(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 02:25 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 01:13 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  1Air Force has been invited by the Big 12 once and was a finalist teh second time... They have value... and if they wanted to come, we would take them. Army wants to be indy but they did say they would like to be in a conference with all the academies. If we could add Air Force, then I think Army becomes possible but at a minimum, I think we could work out a scheduling agreement. Having 6 Army games a year would be awesome.

and I wouldnt bet against BYU. They currently make about %5-6 million a year on their TV contract and get almost nothing from the playoff. Coming into the AAC increases their exposure with getting EST time zone games, easier scheduling, more money from Playoff, ability to make the Access bowl, a better bowl lineup and very possibly more money for their TV contract.

2They have lots of reasons why joining would be positive and if ESPN wants it to happen, then all they have to do is offer them a lower contract or stay the same. Unless BYU gets a raise, it makes sense to come to the AAC. At a minimum they could join as football only.

1.
Air Force has terrible numbers, but they make more sense than Boise and SDSU, if they came with Army maybe it works. Especially if we added say St. Louis and VCU to match (AA could go WAC or even WCC). Adding the Academies would also mean losing the conference Navy showcase game vs Army since it would have to occur before our championship game.

2.
The only reason BYU needs to not join is Utah in the PAC. They currently have a contract that varies between 4-6 million a season depending on what TV channel the games are selected for (ESPN is worth more than ESPN2 etc). There next deal will put then some where around ours, so they would be worth extra travel costs since there wouldn't be a media bump. You still need someone to match with them.


For those making expansion divisions. Navy, Air Force, and Army would all be western division teams with the three private schools to avoid rematches for the c.i.c. trophy and to compete against similarly restricted schools. For AA it makes sense in travel as well, but Army and Navy want a national footprint. So move Memphis to the east.

If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?

The US Navy doesn't forfeit nothin.

(06-18-2019 09:21 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 02:25 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  1.
Air Force has terrible numbers, but they make more sense than Boise and SDSU, if they came with Army maybe it works. Especially if we added say St. Louis and VCU to match (AA could go WAC or even WCC). Adding the Academies would also mean losing the conference Navy showcase game vs Army since it would have to occur before our championship game.

2.
The only reason BYU needs to not join is Utah in the PAC. They currently have a contract that varies between 4-6 million a season depending on what TV channel the games are selected for (ESPN is worth more than ESPN2 etc). There next deal will put then some where around ours, so they would be worth extra travel costs since there wouldn't be a media bump. You still need someone to match with them.


For those making expansion divisions. Navy, Air Force, and Army would all be western division teams with the three private schools to avoid rematches for the c.i.c. trophy and to compete against similarly restricted schools. For AA it makes sense in travel as well, but Army and Navy want a national footprint. So move Memphis to the east.

If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?

The US Navy doesn't forfeit nothin.

Usually asking the Navy to give up will get you a healthy dose of US Marines to clear up thee misunderstanding .

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 02:25 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 01:13 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  1Air Force has been invited by the Big 12 once and was a finalist teh second time... They have value... and if they wanted to come, we would take them. Army wants to be indy but they did say they would like to be in a conference with all the academies. If we could add Air Force, then I think Army becomes possible but at a minimum, I think we could work out a scheduling agreement. Having 6 Army games a year would be awesome.

and I wouldnt bet against BYU. They currently make about %5-6 million a year on their TV contract and get almost nothing from the playoff. Coming into the AAC increases their exposure with getting EST time zone games, easier scheduling, more money from Playoff, ability to make the Access bowl, a better bowl lineup and very possibly more money for their TV contract.

2They have lots of reasons why joining would be positive and if ESPN wants it to happen, then all they have to do is offer them a lower contract or stay the same. Unless BYU gets a raise, it makes sense to come to the AAC. At a minimum they could join as football only.

1.
Air Force has terrible numbers, but they make more sense than Boise and SDSU, if they came with Army maybe it works. Especially if we added say St. Louis and VCU to match (AA could go WAC or even WCC). Adding the Academies would also mean losing the conference Navy showcase game vs Army since it would have to occur before our championship game.

2.
The only reason BYU needs to not join is Utah in the PAC. They currently have a contract that varies between 4-6 million a season depending on what TV channel the games are selected for (ESPN is worth more than ESPN2 etc). There next deal will put then some where around ours, so they would be worth extra travel costs since there wouldn't be a media bump. You still need someone to match with them.


For those making expansion divisions. Navy, Air Force, and Army would all be western division teams with the three private schools to avoid rematches for the c.i.c. trophy and to compete against similarly restricted schools. For AA it makes sense in travel as well, but Army and Navy want a national footprint. So move Memphis to the east.

If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

(06-18-2019 10:02 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 02:25 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  1.
Air Force has terrible numbers, but they make more sense than Boise and SDSU, if they came with Army maybe it works. Especially if we added say St. Louis and VCU to match (AA could go WAC or even WCC). Adding the Academies would also mean losing the conference Navy showcase game vs Army since it would have to occur before our championship game.

2.
The only reason BYU needs to not join is Utah in the PAC. They currently have a contract that varies between 4-6 million a season depending on what TV channel the games are selected for (ESPN is worth more than ESPN2 etc). There next deal will put then some where around ours, so they would be worth extra travel costs since there wouldn't be a media bump. You still need someone to match with them.


For those making expansion divisions. Navy, Air Force, and Army would all be western division teams with the three private schools to avoid rematches for the c.i.c. trophy and to compete against similarly restricted schools. For AA it makes sense in travel as well, but Army and Navy want a national footprint. So move Memphis to the east.

If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

I understand these points well but you're completely ignoring the most important detail: Army and Navy will not change the date of the end of year game just to be in the same conference. They've made this plainly transparent.

If Army-Navy will always be played the week after all CCG's are done, you run into the inevitability that with the Army-Navy game being a conference game, and therefore effects conference results, you can only have the American CCG after the Army-Navy game has occurred, which is just not possible.

^^^^ What Kruciff said is why I would like to get Air Force into the AAC, then go after BYU. Then we just get a scheduling agreement with Army. We dont have to have them as a member to benefit from having them play in our conference. Army doesnt really want to leave being an indy, but scheduling 6 games a year against the best G5 conference makes way more sense.

(06-18-2019 10:19 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:02 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

I understand these points well but you're completely ignoring the most important detail: Army and Navy will not change the date of the end of year game just to be in the same conference. They've made this plainly transparent.

If Army-Navy will always be played the week after all CCG's are done, you run into the inevitability that with the Army-Navy game being a conference game, and therefore effects conference results, you can only have the American CCG after the Army-Navy game has occurred, which is just not possible.

If the Army-Navy game/CCG dates were the only reasons keeping this from happening, then it's a done deal... The CFP commity has already shown that they are willing to wait for the ARMY-NAVY game outcome to see if an AAC team gets the NY6 invite (or CFP invite in the future). They did this the year CMU got the NY6 bid.

(06-18-2019 10:19 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:02 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

I understand these points well but you're completely ignoring the most important detail: Army and Navy will not change the date of the end of year game just to be in the same conference. They've made this plainly transparent.

If Army-Navy will always be played the week after all CCG's are done, you run into the inevitability that with the Army-Navy game being a conference game, and therefore effects conference results, you can only have the American CCG after the Army-Navy game has occurred, which is just not possible.

Then stop. Those are mutually exclusive ideas. Army can not be in the same conference as Navy and never play a conference game against them. Army and Navy will not move the game. That's game, set, match.

BYU will not come unless we are a contract bowl conference or Utah isn't anymore. That's a have a seat strike out on the heater.

AFA, Boise, and SDSU are not worth enough or collectively to add. That's the fat lady singing.

VCU makes sense for Olympics only but everyone else has a draw back. St. Louis and Dayton are possible B.E. canadites. St. Louis doesn't consistently win and Dayton is too close to Cincy (although that never hurt the Philadelphia schools).

The train for expansion pulled out of the station at the end of February. Had Aresco and the presidents taken us to open market their were lots of scenarios that could have occurred. They didn't, so now we are stuck. Settle in cause it will be 2027 before anything moves and 2028 is more likely. The P5 will sign six year deals again, then pick off our emancipated conference the ones they want to boost from 7m we will still be stuck on to the 60m they will be getting by not signing a decade plus of their rights away for peanuts. Conveniently that's also when the Navy contract will be expiring.

We could hear something today about BYU. Supposedly the deal with ESPN is close to being done and could be announced at their media days, which is today.

Well see. If they get more than the AAC, I will be shocked since their viewership is done since the last tv deal. I would hope that ESPN would help the AAC get stronger.

The big question I have is what will the MWC get. That will be a good indicator of our value. If the MWC stays at $3 million or less, then our position as the #6 league is cemented.

(06-18-2019 10:57 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  We could hear something today about BYU. Supposedly the deal with ESPN is close to being done and could be announced at their media days, which is today.

Well see. If they get more than the AAC, I will be shocked since their viewership is done since the last tv deal. I would hope that ESPN would help the AAC get stronger.

The big question I have is what will the MWC get. That will be a good indicator of our value. If the MWC stays at $3 million or less, then our position as the #6 league is cemented.

The numbers say they will get about 30-40 million a year. Roughly 3m a year per team, but Boise's sweet heart deal will get them 5-6 with the rest making about 2.7m. Now they might see a stretch if Sinclair is serious about slugging it out with ESPN and FS1 or NBC really was looking for college football especially say on NBCsports (where their viewership is likely to place them).

The surprise may be that they go streaming and cut and Boise's deal back or out. In fact they could go all streaming except the Boise home games. Boise would get between 2-3m for those 6 games, including the small cut out for the mwc portion of the deal. The rest would give up 2.5m but have complete control of their kick times and even sell the rights old school style to a local station for TV broadcast. For teams like Wyoming and Vegas that plan might be appealing for different reasons. Hawaii would love it as they could probably kick travel subsidies and up their take from ppv package.

We won't actually know the BYU numbers, they're private so we'll get estimates and rumours. The last deal reportedly paid them around 6m a year originally, but the truth that eventually came out is that the pay out is linked to where ESPN shows the game. They get more money for games on ESPN than on the Deuce, so the money has a range each year of 3.5-6m. I would expect a similar type deal again with a smallish bump for each level per game. Probably put them in the ballpark of the AAC.

(06-18-2019 10:44 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:19 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:02 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

I understand these points well but you're completely ignoring the most important detail: Army and Navy will not change the date of the end of year game just to be in the same conference. They've made this plainly transparent.

If Army-Navy will always be played the week after all CCG's are done, you run into the inevitability that with the Army-Navy game being a conference game, and therefore effects conference results, you can only have the American CCG after the Army-Navy game has occurred, which is just not possible.

If the Army-Navy game/CCG dates were the only reasons keeping this from happening, then it's a done deal... The CFP comity has already shown that the are willing to wait for the ARMY-NAVY game outcome to see if an AAC team gets the NY6 invite (or CFP invite in the future). They did this the year CMU got the NY6 bid.

That's not really true though. We're not talking about postponing the NY6 selection by one week, i'm saying that the CCG would have to wait for the conclusion of the Army-Navy game in the event that either team is in the running for a division winner. Let me put it this way, using this years schedule as an example:

• Saturday December 7th, Championship weekend (everyone except the AAC)
• Saturday December 14th, Army-Navy game
• Immediately following, AAC CCG results announced per the results of the game
• Friday December 20th, First Bowl games kickoff
• Saturday December 21st, AAC CCG
  

It's physically not possible to have Army in the conference, keep the Army-Navy game on the same date, and have a CCG at the same time.

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 07:57 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-17-2019 03:44 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If we have any chance of getting Army in the fold, from what I've understood from Navy fans (and by assumption, Army fans too), the Army-Navy game must remain in it's designated spot.

I've been wracking my brain for months trying to figure out a way to accommodate a conference game between Army-Navy but I just don't think it's possible, unless we can have the championship game AFTER the rivalry game.

This years game is held on December 14th, 2019 (wtf?? why so late in the year?). The first bowl game is literally the Friday following, The Frisco Bowl on December 20th.

I think the only way to make this work, and trust me this is dumb and entirely an incomplete thought, but bare with me...

• Step #1: Invite Army, BYU, and AFA. All Fball only. No BBall additions.
• Step #2: Create 3 divisions of 5.
• Step #3: Amend the conference rules that the CCG is between the 2 highest rated division champions.
• Step #4: Put each Service Academy in their own pod. Games played against each other do not count towards conference, standing, and are considered OOC. If all the service academies were in the same division, it would be against CFB rules in order to hold a conference championship game.
  

This is actually a kind of interesting idea. The only difficulties become, what if Army and Navy win their divisions and meet in the CCG, and then again in the Army-Navy game? Does it devalue the rivalry game, or it would add value to the conference to get not one but TWO army-navy games?


Divisions could look like this:

• Army
• UConn
• Temple
• Memphis?
• Cincinnati
  

• Navy
• ECU
• UCF
• USF
• Tulane
  

• AFA
• BYU
• Houston?
• SMU
• Tulsa
  

8 Conference games, 4 intra division, 2 each inter division. Army-Navy-AFA will never be played in conference, but all three share our bowls, can win our conference, get their share of media revenue.

In a perfect world, cross division matchups would be decided similar to basketball, based on expected strength for top matchups, but since football scheduling is so tricky and needs to be done years in advance, I don't think that's possible, so it will be just rotating through the conference 2 at a time, home and away, switching every two years.

Remind me how the timing works as far as CFP rankings, bowl selections, etc? I guess I'm wondering whether, in the once every 50 years Army and Navy are the actual CCG participants, the CCG being the Army/Navy game (at the usual date) would make sense? i.e. could we just hold off on the CCG for an extra week?

Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Short answer before this spirals out of control - No. Navy does not like.

(06-18-2019 12:12 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:44 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:19 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:02 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

I understand these points well but you're completely ignoring the most important detail: Army and Navy will not change the date of the end of year game just to be in the same conference. They've made this plainly transparent.

If Army-Navy will always be played the week after all CCG's are done, you run into the inevitability that with the Army-Navy game being a conference game, and therefore effects conference results, you can only have the American CCG after the Army-Navy game has occurred, which is just not possible.

If the Army-Navy game/CCG dates were the only reasons keeping this from happening, then it's a done deal... The CFP comity has already shown that the are willing to wait for the ARMY-NAVY game outcome to see if an AAC team gets the NY6 invite (or CFP invite in the future). They did this the year CMU got the NY6 bid.

That's not really true though. We're not talking about postponing the NY6 selection by one week, i'm saying that the CCG would have to wait for the conclusion of the Army-Navy game in the event that either team is in the running for a division winner. Let me put it this way, using this years schedule as an example:

• Saturday December 7th, Championship weekend (everyone except the AAC)
• Saturday December 14th, Army-Navy game
• Immediately following, AAC CCG results announced per the results of the game
• Friday December 20th, First Bowl games kickoff
• Saturday December 21st, AAC CCG
  

It's physically not possible to have Army in the conference, keep the Army-Navy game on the same date, and have a CCG at the same time.

Yeah it's a temporal paradox that I hadn't really thought of. You can't just wait and make the Army/Navy game the CCG, because they might have to play that game in order for either team to qualify for the conference championship ga.....oh no I've gone cross-eyed.

I really wish they'd both be willing to play the damn thing on rivalry weekend like all the other big boys. But I get it, gotta have the timeslot all by yourselves. Can't be stealing eyeballs from the iron bowl.

(06-18-2019 12:12 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:44 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:19 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 10:02 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-18-2019 09:18 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  Actually... I like that idea better. That could be a very favorable situation for Army-Navy. Imagine the grandeur that comes with the first ever Army-Navy game that is also a conference championship game...

So yes, in that event if Army and Navy were to actually be the selected division champs, the Championship game would be held off a week, and the rivalry game would also serve as the championship game.

That would also force Army and Navy to forfeit tv rights of that one game, just in case it happens to be the CCG which would be owned by the conference.

@SlhNavy, what do you think?


Edit:
Alternatively, with this solution, we don't necessarily need AFA. You could split the divisions 7-7 with BYU in the west. The problem then becomes similar to the SEC. Do we want to keep only 8 conference games, and only see some members in the conference, at home, once every decade?

I think splitting divisions 5-5-5 would help keep the conference games low (a necessity for Army, Navy, and AFA who have OOC games pretty much locked each year) and also allow for more opportunity against high profile teams.

Two of those OOC games are versus each other. You put the c.i.c. in one division Navy and Air Force free up two ooc games. Navy would only have the traditional Notre Dame game to schedule OOC. Air Force and Army would be wide open for OOC. Air Force could schedule a PAC team, rotate in CSU, New Mexico, Wyoming, New Mexico St,, UTEP, and Hawaii a couple games a year to keep their regional games. They could probably schedule themselves into similar records as they get now. Park their sports in the WAC which will.close up some geography and keeps their presence in the western US, is probably just as cheap as the MWC for them in travel and a league they would compete in very well.

I understand these points well but you're completely ignoring the most important detail: Army and Navy will not change the date of the end of year game just to be in the same conference. They've made this plainly transparent.

If Army-Navy will always be played the week after all CCG's are done, you run into the inevitability that with the Army-Navy game being a conference game, and therefore effects conference results, you can only have the American CCG after the Army-Navy game has occurred, which is just not possible.

If the Army-Navy game/CCG dates were the only reasons keeping this from happening, then it's a done deal... The CFP comity has already shown that the are willing to wait for the ARMY-NAVY game outcome to see if an AAC team gets the NY6 invite (or CFP invite in the future). They did this the year CMU got the NY6 bid.

That's not really true though. We're not talking about postponing the NY6 selection by one week, i'm saying that the CCG would have to wait for the conclusion of the Army-Navy game in the event that either team is in the running for a division winner. Let me put it this way, using this years schedule as an example:

• Saturday December 7th, Championship weekend (everyone except the AAC)
• Sunday December 8th, CFP and NY6 announced
• Saturday December 14th, Army-Navy game
• Immediately following, AAC CCG results announced per the results of the game
• Friday December 20th, First Bowl games kickoff
• Saturday December 21st, AAC CCG
  

It's physically not possible to have Army in the conference, keep the Army-Navy game on the same date, and have a CCG at the same time.

Added the other crucial point, adding fuel to the fire that you can't do all those things.

So leave Army out, have a CCG with a near guarantee the winner goes to the NY6, and keep Army-Navy when it is.

I say again, gains from adding Army and AirForce are marginal at best. You already have the best Service Academy program over the last twenty years, which is also best set up for success for the next twenty years