(04-04-2024 05:52 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:18 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  They didn't ask for their old friend Judy MacLeod to come back?

The only current AAC members that MacLeod didn't oversee in CUSA are South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State.

Right!

It's like everybody except for almost half!

Ha ha ha (laughs in Standard Sunbelt Supremacy Scenario)

Woah now, never suggested that. Don't get too excited.

10/15 is 66.66%.

If you want to be accurate only the 6 newbies ever had clown car Judy as their actual commish (she took over in 2015). Sure, she was Ban Ban's associate until he quit to let her take all the blame (this guy really skates by and never gets the blame he rightfully deserves), but all of us hit the exits before she rode out in her miniature car.

(04-04-2024 05:52 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:18 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  They didn't ask for their old friend Judy MacLeod to come back?

The only current AAC members that MacLeod didn't oversee in CUSA are South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State.

Right!

It's like everybody except for almost half!

Ha ha ha (laughs in Standard Sunbelt Supremacy Scenario)

Woah now, never suggested that. Don't get too excited.

10/15 is 66.66%.

True, but the general point, Y-181, is that the bulk of the AAC members were not exclusively affiliated with the previous version of C-USA.

Original C-USA members USF (the Big East, the Metro), Memphis (Missouri Valley, the Metro, The Great Midwest), Charlotte (A10), UAB (The Great Midwest), North Texas (MVC), Tulsa (WAC, MVC), Tulane (SEC and the Metro) and Rice (SWC) have league-membership histories that go beyond C-USA. This history helps differentiate these schools (and some would contend in a positive way) from most schools in the Belt and the current C-USA. Obviously, there are exceptions in both the Belt (USM in the Metro, for example) and the new-look C-USA (UTEP in the WAC, for example).

Add to the seven AAC schools I list Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State (none of which has a C-USA membership background) — and you get an AAC with a nice diversity of member histories. It's a conference with its own identity.

It's too convenient to paint the current AAC as solely a C-USA-type league. I understand the temptation (particularly for Sun Belt fans who wish the AAC failure). But it just seems a bit misguided to do so.

(04-04-2024 08:30 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 05:52 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:18 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  They didn't ask for their old friend Judy MacLeod to come back?

The only current AAC members that MacLeod didn't oversee in CUSA are South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State.

Right!

It's like everybody except for almost half!

Ha ha ha (laughs in Standard Sunbelt Supremacy Scenario)

Woah now, never suggested that. Don't get too excited.

10/15 is 66.66%.

True, but the general point, Y-181, is that the bulk of the AAC members were not exclusively affiliated with the previous version of C-USA.

Original C-USA members Memphis (Missouri Valley, the Metro, The Great Midwest), Charlotte (A10), UAB (The Great Midwest), North Texas (MVC), Tulsa (WAC, MVC), Tulane (SEC and the Metro) and Rice (SWC) have league-membership histories that go beyond C-USA. This history helps differentiate these schools (and some would contend in a positive way) from most schools in the Belt and the current C-USA. Obviously, there are exceptions in both the Belt (USM in the Metro, for example) and the new-look C-USA (UTEP in the WAC, for example).

Add to the seven AAC schools I list the five that slhNavy 91 posted — South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State (none of which has a C-USA membership background) — and you get an AAC with a nice diversity of member histories. It's a conference with its own identity.

It's too convenient to paint the current AAC as solely a C-USA-type league. I understand the temptation (particularly for Sun Belt fans who wish the AAC failure). But it just seems a bit misguided to do so.

USF did have a very brief stop in C-USA 1.0. Just long enough to dismay all ECU fans as they went from a not existing football program to in the Big East ahead of us in less than 10 years.

(04-04-2024 09:35 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 08:30 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 05:52 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:18 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  They didn't ask for their old friend Judy MacLeod to come back?

The only current AAC members that MacLeod didn't oversee in CUSA are South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State.

Right!

It's like everybody except for almost half!

Ha ha ha (laughs in Standard Sunbelt Supremacy Scenario)

Woah now, never suggested that. Don't get too excited.

10/15 is 66.66%.

True, but the general point, Y-181, is that the bulk of the AAC members were not exclusively affiliated with the previous version of C-USA.

Original C-USA members Memphis (Missouri Valley, the Metro, The Great Midwest), Charlotte (A10), UAB (The Great Midwest), North Texas (MVC), Tulsa (WAC, MVC), Tulane (SEC and the Metro) and Rice (SWC) have league-membership histories that go beyond C-USA. This history helps differentiate these schools (and some would contend in a positive way) from most schools in the Belt and the current C-USA. Obviously, there are exceptions in both the Belt (USM in the Metro, for example) and the new-look C-USA (UTEP in the WAC, for example).

Add to the seven AAC schools I list the five that slhNavy 91 posted — South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State (none of which has a C-USA membership background) — and you get an AAC with a nice diversity of member histories. It's a conference with its own identity.

It's too convenient to paint the current AAC as solely a C-USA-type league. I understand the temptation (particularly for Sun Belt fans who wish the AAC failure). But it just seems a bit misguided to do so.

USF did have a very brief stop in C-USA 1.0. Just long enough to dismay all ECU fans as they went from a not existing football program to in the Big East ahead of us in less than 10 years.

Good catch and my bad. I've corrected my post regarding USF.

(04-04-2024 08:30 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  True, but the general point, Y-181, is that the bulk of the AAC members were not exclusively affiliated with the previous version of C-USA.

Original C-USA members USF (the Big East, the Metro), Memphis (Missouri Valley, the Metro, The Great Midwest), Charlotte (A10), UAB (The Great Midwest), North Texas (MVC), Tulsa (WAC, MVC), Tulane (SEC and the Metro) and Rice (SWC) have league-membership histories that go beyond C-USA. This history helps differentiate these schools (and some would contend in a positive way) from most schools in the Belt and the current C-USA. Obviously, there are exceptions in both the Belt (USM in the Metro, for example) and the new-look C-USA (UTEP in the WAC, for example).

Add to the seven AAC schools I list Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State (none of which has a C-USA membership background) — and you get an AAC with a nice diversity of member histories. It's a conference with its own identity.

It's too convenient to paint the current AAC as solely a C-USA-type league. I understand the temptation (particularly for Sun Belt fans who wish the AAC failure). But it just seems a bit misguided to do so.

Army was in CUSA from 1998-2005. The only AAC schools who weren't in CUSA are Navy, Temple, and Wichita State.

When 12 of your 15 current members left CUSA in the past 20 years...it's basically CUSA with a different name, and they didn't put much effort into that: "Conference United States of America" to..."American Athletic Conference". Looks the same to me, besides their students suddenly becoming athletic.

If 10 members of the Sun Belt left in a 20-year span just to be together again in something called the "Belt of the Sun Athletic Conference", I would also be commenting about how ridiculous that is.

And why did they do it? To eventually get into a "Power" conference...worked for a few, but not the majority of them.

West Georgia could be a target for the SoCon in the future. That would replace for the lost of Georgia Southern. I could see West Florida, Valdosta State and North Alabama to Socon as well.
North Alabama might not be an FBS option as Alabama is not growing as they are study.

Chattanooga
Fargo
South Dakota
Moscow Idaho is growing
etc.

But, the AAC need to find a better commish because their last one could not land any of the Big 12 schools.

(04-04-2024 07:33 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 05:52 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:18 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  They didn't ask for their old friend Judy MacLeod to come back?

The only current AAC members that MacLeod didn't oversee in CUSA are South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State.

Right!

It's like everybody except for almost half!

Ha ha ha (laughs in Standard Sunbelt Supremacy Scenario)

Woah now, never suggested that. Don't get too excited.

10/15 is 66.66%.

If you want to be accurate only the 6 newbies ever had clown car Judy as their actual commish (she took over in 2015). Sure, she was Ban Ban's associate until he quit to let her take all the blame (this guy really skates by and never gets the blame he rightfully deserves), but all of us hit the exits before she rode out in her miniature car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Olp2PBV3M_U

ECU knew her well enough in CUSA for this.

(04-04-2024 02:08 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 08:30 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  True, but the general point, Y-181, is that the bulk of the AAC members were not exclusively affiliated with the previous version of C-USA.

Original C-USA members USF (the Big East, the Metro), Memphis (Missouri Valley, the Metro, The Great Midwest), Charlotte (A10), UAB (The Great Midwest), North Texas (MVC), Tulsa (WAC, MVC), Tulane (SEC and the Metro) and Rice (SWC) have league-membership histories that go beyond C-USA. This history helps differentiate these schools (and some would contend in a positive way) from most schools in the Belt and the current C-USA. Obviously, there are exceptions in both the Belt (USM in the Metro, for example) and the new-look C-USA (UTEP in the WAC, for example).

Add to the seven AAC schools I list Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State (none of which has a C-USA membership background) — and you get an AAC with a nice diversity of member histories. It's a conference with its own identity.

It's too convenient to paint the current AAC as solely a C-USA-type league. I understand the temptation (particularly for Sun Belt fans who wish the AAC failure). But it just seems a bit misguided to do so.

Army was in CUSA from 1998-2005. The only AAC schools who weren't in CUSA are Navy, Temple, and Wichita State.

When 12 of your 15 current members left CUSA in the past 20 years...it's basically CUSA with a different name, and they didn't put much effort into that: "Conference United States of America" to..."American Athletic Conference". Looks the same to me, besides their students suddenly becoming athletic.

If 10 members of the Sun Belt left in a 20-year span just to be together again in something called the "Belt of the Sun Conference", I would also be commenting about how ridiculous that is.

And why did they do it? To eventually get into a "Power" conference...worked for a few, but not the majority of them.

Good catch on Army. My fumble.

But the main point remains: The AAC offers a collective membership with previous D-I histories that involved both solid conferences (the Metro, the MVC, the A10, The Great Midtwest and the WAC) and three high-profile leagues (the SWC, the Big East and the SEC). This collective league-membership history is one reason (among others) the AAC continues to have a better perception 1. than would otherwise be the case and 2. than it likely deserves.

Painting the AAC as an underwhelming and unimpressive new-look version of C-USA.2 without acknowledging that history is awkward.

(04-03-2024 04:28 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:18 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  They didn't ask for their old friend Judy MacLeod to come back?

The only current AAC members that MacLeod didn't oversee in CUSA are South Florida, Navy, Army, Temple, and Wichita State.

Right!

It's like everybody except for almost half!

Ha ha ha (laughs in Standard Sunbelt Supremacy Scenario)

(04-04-2024 02:25 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Good catch on Army. My fumble.

But the main point remains: The AAC offers a collective membership with previous D-I histories that involved both solid conferences (the Metro, the MVC, the A10, The Great Midtwest and the WAC) and three high-profile leagues (the SWC, the Big East and the SEC). This collective league-membership history is one reason (among others) the AAC continues to have a better perception 1. than would otherwise be the case and 2. than it likely deserves.

Painting the AAC as an underwhelming and unimpressive new-look version of C-USA.2 without acknowledging that history is awkward.

I respectfully disagree.

The most recent conference Memphis was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference USF was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference UAB was in before the AAC was...CUSA.

Same for all of your other examples (Tulane, UNCC, North Texas, Tulsa, Rice).

I wasn't alive when Tulane was in the SEC or when Memphis was in the Missouri Valley, but I remember when all of them were in CUSA.

(04-03-2024 12:30 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 10:38 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(04-02-2024 08:12 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(04-02-2024 06:29 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2024/...rence.html

Pernetti oversaw Rutgers' move into the B1G, but also resigned following the Mike Rice scandal. Had been involved with IMG in recent years, so very well connected within college athletics.

Fascinating that the American hires another commissioner with strong NE ties. With moving its HQ to Texas, I would have thought someone like Oliver Luck or other individual with stronger ties to the region.

Oliver Luck is a winner, too, everything he touches turns to gold!

NFL Europe 96-2000
NCAA (EVP for regulatory affairs) 14-18
XFL 18-20
WAC SUN 23-?

Yep, he's the best. /sarcasm

I'm not saying that he's George Kliavkoff, but a whole lot of bad things have happened at a whole lot of places under his watch. Was it all his fault? Was any of it? It's hard to pin any one thing in particular on him, but with that much smoke it's reasonable to assume that there's some fire causing it somewhere.

CUSA hired him as a consultant shortly before losing 9 members to 2 conferences.

I thought that was the ex B1G guy, and he wrote a nice note to the AAC asking to merge and they practically did.

Bah, you're right it was Jim Delany. And it was a very nice letter, worth every penny I'm sure.

(04-02-2024 08:12 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(04-02-2024 06:29 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2024/...rence.html

Pernetti oversaw Rutgers' move into the B1G, but also resigned following the Mike Rice scandal. Had been involved with IMG in recent years, so very well connected within college athletics.

Fascinating that the American hires another commissioner with strong NE ties. With moving its HQ to Texas, I would have thought someone like Oliver Luck or other individual with stronger ties to the region.

Oliver Luck is a winner, too, everything he touches turns to gold!

NFL Europe 96-2000
NCAA (EVP for regulatory affairs) 14-18
XFL 18-20
WAC SUN 23-?

Yep, he's the best. /sarcasm

I'm not saying that he's George Kliavkoff, but a whole lot of bad things have happened at a whole lot of places under his watch. Was it all his fault? Was any of it? It's hard to pin any one thing in particular on him, but with that much smoke it's reasonable to assume that there's some fire causing it somewhere.

He was our direct representative with the PAC 12……

(04-04-2024 04:01 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 02:25 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Good catch on Army. My fumble.

But the main point remains: The AAC offers a collective membership with previous D-I histories that involved both solid conferences (the Metro, the MVC, the A10, The Great Midtwest and the WAC) and three high-profile leagues (the SWC, the Big East and the SEC). This collective league-membership history is one reason (among others) the AAC continues to have a better perception 1. than would otherwise be the case and 2. than it likely deserves.

Painting the AAC as an underwhelming and unimpressive new-look version of C-USA.2 without acknowledging that history is awkward.

I respectfully disagree.

The most recent conference Memphis was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference USF was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference UAB was in before the AAC was...CUSA.

Same for all of your other examples (Tulane, UNCC, North Texas, Tulsa, Rice).

I wasn't alive when Tulane was in the SEC or when Memphis was in the Missouri Valley, but I remember when all of them were in CUSA.

I see your point and it's valid to an extent. But are you allowing your disdain for the AAC fanboys to cloud your ability to offer a fair assessment of the AAC?

C-USA was a very good league for many years, with seven, collectively, quality members that have since moved on to better leagues (Louisville, Cincinnati, TCU, Houston, Saint Louis, Marquette and DePaul). And that's the thing: Those seven schools were willing to align themselves in a conference with Memphis, Tulane, USF, UAB, Charlotte and East Carolina — which, one could argue, speaks reasonably favorably of those six universities and their athletics programs.

To that respectable six-school AAC core you add Wichita, Temple, Army and Navy, each of which brings various positives (and some negatives, to be fair) to the table.

So even if you (or anybody else) look at the current AAC as a "glorified C-USA," ... that is nonetheless a league that offers a nice blend of college sports history, academics and football/basketball/baseball.

As you know, I'm not an AAC apologist. I want Memphis out — and yesterday. But I try to be objective and fair about this. Just like I do when I assess the Sun Belt (and the other G5 leagues).

What do you all think the new commish’s realistic goals should be?

(04-04-2024 04:01 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 02:25 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Good catch on Army. My fumble.

But the main point remains: The AAC offers a collective membership with previous D-I histories that involved both solid conferences (the Metro, the MVC, the A10, The Great Midtwest and the WAC) and three high-profile leagues (the SWC, the Big East and the SEC). This collective league-membership history is one reason (among others) the AAC continues to have a better perception 1. than would otherwise be the case and 2. than it likely deserves.

Painting the AAC as an underwhelming and unimpressive new-look version of C-USA.2 without acknowledging that history is awkward.

I respectfully disagree.

The most recent conference Memphis was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference USF was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference UAB was in before the AAC was...CUSA.

Same for all of your other examples (Tulane, UNCC, North Texas, Tulsa, Rice).

I wasn't alive when Tulane was in the SEC or when Memphis was in the Missouri Valley, but I remember when all of them were in CUSA.

The last conference USF was in before CUSA was the Big East.

(04-04-2024 05:21 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  What do you all think the new commish’s realistic goals should be?

His first goal (among others) should be to work toward being transparent related to 1. acknowledging that the AAC offers some members (Memphis, Tulane and USF, in particular) that want to move on to a better league (either an existing conference or one that has yet to be formed) and, on this note, 2. doing what he can to help facilitate that

Another goal should be to address the challenges that Temple and Wichita face given their far-flung locations and, in Temple's case, a "cultural disconnect" in relation to the league's other members.

Another: Conduct future AAC men's hoops tourneys in cities that will at least minimize the embarrassment of horrific attendance for which the league is notoriously known. Having the last tourney in Fort Worth was a joke.

Another: Be in frequent contact with Air Force for long-term planning purposes

Another: Assess the possibility of adding some schools that don't play football and that care about basketball (VCU at the top of the list).

Another: Have two all-sports schools as candidates ready to replace USF and Tulane if those two replace Clemson and Florida State in the ACC.

(04-04-2024 05:28 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 04:01 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 02:25 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Good catch on Army. My fumble.

But the main point remains: The AAC offers a collective membership with previous D-I histories that involved both solid conferences (the Metro, the MVC, the A10, The Great Midtwest and the WAC) and three high-profile leagues (the SWC, the Big East and the SEC). This collective league-membership history is one reason (among others) the AAC continues to have a better perception 1. than would otherwise be the case and 2. than it likely deserves.

Painting the AAC as an underwhelming and unimpressive new-look version of C-USA.2 without acknowledging that history is awkward.

I respectfully disagree.

The most recent conference Memphis was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference USF was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference UAB was in before the AAC was...CUSA.

Same for all of your other examples (Tulane, UNCC, North Texas, Tulsa, Rice).

I wasn't alive when Tulane was in the SEC or when Memphis was in the Missouri Valley, but I remember when all of them were in CUSA.

The last conference USF was in before CUSA was the Big East.

Good catch, MinR. I missed that one.

(04-04-2024 05:28 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 04:01 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 02:25 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Good catch on Army. My fumble.

But the main point remains: The AAC offers a collective membership with previous D-I histories that involved both solid conferences (the Metro, the MVC, the A10, The Great Midtwest and the WAC) and three high-profile leagues (the SWC, the Big East and the SEC). This collective league-membership history is one reason (among others) the AAC continues to have a better perception 1. than would otherwise be the case and 2. than it likely deserves.

Painting the AAC as an underwhelming and unimpressive new-look version of C-USA.2 without acknowledging that history is awkward.

I respectfully disagree.

The most recent conference Memphis was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference USF was in before the AAC was...CUSA.
The most recent conference UAB was in before the AAC was...CUSA.

Same for all of your other examples (Tulane, UNCC, North Texas, Tulsa, Rice).

I wasn't alive when Tulane was in the SEC or when Memphis was in the Missouri Valley, but I remember when all of them were in CUSA.

The last conference USF was in before CUSA was the Big East.

That's true, though the Big East football conference kind of just faded into being the AAC after being left behind. I see them as sort-of the same conference on the football side of things.

(04-04-2024 04:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I see your point and it's valid to an extent. But are you allowing your disdain for the AAC fanboys to cloud your ability to offer a fair assessment of the AAC?

C-USA was a very good league for many years, with seven, collectively, quality members that have since moved on to better leagues (Louisville, Cincinnati, TCU, Houston, Saint Louis, Marquette and DePaul). And that's the thing: Those seven schools were willing to align themselves in a conference with Memphis, Tulane, USF, UAB, Charlotte and East Carolina — which, one could argue, speaks reasonably favorably of those six universities and their athletics programs.

To that respectable six-school AAC core you add Wichita, Temple, Army and Navy, each of which brings various positives (and some negatives, to be fair) to the table.

So even if you (or anybody else) look at the current AAC as a "glorified C-USA," ... that is nonetheless a league that offers a nice blend of college sports history, academics and football/basketball/baseball.

As you know, I'm not an AAC apologist. I want Memphis out — and yesterday. But I try to be objective and fair about this. Just like I do when I assess the Sun Belt (and the other G5 leagues).

You're being nice about it, but you're trying to make my posts more personal than they actually are.

CUSA 1.0 was my favorite conference growing up. I wish those guys would've stuck together instead of chasing "Power" conferences individually. There could've been something special there.

Do you feel the same about the WAC as you do the AAC? Is the WAC a great conference today because current P4 members SMU, TCU, BYU, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State came from there? My answer to that is "No".

(04-04-2024 07:00 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 04:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I see your point and it's valid to an extent. But are you allowing your disdain for the AAC fanboys to cloud your ability to offer a fair assessment of the AAC?

C-USA was a very good league for many years, with seven, collectively, quality members that have since moved on to better leagues (Louisville, Cincinnati, TCU, Houston, Saint Louis, Marquette and DePaul). And that's the thing: Those seven schools were willing to align themselves in a conference with Memphis, Tulane, USF, UAB, Charlotte and East Carolina — which, one could argue, speaks reasonably favorably of those six universities and their athletics programs.

To that respectable six-school AAC core you add Wichita, Temple, Army and Navy, each of which brings various positives (and some negatives, to be fair) to the table.

So even if you (or anybody else) look at the current AAC as a "glorified C-USA," ... that is nonetheless a league that offers a nice blend of college sports history, academics and football/basketball/baseball.

As you know, I'm not an AAC apologist. I want Memphis out — and yesterday. But I try to be objective and fair about this. Just like I do when I assess the Sun Belt (and the other G5 leagues).

You're being nice about it, but you're trying to make my posts more personal than they actually are.

CUSA 1.0 was my favorite conference growing up. I wish those guys would've stuck together instead of chasing "Power" conferences individually. There could've been something special there.

Do you feel the same about the WAC as you do the AAC? Is the WAC a great conference today because current P4 members SMU, TCU, BYU, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State came from there? My answer to that is "No".

The "left-behinds" in the AAC actually offer, collectively, some solid sports and academics history. The current members of the WAC, overall and generally speaking, do not. Major difference.

The original C-USA was a good, solid league. The current AAC is a major step down in men's basketball from that first iteration of C-USA but could end up being about as good in football. Time will tell.

To be fair, I have seen your posts that have been favorable toward the AAC.