least the middle of the pack of the P5 (if not better) because that's really the standard that's going to apply to G5 schools wanting to get in going forward.

 

[UConnDan97]

Now, you might not like how the line is constructed, but it's actually a very clear line and there's nothing really artificial about it.

In the BCS era, there were 6 AQ conferences that were provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

In the CFP era, there are now 5 P5 conferences that are provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

That seems pretty clear. Maybe it's not "fair", but it's definitely clear.

Also, it doesn't matter whether Wake Forest is more valuable than UConn or not. Wake Forest is a founding member of the ACC and, just like the founding member of a successful company, they get to enjoy the fruits of that founding status as long as the ACC exists. They were in the right place at the right time. As a comparison, Mark Zuckerberg's personal assistant/secretary that was granted a bunch of Facebook options before their IPO and is surely wealthier now than all of us here on this board combined and then some. If you or I wanted to get the same amount of Facebook stock as a new employee, we'd essentially have to create an entire new line of business for Facebook that generated billions of dollars of revenue. Is that "fair" even if you had a PhD from MIT and an MBA from Harvard with genius math ability while Zuckerberg's PA just happened to answer the right Monster ad back when Facebook was a tiny startup? Well, the point is that first movers and founders get disproportionate rewards. This is a long-winded way of saying that being better than Wake Forest is NOT the standard to get into the P5. Instead, you have to compare yourselves to at least the middle of the pack of the P5 (if not better) because that's really the standard that's going to apply to G5 schools wanting to get in going forward.

If one creates groups that are differentially rewarded and have differential access based on popularity of certain members within the group, while at the same time purposely limiting the rewards and access of other high-performers not within those groups.......yeah, that's pretty f#$king artificial...

 

[WestHartHusk]

So what is the "clear line" for a founding member of a BCS conference whose destruction was set upon by its media "partner"?

 

[MattMang23]

Now, you might not like how the line is constructed, but it's actually a very clear line and there's nothing really artificial about it.

In the BCS era, there were 6 AQ conferences that were provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

In the CFP era, there are now 5 P5 conferences that are provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

That seems pretty clear. Maybe it's not "fair", but it's definitely clear.

Also, it doesn't matter whether Wake Forest is more valuable than UConn or not. Wake Forest is a founding member of the ACC and, just like the founding member of a successful company, they get to enjoy the fruits of that founding status as long as the ACC exists. They were in the right place at the right time. As a comparison, Mark Zuckerberg's personal assistant/secretary that was granted a bunch of Facebook options before their IPO and is surely wealthier now than all of us here on this board combined and then some. If you or I wanted to get the same amount of Facebook stock as a new employee, we'd essentially have to create an entire new line of business for Facebook that generated billions of dollars of revenue. Is that "fair" even if you had a PhD from MIT and an MBA from Harvard with genius math ability while Zuckerberg's PA just happened to answer the right Monster ad back when Facebook was a tiny startup? Well, the point is that first movers and founders get disproportionate rewards. This is a long-winded way of saying that being better than Wake Forest is NOT the standard to get into the P5. Instead, you have to compare yourselves to at least the middle of the pack of the P5 (if not better) because that's really the standard that's going to apply to G5 schools wanting to get in going forward.

Which is an absurd measure. There is no way that going forward G5 schools will be able to compete with the revenue streams as disproportionate as they are between leagues. Asking these have nots to meet the same metrics as the haves is a self fulfilling prophecy. The haves know it can't happen and so setting the bar at a level that can never be achieved makes it inherently impossible that it will be achieved.

 

[SubbaBub]

The Tulane talk was a proxy for holding put against Houston. I'm convinced of that. OU couldn't be against Houston without an alternative school. A disposable one was best if it ever got to horse trading.

Any school against UH + 1 couldn't have UH in theit initial list of acceptable schools.

You also had presidents doing solids for each other by naming there no chance schools to list of finalists. (SMU, et al)

 

[MattMang23]

So what is the "clear line" for a founding member of a BCS conference whose destruction was set upon by its media "partner"?

I know how this plays out. Frank tells us that we weren't a founding member of the football league. Then I tell Frank that really no football team other than Cuse and BC were founding members of the Big East because the football league began 14 years after the all sports league and so the first "real Big East teams" (ie football teams) in the league other than Cuse, Pitt (who was there at the start of the football league but was not a founding Big East member) and BC came in as associate members and weren't full Big East members until later.

So the bar then moves arbitrarily again.

 

[frankthetank]

Which is an absurd measure. There is no way that going forward G5 schools will be able to compete with the revenue streams as disproportionate as they are between leagues. Asking these have nots to meet the same metrics as the haves is a self fulfilling prophecy. The haves know it can't happen and so setting the bar at a level that can never be achieved makes it inherently impossible that it will be achieved.

Well, I agree that it's setting the bar at a really high level. The Big 12 just decided not to invite anyone despite having the lowest financial and academic barriers to entry out of any P5 league, so it's even higher for the other power conferences. The bar is only going to get higher from this point forward (which is why alternative options like football independence for UConn, which would have been a terrible idea before yesterday, might now need to be at least considered since the P5 is effectively shutting its doors down for the next generation).

 

[frankthetank]

I know how this plays out. Frank tells us that we weren't a founding member of the football league. Then I tell Frank that really no football team other than Cuse and BC were founding members of the Big East because the football league began 14 years after the all sports league and so the first "real Big East teams" (ie football teams) in the league other than Cuse, Pitt (who was there at the start of the football league but was not a founding Big East member) and BC came in as associate members and weren't full Big East members until later.

So the bar then moves arbitrarily again.

Oh, I wouldn't say it's a different bar. It's more like UConn was a member of a conference that simply failed (just like there are thousands of startups that fail for every Facebook-type success). Some other schools like Syracuse were able to find golden parachutes in time but UConn wasn't able to do so. If the ACC ended up breaking apart, you could certainly see Wake Forest getting left behind. Note that I emphasized that Wake Forest would enjoy its founder status "as long as the ACC exists". There isn't a guarantee that the ACC will exist forever - I'm just saying that Wake has its privileges as long as its league *does* exist. Same thing with a split up Big 12 - schools like Iowa State and Baylor may not have life rafts in that situation.

The reality is that UConn didn't have much or any control over its conference situation until the ACC was looking for its replacement for Maryland. That was the one time that UConn really had a head-to-head competition with another school and it was a fit that (on paper) was a match. In terms of everything that I've observed and written about regarding conference realignment for nearly a decade, the fact that the ACC picked Louisville over UConn was the only time that I was legitimately surprised at a move at the power conference level. You can look back at posts #5 and #6 on the very first page of the "Key Tweets" thread that was started back in 2012 - they show my Tweets about how I thought it would be a massive mindshift if the ACC picked Louisville over UConn. Now, I understand posthumously why the ACC made that choice, but it still flew in the face of what the ACC purported to have as its expansion criteria for everyone else up until that point in time.

Even this Big 12 expansion process was always going to be a longshot for UConn. I know that it doesn't need to be said here, but that UConn/Louisville showdown for the ACC slot in 2012 really flipped the script on so many different levels.

 

[Confident Carl]

Now, you might not like how the line is constructed, but it's actually a very clear line and there's nothing really artificial about it.

In the BCS era, there were 6 AQ conferences that were provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

In the CFP era, there are now 5 P5 conferences that are provided with guaranteed access to the top level bowls.

That seems pretty clear. Maybe it's not "fair", but it's definitely clear.

Also, it doesn't matter whether Wake Forest is more valuable than UConn or not. Wake Forest is a founding member of the ACC and, just like the founding member of a successful company, they get to enjoy the fruits of that founding status as long as the ACC exists. They were in the right place at the right time. As a comparison, Mark Zuckerberg's personal assistant/secretary that was granted a bunch of Facebook options before their IPO and is surely wealthier now than all of us here on this board combined and then some. If you or I wanted to get the same amount of Facebook stock as a new employee, we'd essentially have to create an entire new line of business for Facebook that generated billions of dollars of revenue. Is that "fair" even if you had a PhD from MIT and an MBA from Harvard with genius math ability while Zuckerberg's PA just happened to answer the right Monster ad back when Facebook was a tiny startup? Well, the point is that first movers and founders get disproportionate rewards. This is a long-winded way of saying that being better than Wake Forest is NOT the standard to get into the P5. Instead, you have to compare yourselves to at least the middle of the pack of the P5 (if not better) because that's really the standard that's going to apply to G5 schools wanting to get in going forward.

Excellent analogy. Sometimes life's just fair.

 

[Exit 4]

Its funny, but I think this board is at the point where so many people have become quite knowledgeable about CRA that FTT's post no longer seem that informative. Yawn, FTT - we already know this stuff.

 

[Confident Carl]

Well, I agree that it's setting the bar at a really high level. The Big 12 just decided not to invite anyone despite having the lowest financial and academic barriers to entry out of any P5 league, so it's even higher for the other power conferences. The bar is only going to get higher from this point forward (which is why alternative options like football independence for UConn, which would have been a terrible idea before yesterday, might now need to be at least considered since the P5 is effectively shutting its doors down for the next generation).

Independent UCONN in football makes no sense. Go ask UMASS. We will gain reliance by winning in this league. You spoke about investing in a start up and reaping the rewards earlier. Well isn't the ACC a start up? I compare it to an emerging growth company. There is a possibility that Mike Aresco could hit pay dirt at contract renewal time. As slim as that possibility may be, UCONN leaving the AAC prematurely eliminates the possibility of making a return on their investment. UMASS would trade places with UCONN in a New York minute!

 

[noeynox]

Interesting that merging with a league that makes less than we currently do would somehow increase our value. Seems like it would only devalue what we have.

More content? Sure. Better content? Aside from Boise State football who is it that is driving this content?

The AAC and MW in their current forms (without kicking members out) are in their best possible forms given the circumstances.

Doing something, just for the sake of it isn't always the best idea. You guys want to be in a league where we are flying to San Jose or Wyoming for games?

Are you out of your mind?

Break down by geographic pods. The purposes are to be the undisputed best league outside the P5, and secure that NY6, bid every year. Everyone doesn't agree I get it, but it's time to try something different.