Let the predictions begin: Temple "Temple will easily earn a bowl spot this year and will make a serious run for the AAC Championship in 2015."

Five Early Predictions for G5 http://g5conferencenews.blogspot.com/

I get it that the AAC isn't pulling in the $$$ as some others do but no way in the world the AAC should be in the same sentence with those lower conferences.

(05-23-2015 09:20 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  I get it that the AAC isn't pulling in the $$$ as some others do but no way in the world the AAC should be in the same sentence with those lower conferences.

This article seems to support that

Just glad that Temple is no longer a laughingstock in football. I'm thinking 7 wins and a bowl this year.

In basketball we should be decent too with hopefully a solid foundation for big things the next year.

(05-23-2015 09:27 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(05-23-2015 09:20 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  I get it that the AAC isn't pulling in the $$$ as some others do but no way in the world the AAC should be in the same sentence with those lower conferences.

This article seems to support that

Interesting read... Thanks for sharing, Kruciff

Many of these writers are beginning to understand the strength the AAC pulls.

The following is my view and in order, of the conferences;

SEC
PAC/B1G
Big12
ACC

AAC



MWC
* I would place them evenly with the AAC but I won't b/c one team lifts them all on their back, Boise.




CUSA
MAC
SBC

^I think you are underestimating the MWC as a whole. Sure they have some dregs, but so do we (so does everybody for that matter).

I think the AAC and MWC are tied and any given year one will be slightly above the other. And further, you can't simply discount Boise like that. They are in the conference so the conference gets the benefit of having their presence.

I would say nationally, the MWC will be seen as stronger or better than the AAC simply because of Boise. There is something to having a flagship type program like that. Some of the power conferences have had really bad years top to bottom but because of a flagship program the conference gets a pass in perception. This was the Big East's problem. It was a great conference there for a while with as many as four teams ranked at once but because we didn't have a nationally recognized program we got overlooked and looked down upon. Despite the on field performance...in which we out performed the B1G and ACC most of those years (bowls wins, BCS wins, head to head OOC match ups, etc.).

(05-24-2015 08:30 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  ^I think you are underestimating the MWC as a whole. Sure they have some dregs, but so do we (so does everybody for that matter).

I think the AAC and MWC are tied and any given year one will be slightly above the other. And further, you can't simply discount Boise like that. They are in the conference so the conference gets the benefit of having their presence.

I would say nationally, the MWC will be seen as stronger or better than the AAC simply because of Boise. There is something to having a flagship type program like that. Some of the power conferences have had really bad years top to bottom but because of a flagship program the conference gets a pass in perception. This was the Big East's problem. It was a great conference there for a while with as many as four teams ranked at once but because we didn't have a nationally recognized program we got overlooked and looked down upon. Despite the on field performance...in which we out performed the B1G and ACC most of those years (bowls wins, BCS wins, head to head OOC match ups, etc.).

Don't get me wrong, and I mean it when saying this, Bearcats#1... The mwc as a whole is could be a good conference... Although your perception of a national program you just place on Boise a fairly new football program is a couple of decades viewed as to soon.

:cheers:

(05-24-2015 11:11 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-24-2015 08:30 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  ^I think you are underestimating the MWC as a whole. Sure they have some dregs, but so do we (so does everybody for that matter).

I think the AAC and MWC are tied and any given year one will be slightly above the other. And further, you can't simply discount Boise like that. They are in the conference so the conference gets the benefit of having their presence.

I would say nationally, the MWC will be seen as stronger or better than the AAC simply because of Boise. There is something to having a flagship type program like that. Some of the power conferences have had really bad years top to bottom but because of a flagship program the conference gets a pass in perception. This was the Big East's problem. It was a great conference there for a while with as many as four teams ranked at once but because we didn't have a nationally recognized program we got overlooked and looked down upon. Despite the on field performance...in which we out performed the B1G and ACC most of those years (bowls wins, BCS wins, head to head OOC match ups, etc.).

Don't get me wrong, and I mean it when saying this, Bearcats#1... The mwc as a whole is could be a good conference... Although your perception of a national program you just place on Boise a fairly new football program is a couple of decades viewed as to soon.

:cheers:

Boise isnt an OU or FSU, no. But they have some national cache and if we were in a conference with them it would give us a chance at a big national televised game potentially. Boise is as big a name nationally as the G5 has. Thats what Im trying to say.

I would love it if UC was ranked playing a ranked Boise for the conf title on espn...that type of scenario is appealing to me undwr current circumstances.