Commentary Thread for Premium Top-Shelf Tweets

[UCFBfan]

I look forward to either welcoming the Big 12 schools who don't think we add value to the AAC in 8 years or laughing at them as they backfill the AAC when we get an invite to the ACC or better, the B1G, when the Big 12 GOR ends and the conference disappears.

What a crock of crap that is that we aren't adding value to a conference with schools like ISU, KSU, and Texas Tech.....please.

 

[UCFBfan]

Btw, outside of a big 12 invite, this is the best possible result for us.

 

[Stinger92860]

"They don't add anything" is idiotic. They don't add the same value as UT or OU, that makes sense. Sounds like B12 expansion is done. The good news is AAC stays as is until 2024. At that time we shall see what value the other 8 schools bring to the table.

I'm sorry but I still don't see the value of OU beyond football tradition. A state similar to CT population wise, but a state with an NBA team and another B12 school in the same footprint. How do they increase or match revenue requirements for the SEC or B1G. The ACC and PAC is too far away. Same argument against us.

 

[NYUConn]

The American made a huge mistake when they added Tulsa and Tulane.

UConn/Cinci/USF/Houston/UCF
SMU/Memphis/Temple/ECU is a better league. Include Navy as a football only if you feel the need.

Play a football round robin and a double basketball round robin.

You'd get an average of 3 NCAA bids - would be the 6th best football league and you'd have fewer mouths to feed the next time a contact negotiation rolls around.

Everyone schedules an FCS home game, the league can schedule home and homes with BYU later in the season since they are dying for legitimate games and you don't have any problems getting 6 home games and still have one game to schedule a 2-1 with bigger programs.

The AAC championship game is worthless and makes it just as likely your best team gets beat and left out of the access bowl as it does them any good. It's not like the rare playoff contender like Houston is going to get a bump from beating Temple or USF.

In fairness at the time of the last round of expansion you needed 12 for a Championship Game, which was always Aresco and The American's stated goal.

Also, Aresco was still negotiating a TV deal at the time of the Tulane add, so having the NOLA market in his pocket was thought to increase leverage and the conferences value (which it clearly did not succeed in doing).

Tulsa, yeah, they should be shot into the Sun.

 

[whaler11]

In fairness at the time of the last round of expansion you needed 12 for a Championship Game, which was always Aresco and The American's stated goal.

Also, Aresco was still negotiating a TV deal at the time of the Tulane add, so having the NOLA market in his pocket was thought to increase leverage and the conferences value (which it clearly did not succeed in doing).

Tulsa, yeah, they should be shot into the Sun.

That's my point - they didn't (don't) need a championship game.

If Aresco thought he was adding value with Tulane's market he should forfeit his salary since that day.

 

[NYUConn]

That's my point - they didn't (don't) need a championship game.

If Aresco thought he was adding value with Tulane's market he should forfeit his salary since that day.

I'm not gonna dispute your take on Aresco's read on Tulane's value to the NOLA market, but I do think having the CCG is actually good for the conference for a couple of reasons:

1) Having a 13th game increases the conference's chances of getting into the CFP and a NY6 bowl bid.

2) There is additional revenue to be gained through the CCG.

 

[whaler11]

I'm not gonna dispute your take on Aresco's read on Tulane's value to the NOLA market, but I do think having the CCG is actually good for the conference for a couple of reasons:

1) Having a 13th game increases the conference's chances of getting into the CFP and a NY6 bowl bid.

2) There is additional revenue to be gained through the CCG.

I don't think number 1 is a given and I imagine when you divide by 12 instead of 10 it's actually a net decrease to each school.

If my deal is 20 million for 10
and 22 for 12 - which would I prefer?

The championship game would have to be worth more than 2 full shares to make it worthwhile on a per team basis.

 

[NYUConn]

I don't think number 1 is a given and I imagine when you divide by 12 instead of 10 it's actually a net decrease to each school.

If my deal is 20 million for 10
and 22 for 12 - which would I prefer?

The championship game would have to be worth more than 2 full shares to make it worthwhile on a per team basis.

For No. 1 I am just going on what the CFP selection committee has publicly said. I'm not making that up.

On No. 2 I agree, but again, at the time you needed 12 for a CCG. If The American were to lose two more teams, I would totally agree it's in everyone's best interest to stay at 10.

 

[whaler11]

For No. 1 I am just going on what the CFP selection committee has publicly said. I'm not making that up.

On No. 2 I agree, but again, at the time you needed 12 for a CCG. If The American were to lose two more teams, I would totally agree it's in everyone's best interest to stay at 10.

Well the committee is assuming you win the game when they say that....

It's different for the AAC because they aren't going to have two candidates.

 

[Fishy]

The odds on an AAC team making the playoffs are slim. The odds of making it without an extra W in a championship game are zero.

It is what it is.

 

[NYUConn]

Well the committee is assuming you win the game when they say that....

It's different for the AAC because they aren't going to have two candidates.

Maybe, but is a 12-1 Boise State more likely to jump a 12-0 Houston team when in the final weekend of the year Boise has big win over Colorado State in the MWC Championship game and Houston is sitting at home?

I don't think you can leave that to chance.

 

[whaler11]

Maybe, but is a 12-1 Boise State more likely to jump a 12-0 Houston team when in the final weekend of the year Boise has big win over Colorado State in the MWC Championship game and Houston is sitting at home?

I don't think you can leave that to chance.

Sometimes yes - sometimes no which is why I don't think it's as valuable as Aresco.

 

[Vowelguy]

Maybe, but is a 12-1 Boise State more likely to jump a 12-0 Houston team when in the final weekend of the year Boise has big win over Colorado State in the MWC Championship game and Houston is sitting at home?

I don't think you can leave that to chance.

If Houston gets to 12-0, they will have beaten OU and Louisville. Only way they're not in the playoffs is if Stanf/Wash & Clemson are unbeaten. Aint no way Boise is leaping them.

 

[NYUConn]

If Houston gets to 12-0, they will have beaten OU and Louisville. Only way they're not in the playoffs is if Stanf/Wash & Clemson are unbeaten. Aint no way Boise is leaping them.

Thanks, I meant in a hypothetical, non-CCG world.

 

[CL82]

If Houston gets to 12-0, they will have beaten OU and Louisville. Only way they're not in the playoffs is if Stanf/Wash & Clemson are unbeaten. Aint no way Boise is leaping them.

That would be pretty cool Almost makes me feel bad about our beating them tomorrow. Almost.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

There is no way that adding Tulane and Tulsa were offset by adding the AAC title game.

Not to mention the fact that NCAA credits, bowl revenue and then having to see them on your home schedules for football and basketball kills tickets sales.

It was an idiotic decision then and it still is now.

The New Orleans market. .

 

[NYUConn]

There is no way that adding Tulane and Tulsa were offset by adding the AAC title game.

Not to mention the fact that NCAA credits, bowl revenue and then having to see them on your home schedules for football and basketball kills tickets sales.

It was an idiotic decision then and it still is now.

The New Orleans market. .

Who would you have added?

Keep in mind that Boise St., SDSU and BYU were non-starters.

(I'm not defending the decision to add Tulane and Tulsa - especially Tulsa - but I'm looking to underscore the difficult spot the American was in at a time when you needed 12 for a CCG.)

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Who would you have added?

Keep in mind that Boise St., SDSU and BYU were non-starters.

(I'm not defending the decision to add Tulane and Tulsa - especially Tulsa - but I'm looking to underscore the difficult spot the American was in at a time when you needed 12 for a CCG.)

I would have kept 10 teams and not had the CCG. It didn't bring additional revenue to cover the two new teams (not to mention the other factors I listed above) and I think the only way an AAC team would get into the playoff is if they ran the table and won ranked games ooc.

If Houston runs the table this year it won't be because they had one extra game against USF or whoever it may be.

 

[Vowelguy]

That would be pretty cool Almost makes me feel bad about our beating them tomorrow. Almost.

I wish that were true. Instead I see an epic blood bath.

 

[CallMeBruce]

In fairness at the time of the last round of expansion you needed 12 for a Championship Game, which was always Aresco and The American's stated goal.

Also, Aresco was still negotiating a TV deal at the time of the Tulane add, so having the NOLA market in his pocket was thought to increase leverage and the conferences value (which it clearly did not succeed in doing).

Tulsa, yeah, they should be shot into the Sun.

NOLA isn't a top-50 market, so I doubt they had much impact on the TV partners.

 

[NYUConn]

If Houston runs the table this year it won't be because they had one extra game against USF or whoever it may be.

You may be right, but it flies in the face of everything the CFP committee has said.

 

[NYUConn]

NOLA isn't a top-50 market, so I doubt they had much impact on the TV partners.

I mean, dude, it's No. 51.

But clearly you're right that it didn't matter. Though Aresco being hired was supposedly cause of his TV chops and a lot of the new teams added, like Tulane, were because of their media market. Goal was to make The American as attractive as possible for the networks to get a better TV deal.

Clearly Aresco swung and missed.

 

[TRest]

I mean, dude, it's No. 51.

But clearly you're right that it didn't matter. Though Aresco being hired was supposedly cause of his TV chops and a lot of the new teams added, like Tulane, were because of their media market. Goal was to make The American as attractive as possible for the networks to get a better TV deal.

Clearly Aresco swung and missed.

At the time I thought the rumor was Tulane got in on the heavy lobbying of a friend in the president of UCF. Why would the conference listen to that guy? Because it's the AAC.

 

[Fishy]

Tulane got in because the Big East was in danger of ceasing to exist as a conference.

Pitt, Syracuse, WV and Rutgers were gone. They knew the Catholics were talking to Fox and that UConn, Louisville and Cincy were talking to the ACC. They needed warm bodies and Tulane and East Carolina (football-only at the time) were the warmest bodies available.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Tulane got in because the Big East was in danger of ceasing to exist as a conference.

Pitt, Syracuse, WV and Rutgers were gone. They knew the Catholics were talking to Fox and that UConn, Louisville and Cincy were talking to the ACC. They needed warm bodies and Tulane and East Carolina (football-only at the time) were the warmest bodies available.

I also suspect that there were University Presidents, who watched those mostly solid academic institutions walk, and who were only willing to suffer ECU with somebody like Tulane coming in at the same time. Tulane is not a major problem for the AAC, I don't know why people are harping about it.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Tulane got in because the Big East was in danger of ceasing to exist as a conference.

Pitt, Syracuse, WV and Rutgers were gone. They knew the Catholics were talking to Fox and that UConn, Louisville and Cincy were talking to the ACC. They needed warm bodies and Tulane and East Carolina (football-only at the time) were the warmest bodies available.

Sure. This reason is as good as any.

 

[Hoophound]

Duplicate to post in Premium Thread:

Guess who's speaking for who? Tramel: OU not anti-expansion; OU is anti-expansion candidates

>>“From Day One, expanding was OK if we replaced the teams we lost with teams of equal stature,” said an OU administrator Tuesday. “They are not out there.”

Brigham Young. Houston. Cincinnati. Connecticut. All have pluses and minuses. We can debate which candidates offer the best portfolios. We cannot debate that all have minuses.

Nebraska didn't have minuses. Texas A&M didn't have minuses. Colorado and Missouri didn't have minuses. All flagship universities in their states. All deep roots with fellow conference schools. All a decent (or better) amount of football tradition. All academically stout (all four members of the prestigious Association of American Universities).

“The teams we need have left,” another Big 12 administrator said Tuesday. “Whoever you add out there really devalues the whole conference. They don't add anything. Just to get 12? What's sacred about a number? Does that make you stable?”<<

I'd never leave this comment unchecked if I were Herbst/Benedict. That is total b.s. While I would want to slam their idiocy in the process, I'd avoid that for now because making enemies is not a good idea. However, I would certainly use it as an opportunity to get some publicity by smashing that comment to bits with facts and showing some fight. Maybe with Cincy and Houston that actually applies, but no way is it true of BYU and UConn. If they actually believe that, who is feeding them that nonsense? We all know who.

 

[MattMang23]

who is feeding them that nonsense? We all know who.

Flipper?

 

[gioff23]

If you believe they learned something they didn't know before they launched their expansion attempt, I've got some choice FL real estate for you. This is a stare down btw OU and bevo. OU has made it clear they ain't joining the SWC.

 

[HuskyinWRNY]

If expansion is dead, the top AAC teams need to band together with the top MWC teams to form a football only conference. The bottom half of the AAC is not tenable for the likes of UConn and Cincinnati in the long term. A football only conference of UConn, UC, UH, BYU, Boise, Air Force, Navy, CSU, USF, UCF, and maybe Memphis could serve as a legitimate sixth league option. It would also afford the opportunity for UConn and UC to bring olympic sports back to the Big East, immediately bolster the basketball conference there and create one of the best BB leagues in the country. This would position UConn best to prove itself for down the road P5 expansion. Staying in the AAC and battling it out against ECU, Tulane, Tulsa, Temple, and SMU in all sports will further devalue our brand across the board. When the AAC was formed, of course there was the 12-team conference championship rule, but the addition of these bottom-feeding schools that have no value, few fans, and have no football or basketball cache whatsoever significantly bring down the league from a branding and revenue standpoint.

I get the sense UConn knows this and from some of the tea leaves out there, UConn is not content to stay in the AAC if they don't get a B12 bid, or if they decide not to expand.

I think you add Temple and

Sounds great for UConn and Cincinnati, but where are the other schools park their other sports?

Add Temple and maybe another MWC school and keep all the sports together.