(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

Ummm, you had better hope that USF loses a game or two too. USF plays FSU this weekend. If USF gets through that game and go undefeated for a while, then Boise State, SDSU and AF is going to be behind USF too.

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

You guys should just come over to the AAC. Leave Boise behind.

(09-18-2016 10:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

Ummm, you had better hope that USF loses a game or two too. USF plays FSU this weekend. If USF gets through that game and go undefeated for a while, then Boise State, SDSU and AF is going to be behind USF too.

A 2 loss American team will get the nod over a one loss MW team, this conference is that tough, and the committee knows it.

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

boise struggled to beat a subpar wazzu
air force has played horrible teams to start the year

and ill start by saying temple is not a top AAC team this year

just of resume alone

id take cincy, memphis, navy, usf, tulsa and ecu over airforce

Houston is in a league of its own in comparison to sdsu (top teams)

usf and boise are probably similarly ranked (excpet usf crushed the bad p5 while Boise struggled)

and then their are 5 AAC id take over Air force... i dont agree with the "little difference" at the top...
yes sdsu and boise are favored to go undefeated..but tulsa, ecu, cincy, memphis, usf, houston would all be favored to go undefeated on your schedules

hell temple and uconn would be favored against everyone not your top 3

I like SDSU, but their schedule is horrific. UH or USF should be safe at 11-2 or better, as you don't deserve a NY6 bowl if your best win is Cal, and have a conference schedule with a current, average Massey rating of 119.

Same type of a situation as 2014 Marshall.

(09-18-2016 10:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

Ummm, you had better hope that USF loses a game or two too. USF plays FSU this weekend. If USF gets through that game and go undefeated for a while, then Boise State, SDSU and AF is going to be behind USF too.

While I doubt USF beats Florida State, I think you underestimate being the "incumbent." Being ranked in the AP early, directly effects perception from everyone, including the committee late in the year. A 12-0 Boise and SDSU playing each other in the MWC Championship game gets in in front of USF.

(09-18-2016 11:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  I like SDSU, but their schedule is horrific. UH or USF should be safe at 11-2 or better, as you don't deserve a NY6 bowl if your best win is Cal, and have a conference schedule with a current, average Massey rating of 119. Marshall-type situation from 2014.

I agree, our schedule is not very good perception wise. With that, Cal beating Texas is already starting to help. However, the weakness of the bottom part of our conference will hurt.

A two loss USF/ECU/Houston is unlikely to get in over an undefeated BSU or SDSU.

(09-18-2016 11:50 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 10:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

Ummm, you had better hope that USF loses a game or two too. USF plays FSU this weekend. If USF gets through that game and go undefeated for a while, then Boise State, SDSU and AF is going to be behind USF too.

While I doubt USF beats Florida State, I think you underestimate being the "incumbent." Being ranked in the AP early, directly effects perception from everyone, including the committee late in the year. A 12-0 Boise and SDSU playing each other in the MWC Championship game gets in in front of USF.

You probably felt the same way about Houston being able to beat FSU last year as you feel about USF being able to beat FSU this year. USF can beat FSU, because the top and the middle programs in the AAC and the ACC are closer than people think. Hell ECU has ran through middle of the ACC like a hot knife through butter over the last few years; so I know that USF can beat FSU.

Moreover, I think that you underestimate the perception of how much stronger the AAC is viewed in comparison to the MWC. Just two years back; ECU got ranked in the first CFP poll before Boise State and Colorado State. If USF wins this weekend; I would be shocked if USF didn't jump both SDSU and Boise State. Unfortunatley for Boise State and SDSU; you will need AAC teams to beat up on each other before either school would get a sniff of the access bowl.

(09-19-2016 12:07 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 11:50 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 10:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

Ummm, you had better hope that USF loses a game or two too. USF plays FSU this weekend. If USF gets through that game and go undefeated for a while, then Boise State, SDSU and AF is going to be behind USF too.

While I doubt USF beats Florida State, I think you underestimate being the "incumbent." Being ranked in the AP early, directly effects perception from everyone, including the committee late in the year. A 12-0 Boise and SDSU playing each other in the MWC Championship game gets in in front of USF.

You probably felt the same way about Houston being able to beat FSU last year as you feel about USF being able to beat FSU this year. USF can beat FSU, because the top and the middle programs in the AAC and the ACC are closer than people think. Hell ECU has ran through middle of the ACC like a hot knife through butter over the last few years; so I know that USF can beat FSU.

Moreover, I think that you underestimate the perception of how much stronger the AAC is viewed in comparison to the MWC. Just two years back; ECU got ranked in the first CFP poll before Boise State and Colorado State. If USF wins this weekend; I would be shocked if USF didn't jump both SDSU and Boise State. Unfortunatley for Boise State and SDSU; you will need AAC teams to beat up on each other before either school would get a sniff of the access bowl.

USF is a damn good team, and they played well against FSU last year. I just think the fact that they get FSU coming off of a loss really hurts them.

In regards to perception, SDSU is just now getting a lot of attention, while USF is not really as of yet. Granted this took a 13 game win streak and a RB that is as good or better than Marshall Faulk. Things may change if USF wins this weekend, but right now, SDSU is getting more publicity.

In regards to the Access Bowl, we only have a sample set of two. In 2014, a 2 loss Boise team got the bid, and of course Houston secured it last season. I think we need to wait for four or five seasons before making assumptions that the AAC, MW, or any G5 conferences is the presumptive G5 representative each season.

Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

News in San Diego is not national news. You will forever be hurt by east coast bias. Just the facts.

(09-19-2016 09:59 AM)isidnirb Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

News in San Diego is not national news. You will forever be hurt by east coast bias. Just the facts.

East Coast bias definitely hurts in the big picture, but when compared to USF (this season), it has not been a factor thus far.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...ego-state/

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...les-091816
"San Diego State’s Donnel Pumphrey is averaging over 53 rushing yards per game more than the nation’s next most prolific running back. (Louisville QB Lamar Jackson is actually second in rushing at 155 yards per game, 45 yards behind the Aztecs star."

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...k-3-091816

"The Aztecs star notched his second straight 200-plus yard game with 220 and three TDs against NIU. He remains the nation’s leading rusher, averaging 199.7 yards per game"

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...ine-week-3

"4. Donnel Pumphrey, RB, San Diego State: Pumphrey ran for 220 yards with three touchdowns on 23 carries in the Aztecs' 42-28 win at Northern Illinois. It was his second straight game with more than 200 rushing yards, and he set a Mountain West Conference record with his 52nd career touchdown."

(09-18-2016 04:01 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Notre Dame and BYU need to start pulling their weight for the independents.

Toledo will play Notre Dame in South Bend in 2021.

(09-18-2016 11:48 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  As of September 17, 2016, the AAC has pulled away from the other G5's. The MAC is closing ground on the MWC and CUSA is dead last. Aresco's narrative of the AAC being a P6 is looking solid.

1. SEC 38.75
2. Pac 12 42.53
3 Big 10 46.88
4 ACC 50.59
5 Big 12 52.00
6 AAC 64.51
7 FBS Indep 67.16
8 MWC 81.07
9 MAC 84.03
10 Sun Belt 94.97
11 CUSA 96.15

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

None of it matters. There will never be a recognized P6. In fact, there is a much greater chance that there will be a P4 before a P6. Frankly, the SEC and B1G want consolidation into 4 conferences of 16 plus ND. IF the Big XII adds two more, that would make it 66. That poses a problem. The next number that works (i.e. divisible by 4) is 80 and they DON't want to split the pie that much.

When the next AAC tv deal comes up, you will see a fall. Why? Because the old market based (that is number of cable boxes) negotiation is no longer a driving force due to the bleeding of subscribers not only by ESPN by by cable companies as a whole. The only conferences that they can count on to deliver are the now P5. They get the money and ESPN will say take what we offer to rest. CBSSN, NBCSN and Fox are not going to throw beau coup bucks at anyone when they don't have to either. Do I hate it. You damn right. But nothing can be done. It's the old golden rule....he who has the gold (ESPN) makes the rule.

(09-18-2016 02:15 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 01:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 12:08 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If Temple can capitulate on Rhule, ECU and UCF realize their former selves, and one of the private schools in the west really turns the corner, this could be a P5 conference in all but tv revenue. The NY6 bid would be all but officially ours.

Sure....until Houston and Cincinnati leave for the Big 12.

The AAC is in the same position the MW was back in 2009. The MW had Utah, TCU, BYU, and Boise was begging to get in. Had the MW added Boise State then, the Pac had not taken Utah, the MW was going to get BCS inclusion.

Sorry guys, I like your conference, but unfortunately, due to realignment, the AAC is going to fall back a notch.

Your nervous I get it. If I was in your shoes I would be as well. But even if we loose two teams we are going to be better than the MWC. The MWC is an after thought on the East Coast. The only G5 school that exists in peoples minds on the East Coast is Boise.

So rock on San Diego guy. Continue to watch as the MWC becomes more irrelevant while the AAC makes smart moves going forward that keeps the conference on top.

But hey, enjoy your Zoo and the weather.

What happens if we tighten said teams?

Now that's funny.

(09-19-2016 11:08 AM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 11:48 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  As of September 17, 2016, the AAC has pulled away from the other G5's. The MAC is closing ground on the MWC and CUSA is dead last. Aresco's narrative of the AAC being a P6 is looking solid.

1. SEC 38.75
2. Pac 12 42.53
3 Big 10 46.88
4 ACC 50.59
5 Big 12 52.00
6 AAC 64.51
7 FBS Indep 67.16
8 MWC 81.07
9 MAC 84.03
10 Sun Belt 94.97
11 CUSA 96.15

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

None of it matters. There will never be a recognized P6. In fact, there is a much greater chance that there will be a P4 before a P6. Frankly, the SEC and B1G want consolidation into 4 conferences of 16 plus ND. IF the Big XII adds two more, that would make it 66. That poses a problem. The next number that works (i.e. divisible by 4) is 80 and they DON't want to split the pie that much.

When the next AAC tv deal comes up, you will see a fall. Why? Because the old market based (that is number of cable boxes) negotiation is no longer a driving force due to the bleeding of subscribers not only by ESPN by by cable companies as a whole. The only conferences that they can count on to deliver are the now P5. They get the money and ESPN will say take what we offer to rest. CBSSN, NBCSN and Fox are not going to throw beau coup bucks at anyone when they don't have to either. Do I hate it. You damn right. But nothing can be done. It's the old golden rule....he who has the gold (ESPN) makes the rule.

Jeez. You have been drinking waaaaaaay too much CUSA board koolaide.

Look, I agree---we will likely never be a P6---but the idea our payout is going to fall from its current paltry 2 million per team is just not based in reality. Its based on the CUSA experience---which has nothing to do with the AAC.

The reason the CUSA deal feel so dramatically was the new conference composition---not the cable industry. The Big 10 deal is four times larger than its old deal. How did that happen if the whole cable industry is collapsing and all deals are plummeting??

Here is the deal. CUSA's issue is viewership. Last year CUSA had one game that exceeded 500K viewers. One. That's why CUSA got cut back to $200K a team. They are drawing viewers like the Sunbelt so they receive Sunbelt pay.

On the other hand, the AAC had 19 games in their TV package that exceeded 1 million viewers. The value of having nearly 20 games with a million+ viewers included in a TV package is light years beyond the selling a package who's big gun is a single 500K viewer game. You cant use the CUSA experience to extrapolate the AAC value. The two products are nothing alike.

The reality is, due to instability, a weak negotiating position, and the lack of a national broadcast track record, the AAC was badly underpaid when it signed its contact in 2013. Since that time, the AAC has vastly out performed expectations both on the field and in the TV ratings.

The opposite was true of CUSA. CUSA had 3 years of its new configuration to prove it had a value that was similar to the old CUSA. Its performance on the field and (more importantly) its ratings have failed miserably in that effort and that is why it now makes $200K a team.

The situations couldn't be more different.

(09-19-2016 11:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:08 AM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 11:48 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  As of September 17, 2016, the AAC has pulled away from the other G5's. The MAC is closing ground on the MWC and CUSA is dead last. Aresco's narrative of the AAC being a P6 is looking solid.

1. SEC 38.75
2. Pac 12 42.53
3 Big 10 46.88
4 ACC 50.59
5 Big 12 52.00
6 AAC 64.51
7 FBS Indep 67.16
8 MWC 81.07
9 MAC 84.03
10 Sun Belt 94.97
11 CUSA 96.15

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

None of it matters. There will never be a recognized P6. In fact, there is a much greater chance that there will be a P4 before a P6. Frankly, the SEC and B1G want consolidation into 4 conferences of 16 plus ND. IF the Big XII adds two more, that would make it 66. That poses a problem. The next number that works (i.e. divisible by 4) is 80 and they DON't want to split the pie that much.

When the next AAC tv deal comes up, you will see a fall. Why? Because the old market based (that is number of cable boxes) negotiation is no longer a driving force due to the bleeding of subscribers not only by ESPN by by cable companies as a whole. The only conferences that they can count on to deliver are the now P5. They get the money and ESPN will say take what we offer to rest. CBSSN, NBCSN and Fox are not going to throw beau coup bucks at anyone when they don't have to either. Do I hate it. You damn right. But nothing can be done. It's the old golden rule....he who has the gold (ESPN) makes the rule.

Jeez. You have been drinking waaaaaaay too much CUSA board koolaide.

Look, I agree---we will likely never be a P6---but the idea our payout is going to fall from its current paltry 2 million per team is just not based in reality. Its based on the CUSA experience---which has nothing to do with the AAC.

The reason the CUSA deal feel so dramatically was the new conference composition---not the cable industry. The Big 10 deal is four times larger than its old deal. How did that happen if the whole cable industry is collapsing and all deals are plummeting??

Here is the deal. CUSA's issue is viewership. Last year CUSA had one game that exceeded 500K viewers. One. That's why CUSA got cut back to $200K a team. They are drawing viewers like the Sunbelt so they receive Sunbelt pay.

On the other hand, the AAC had 19 games in their TV package that exceeded 1 million viewers. The value of having nearly 20 games with a million+ viewers included in a TV package is light years beyond the selling a package who's big gun is a single 500K viewer game. You cant use the CUSA experience to extrapolate the AAC value. The two products are nothing alike.

The reality is, due to instability, a weak negotiating position, and the lack of a national broadcast track record, the AAC was badly underpaid when it signed its contact in 2013. Since that time, the AAC has vastly out performed expectations both on the field and in the TV ratings.

The opposite was true of CUSA. CUSA had 3 years of its new configuration to prove it had a value that was similar to the old CUSA. Its performance on the field and (more importantly) its ratings have failed miserably in that effort and that is why it now makes $200K a team.

The situations couldn't be more different.

First, I am not drinking kool aid. Second, my information comes from people that I know in the television/communications industry not affiliated with CUSA. The B1G got what it got because regardless of how they go in the future, it is going to be through some outlet such as a conference channel or another platform that will be pay per view. The look at the number of B1G alumni and the attendance numbers and extrapolate from there. That means that they have the greatest return. Plus, the over the air networks need advertising dollars. Those conferences draw the bigger audiences.

They really don't care if they have any of the G5. They will just put more of the P5 on their networks. ESPN now broadcasts every SEC game between SEC teams. The only ones you are seeing on the SEC network are the SEC OCC games against G5 or FCS. Later in the year, those will be replaced with the conference games betweenhe bottom dwellers.