Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
Author Message
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #181
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-20-2021 09:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  (The AAC has been)...a multi-bid league every year...

True, but the Atlantic 10 has also been a multi-bid league, and they've had more NCAA bids (3.33) than the AAC has had between 2014 & 2019:

.............AAC........A-10
2014........4*............6 *Including UConn & Louisville
2015........2..............3
2016........4*............3 *Including UConn
2017........2..............3
2018........3..............3
2019........4..............2
(2020)......(2 or 3)..........(2 or 3)(predicted range; tournament cancelled)

Total......19*..........20 *Including UConn (& Louisville in 2014)

In 2020, only two AAC teams had 23 wins at the end of the season and were predicted to received NCAA bids (Houston; projected #7 seed; WSU; #11 seed). Three A-10 teams had 23+ wins (Dayton (29 wins; projected #1 seed), Richmond (24 wins; #11 seed); & St. Louis (23 wins)), and three WCC teams had 24+ wins (Gonzaga (31 wins; projected #1 seed); BYU (24 wins; #5 seed); St. Mary's (26 wins; #8 seed)).

http://bracketmatrix.com/matrix_2020.html


The situation is much the same 8 weeks into the 2020-21 season. Only 1 AAC team (Houston (projected #2 seed)) is projected to make the NCAA with a seed of #12 or higher.^ Two A-10 teams (St. Louis (projected #8 seed) & Richmond (#12 seed)) and two WCC teams (Gonzaga (#1 seed); BYU (#9 seed)) are projected to receive NCAA bids with #12 seeds or higher.
^http://bracketmatrix.com/

Quote:...the AAC ... has the potential to field a very high quality basketball league (by)... getting Memphis, Temple, Wichita, and Cinci back into top form...If we can get the schools that were supposed to be our heavy hitters in basketball on tract---this can look a lot like a Big East level league...

We, as AAC fans, would really like to believe that this is true. However, the current data are not encouraging. According to the 2019-20 and 2020-21 rankings, the upper echelon teams in the American have gotten weaker as a group, not stronger, since the 2018-19 season.

Memphis has recruited well, but has been under-performing expectations consistently under Coach Hardaway, with little evidence of improvement. Cincinnati has struggled under their new/current Head Coach. Although Wichita State has surpassed expectations under their new Head Coach, their program has been hit hard by the departure of Coach Marshall, and their future prospects will depend on the recruiting, player development, and game coaching abilities of their next Head Coach.

SMU and Tulsa seem to be upwardly-mobile programs, but it remains to be seen whether they will be able to achieve post-season success. UCF and USF have had limited success, and it's too soon to know
whether or not Temple will be able to make its way back into the NCAA or NIT tournament within the next 2 or 3 years.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2021 08:14 AM by jedclampett.)
01-21-2021 05:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #182
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
If one had to assign a letter grade to the AAC MBB programs, based on their performance over the past two seasons, their grades would probably be:

A Houston (34-9) (NCAA quality)
A- Wichita State (31-11) (NCAA or "NCAA bubble" quality)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B+ SMU (26-13) ("NCAA bubble" or NIT)
B+ Tulsa (29-14) ("NCAA bubble" or NIT)
B+ Memphis (27-15) ("NCAA bubble" or NIT quality)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B Cincinnati (23-17)
C UCF (19-19)
C USF (21-22)
C- Temple (17-20)
C- ECU (18-23)
C- Tulane (18-22)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

How many AAC programs have clearly improved since 2019?

Two - - SMU and Tulsa

How many have struggled, stumbled, or underperformed?

Seven - - Memphis, Cincy, Temple, UCF, USF, ECU, and Tulane

How many of the existing AAC programs have finished a season in the Final AP Top 10, in the history of the conference?

One - - Cincy, in 2018

How many have advanced to the NCAA Sweet Sixteen?

One - - Houston, in 2019 (+ Wichita 2015, before joining the AAC)


How many have advanced to the Elite Eight or Final Four?

None.



One hundred teams will play in the 2021 NCAA & NIT tournaments; 20 of these will be automatic qualifiers from minor conferences. The top 80 teams are most likely to receive NCAA bids based on their rankings.

At present, with only 4 AAC teams being ranked #80 or higher in the Massey Composite Top 80, it appears unlikely that the conference will have more than 4 or 5 teams in the 2021 NCAA or NIT. By contrast, there are nearly three times as many (eleven) Atlantic 10 or WCC teams in the top 80.

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With this set of data, it would be extremely difficult to put together a strong argument that that the American will be able to send more than 4 teams to the NCAA tournament within the foreseeable future.

Will the conference's legacy programs (Cincy, Memphis, Temple) rise back up to the upper echelon of the conference in the next few years?

Possibly, but they will have to battle with Houston, Tulsa, and SMU, and only twice in the history of the conference have more than four teams been able to win 12+ conference games.

Since no team in the history of the AAC that has won fewer than 12 conference games has ever received an NCAA bid, and since it has been so rare for more than four AAC teams to finish with 12+ wins, the probability that we will see more than four AAC teams in the NCAA appears to be exceedingly low (low enough (0 in 7 seasons) that it appears unlikely to happen more than once in the next 20 seasons).

The situation might have been different if Connecticut hadn't switched to the Big East, but without Connecticut, the data and the probabilities indicate that it doesn't appear to be "in the cards."

Adding a BB school such as VCU might permit the American to send a maximum of 5 teams to the NCAA tournament, at least occasionally (perhaps once every 4 or 5 seasons). The average would be likely to increase from 2.67 (2-3 NCAA teams) to 3-4 NCAA teams.

To boost the average up to 4-5 NCAA bids, it would probably be necessary to add two high quality programs, such as VCU and Dayton.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2021 08:26 AM by jedclampett.)
01-21-2021 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gulfcoastgal Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,299
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
Post: #183
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-20-2021 09:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-20-2021 08:24 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  I am pretty sure that baskstball is a an afterthought in any expansion.

I am in no way ripping on the basketball fans on this board.

The world has changed

The reality is..
- 35 years ago confernce affliliation meant little for football,but basketball was all about being in
a conference. Remeber the metro conference...
- 25 years agp being in a conference became required so the cusa was formed, but it was formed as a basketball conference as well.
- 15 years ago the the cusa was raided, usf added to big east becuae of football and temple kicked out becuse they sucked at football. The cusa addeded all teams that came with football.
-5ish years ago the additions to the conference were for football, and it caused a split. Navy was added for football. Wichita state later added for mutual need.
- when the Big 12 talked about expansion a few years back eveyone applied and it wasnt for the quality of basketball playesd there or the number of bids it gets to the ncaa toruney. It was all about football.

All of that said, the expansion is all about football.

No doubt---football is the most valuable asset for most conferences. That said, the Big East has shown us that very high quality basketball can be even more valuable than mediocre G5 football/basketball combined. My sense is the AAC already has the potential to field a very high quality basketball league. Its really just about getting Memphis, Temple, Wichita, and Cinci back into top form. The fact this has been a multi-bid league every year despite Memphis, UConn, and Temple going through performance troughs is a testament to the development of the mid-level depth programs of the AAC. Schools like SMU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, and USF have all improved into programs that can compete for NCAA at large bids on a fairly regular basis. If we can get the schools that were supposed to be our heavy hitters in basketball on tract---this can look a lot like a Big East level league---and that has substantial television value.

This is probably the AAC's path of least resistance in that these teams have underperformed, but deliver market share...less sure about Temple as I haven't followed them as closely over the years. When Memphis moved from CUSA to the AAC, the metro jumped in ESPN's rated markets...as did Nashville though markedly less so than Memphis. Point being, as the Memphis football brand grows (TN, AR and MS), bball to date still has a farther geographic reach.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2021 12:21 PM by gulfcoastgal.)
01-21-2021 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #184
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-21-2021 05:02 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-20-2021 09:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  (The AAC has been)...a multi-bid league every year...

True, but the Atlantic 10 has also been a multi-bid league, and they've had more NCAA bids (3.33) than the AAC has had between 2014 & 2019:

.............AAC........A-10
2014........4*............6 *Including UConn & Louisville
2015........2..............3
2016........4*............3 *Including UConn
2017........2..............3
2018........3..............3
2019........4..............2
(2020)......(2 or 3)..........(2 or 3)(predicted range; tournament cancelled)

Total......19*..........20 *Including UConn (& Louisville in 2014)

In 2020, only two AAC teams had 23 wins at the end of the season and were predicted to received NCAA bids (Houston; projected #7 seed; WSU; #11 seed). Three A-10 teams had 23+ wins (Dayton (29 wins; projected #1 seed), Richmond (24 wins; #11 seed); & St. Louis (23 wins)), and three WCC teams had 24+ wins (Gonzaga (31 wins; projected #1 seed); BYU (24 wins; #5 seed); St. Mary's (26 wins; #8 seed)).

http://bracketmatrix.com/matrix_2020.html


The situation is much the same 8 weeks into the 2020-21 season. Only 1 AAC team (Houston (projected #2 seed)) is projected to make the NCAA with a seed of #12 or higher.^ Two A-10 teams (St. Louis (projected #8 seed) & Richmond (#12 seed)) and two WCC teams (Gonzaga (#1 seed); BYU (#9 seed)) are projected to receive NCAA bids with #12 seeds or higher.
^http://bracketmatrix.com/

Quote:...the AAC ... has the potential to field a very high quality basketball league (by)... getting Memphis, Temple, Wichita, and Cinci back into top form...If we can get the schools that were supposed to be our heavy hitters in basketball on tract---this can look a lot like a Big East level league...

We, as AAC fans, would really like to believe that this is true. However, the current data are not encouraging. According to the 2019-20 and 2020-21 rankings, the upper echelon teams in the American have gotten weaker as a group, not stronger, since the 2018-19 season.

Memphis has recruited well, but has been under-performing expectations consistently under Coach Hardaway, with little evidence of improvement. Cincinnati has struggled under their new/current Head Coach. Although Wichita State has surpassed expectations under their new Head Coach, their program has been hit hard by the departure of Coach Marshall, and their future prospects will depend on the recruiting, player development, and game coaching abilities of their next Head Coach.

SMU and Tulsa seem to be upwardly-mobile programs, but it remains to be seen whether they will be able to achieve post-season success. UCF and USF have had limited success, and it's too soon to know
whether or not Temple will be able to make its way back into the NCAA or NIT tournament within the next 2 or 3 years.

Not sure what your point is here. The difference in bids between the AAC and A-10 is negligible (especially considering the A-10 has 14 members vs 11-12 AAC members). My view is exactly what I said. What we see is the A-10 humming along like a finely tuned machine with its top programs producing as expected. The AAC is performing similarly, despite its historically top programs performing well below average. That is probably one reason the current top 5 NET ratings appears to favor the A-10 to a slight degree. Its also worth noting the bottom of the A-10 is far far worse than the bottom of the AAC.

The AAC will be a basketball dreadnought if the programs expected to be the bell cows of the conference finally get back on track. Taking a top A-10 program to add to the thickening upper belt of AAC teams seems like a perfectly reasonable way to replace a departed under performing UConn program.

Current A-10 top 5 teams in Net rating

16, 42, 50, 57, 70.

Current AAC top 5 teams in Net rating

5, 56, 59, 75, 79

Worst 3 A-10 teams
249, 263, 331

Worst 3 AAC teams
122, 129, 189
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2021 03:10 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-21-2021 02:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #185
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-21-2021 02:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-21-2021 05:02 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-20-2021 09:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  (The AAC has been)...a multi-bid league every year...

True, but the Atlantic 10 has also been a multi-bid league, and they've had more NCAA bids (3.33) than the AAC has had between 2014 & 2019:

.............AAC........A-10
2014........4*............6 *Including UConn & Louisville
2015........2..............3
2016........4*............3 *Including UConn
2017........2..............3
2018........3..............3
2019........4..............2
(2020)......(2 or 3)..........(2 or 3)(predicted range; tournament cancelled)

Total......19*..........20 *Including UConn (& Louisville in 2014)

In 2020, only two AAC teams had 23 wins at the end of the season and were predicted to received NCAA bids (Houston; projected #7 seed; WSU; #11 seed). Three A-10 teams had 23+ wins (Dayton (29 wins; projected #1 seed), Richmond (24 wins; #11 seed); & St. Louis (23 wins)), and three WCC teams had 24+ wins (Gonzaga (31 wins; projected #1 seed); BYU (24 wins; #5 seed); St. Mary's (26 wins; #8 seed)).

http://bracketmatrix.com/matrix_2020.html


The situation is much the same 8 weeks into the 2020-21 season. Only 1 AAC team (Houston (projected #2 seed)) is projected to make the NCAA with a seed of #12 or higher.^ Two A-10 teams (St. Louis (projected #8 seed) & Richmond (#12 seed)) and two WCC teams (Gonzaga (#1 seed); BYU (#9 seed)) are projected to receive NCAA bids with #12 seeds or higher.
^http://bracketmatrix.com/

Quote:...the AAC ... has the potential to field a very high quality basketball league (by)... getting Memphis, Temple, Wichita, and Cinci back into top form...If we can get the schools that were supposed to be our heavy hitters in basketball on tract---this can look a lot like a Big East level league...

We, as AAC fans, would really like to believe that this is true. However, the current data are not encouraging. According to the 2019-20 and 2020-21 rankings, the upper echelon teams in the American have gotten weaker as a group, not stronger, since the 2018-19 season.

Memphis has recruited well, but has been under-performing expectations consistently under Coach Hardaway, with little evidence of improvement. Cincinnati has struggled under their new/current Head Coach. Although Wichita State has surpassed expectations under their new Head Coach, their program has been hit hard by the departure of Coach Marshall, and their future prospects will depend on the recruiting, player development, and game coaching abilities of their next Head Coach.

SMU and Tulsa seem to be upwardly-mobile programs, but it remains to be seen whether they will be able to achieve post-season success. UCF and USF have had limited success, and it's too soon to know
whether or not Temple will be able to make its way back into the NCAA or NIT tournament within the next 2 or 3 years.

Not sure what your point is here. The difference in bids between the AAC and A-10 is negligible (especially considering the A-10 has 14 members vs 11-12 AAC members). My view is exactly what I said. What we see is the A-10 humming along like a finely tuned machine with its top programs producing as expected. The AAC is performing similarly, despite its historically top programs performing well below average. That is probably one reason the current top 5 NET ratings appears to favor the A-10 to a slight degree. Its also worth noting the bottom of the A-10 is far far worse than the bottom of the AAC.

The AAC will be a basketball dreadnought if the programs expected to be the bell cows of the conference finally get back on track. Taking a top A-10 program to add to the thickening upper belt of AAC teams seems like a perfectly reasonable way to replace a departed under performing UConn program.

Current A-10 top 5 teams in Net rating

16, 42, 50, 57, 70.

Current AAC top 5 teams in Net rating

5, 56, 59, 75, 79

Worst 3 A-10 teams
249, 263, 331

Worst 3 AAC teams
122, 129, 189

It's definitely true that it's only the upper echelon of the A10 that is comparable with that of the AAC. Their lower echelon is certainly weaker, and that's why the A10 is ranked #9, while AAC is #7.

.

The main reason I put up the numbers for the Atlantic 10 was to make it clear that we're not the only non-P5 "multi-bid" conference, and that the AAC hasn't led the way with the most NCAA bids.

If averaging ~3 NCAA bids per year, alone, were enough to make the AAC competitive with the lowest ranked P5 conferences, then the A-10 would be in a stronger position to attain power-level status than is the AAC.

More importantly, the way I grasp the situation, the fact that the AAC has trailed behind the A-10 in this category the way it has is fairly compelling evidence that the AAC isn't nearly strong enough to be considered eligible for power conference status, or (the same trend holds up for the next decade) for a significant pay raise from ESPN the next time the broadcasting agreement is negotiated.

It is true, as you've noted, that the conference is in the midst of an "off-year" for the second year in a row, and that things like this tend to be cyclical. Chances are that, unless the level of parity remains as high as it is this season, things will improve somewhat within 2-3 years.

On the other hand, our past record suggests that when it does improve, the conference won't be likely to send more than 3 or 4 teams to the NCAA in its best years. Having failed to get 5 NCAA bids per season over the past 6 seasons in a row (actually 7, since the AAC would have only gotten 2 or 3 bids in 2020), and having lost one of our better BB programs, the mathematics suggest that the AAC is unlikely to get more than 4 NCAA bids more than once every ten years (max.) as it is currently comprised.

This, in turn, suggests that, in order to get more NCAA bids, the American's best bet may be to add at least one quality BB team to replace UConn. That, alone, may bring the average number of bids per seasons back up to the 3-4 range.
01-21-2021 03:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #186
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-21-2021 03:41 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-21-2021 02:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-21-2021 05:02 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-20-2021 09:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  (The AAC has been)...a multi-bid league every year...

True, but the Atlantic 10 has also been a multi-bid league, and they've had more NCAA bids (3.33) than the AAC has had between 2014 & 2019:

.............AAC........A-10
2014........4*............6 *Including UConn & Louisville
2015........2..............3
2016........4*............3 *Including UConn
2017........2..............3
2018........3..............3
2019........4..............2
(2020)......(2 or 3)..........(2 or 3)(predicted range; tournament cancelled)

Total......19*..........20 *Including UConn (& Louisville in 2014)

In 2020, only two AAC teams had 23 wins at the end of the season and were predicted to received NCAA bids (Houston; projected #7 seed; WSU; #11 seed). Three A-10 teams had 23+ wins (Dayton (29 wins; projected #1 seed), Richmond (24 wins; #11 seed); & St. Louis (23 wins)), and three WCC teams had 24+ wins (Gonzaga (31 wins; projected #1 seed); BYU (24 wins; #5 seed); St. Mary's (26 wins; #8 seed)).

http://bracketmatrix.com/matrix_2020.html


The situation is much the same 8 weeks into the 2020-21 season. Only 1 AAC team (Houston (projected #2 seed)) is projected to make the NCAA with a seed of #12 or higher.^ Two A-10 teams (St. Louis (projected #8 seed) & Richmond (#12 seed)) and two WCC teams (Gonzaga (#1 seed); BYU (#9 seed)) are projected to receive NCAA bids with #12 seeds or higher.
^http://bracketmatrix.com/

Quote:...the AAC ... has the potential to field a very high quality basketball league (by)... getting Memphis, Temple, Wichita, and Cinci back into top form...If we can get the schools that were supposed to be our heavy hitters in basketball on tract---this can look a lot like a Big East level league...

We, as AAC fans, would really like to believe that this is true. However, the current data are not encouraging. According to the 2019-20 and 2020-21 rankings, the upper echelon teams in the American have gotten weaker as a group, not stronger, since the 2018-19 season.

Memphis has recruited well, but has been under-performing expectations consistently under Coach Hardaway, with little evidence of improvement. Cincinnati has struggled under their new/current Head Coach. Although Wichita State has surpassed expectations under their new Head Coach, their program has been hit hard by the departure of Coach Marshall, and their future prospects will depend on the recruiting, player development, and game coaching abilities of their next Head Coach.

SMU and Tulsa seem to be upwardly-mobile programs, but it remains to be seen whether they will be able to achieve post-season success. UCF and USF have had limited success, and it's too soon to know
whether or not Temple will be able to make its way back into the NCAA or NIT tournament within the next 2 or 3 years.

Not sure what your point is here. The difference in bids between the AAC and A-10 is negligible (especially considering the A-10 has 14 members vs 11-12 AAC members). My view is exactly what I said. What we see is the A-10 humming along like a finely tuned machine with its top programs producing as expected. The AAC is performing similarly, despite its historically top programs performing well below average. That is probably one reason the current top 5 NET ratings appears to favor the A-10 to a slight degree. Its also worth noting the bottom of the A-10 is far far worse than the bottom of the AAC.

The AAC will be a basketball dreadnought if the programs expected to be the bell cows of the conference finally get back on track. Taking a top A-10 program to add to the thickening upper belt of AAC teams seems like a perfectly reasonable way to replace a departed under performing UConn program.

Current A-10 top 5 teams in Net rating

16, 42, 50, 57, 70.

Current AAC top 5 teams in Net rating

5, 56, 59, 75, 79

Worst 3 A-10 teams
249, 263, 331

Worst 3 AAC teams
122, 129, 189

It's definitely true that it's only the upper echelon of the A10 that is comparable with that of the AAC. Their lower echelon is certainly weaker, and that's why the A10 is ranked #9, while AAC is #7.

.

The main reason I put up the numbers for the Atlantic 10 was to make it clear that we're not the only non-P5 "multi-bid" conference, and that the AAC hasn't led the way with the most NCAA bids.

If averaging ~3 NCAA bids per year, alone, were enough to make the AAC competitive with the lowest ranked P5 conferences, then the A-10 would be in a stronger position to attain power-level status than is the AAC.

More importantly, the way I grasp the situation, the fact that the AAC has trailed behind the A-10 in this category the way it has is fairly compelling evidence that the AAC isn't nearly strong enough to be considered eligible for power conference status, or (the same trend holds up for the next decade) for a significant pay raise from ESPN the next time the broadcasting agreement is negotiated.

It is true, as you've noted, that the conference is in the midst of an "off-year" for the second year in a row, and that things like this tend to be cyclical. Chances are that, unless the level of parity remains as high as it is this season, things will improve somewhat within 2-3 years.

On the other hand, our past record suggests that when it does improve, the conference won't be likely to send more than 3 or 4 teams to the NCAA in its best years. Having failed to get 5 NCAA bids per season over the past 6 seasons in a row (actually 7, since the AAC would have only gotten 2 or 3 bids in 2020), and having lost one of our better BB programs, the mathematics suggest that the AAC is unlikely to get more than 4 NCAA bids more than once every ten years (max.) as it is currently comprised.

This, in turn, suggests that, in order to get more NCAA bids, the American's best bet may be to add at least one quality BB team to replace UConn. That, alone, may bring the average number of bids per seasons back up to the 3-4 range.

Yeah pulling VCU or Dayton or a similar strength program could be beneficial.
01-24-2021 10:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PirateJP Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,658
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 163
I Root For: ECU; Charlotte
Location:
Post: #187
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
Not reading through all of these posts but from what I can see people are actually advocating becoming the old Big East. That didn’t work out well the first time.
01-26-2021 05:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,110
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 499
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #188
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
I don't think anybody wants to be the old BE with even split of FB to BB schools. Having 1 to 3 BB only's is a different animal.
01-26-2021 08:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #189
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 05:33 AM)PirateJP Wrote:  Not reading through all of these posts but from what I can see people are actually advocating becoming the old Big East. That didn’t work out well the first time.

Exactly what do you mean by saying that it "didn't work out" for the old Big East?

The old Big East was an extremely successful conference throughout its life (1991-2013). It was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was one of the nation's 2 or 3 elite basketball conferences.

The only reason why the old Big East lost its top FB teams was that the old Big East became "a victim of its own success" when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville a series of offers that they couldn't refuse.

Being a hybrid conference had nothing to do with it. The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a power conference of its time.

If the ACC hadn't poached all those Big East teams, the old Big East FB conference would have kept on plugging, and there would have been 6, rather than 5 power conferences. It would have also been a fine basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut.

.

Two other things:

1) There's no comparison between the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) and that of the old Big East (7 non-FB schools).

2) The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broken up for the same basic reason that the old Big East was - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached (given offers that they couldn't refuse) by the Big Eight (which then became the Big 12).

.

What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal?
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2021 09:35 AM by jedclampett.)
01-26-2021 09:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HoustonRocks Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,229
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 40
I Root For: HoustonCougars
Location:
Post: #190
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
"What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.
01-26-2021 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #191
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.
01-26-2021 05:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TUowl06 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 998
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Temple/DePaul/K-State
Location: NEPA & Manhattan, KS
Post: #192
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 05:03 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.

The old SWC and Big East have very literally in common. This is a great read...

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ears-later
01-26-2021 07:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,088
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 172
I Root For: No CFP BIAS
Location: 12Team (6+6) Playoff
Post: #193
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 09:26 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 05:33 AM)PirateJP Wrote:  Not reading through all of these posts but from what I can see people are actually advocating becoming the old Big East. That didn’t work out well the first time.

Exactly what do you mean by saying that it "didn't work out" for the old Big East?

The old Big East was an extremely successful conference throughout its life (1991-2013). It was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was one of the nation's 2 or 3 elite basketball conferences.

The only reason why the old Big East lost its top FB teams was that the old Big East became "a victim of its own success" when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville a series of offers that they couldn't refuse.

Being a hybrid conference had nothing to do with it. The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a power conference of its time.

If the ACC hadn't poached all those Big East teams, the old Big East FB conference would have kept on plugging, and there would have been 6, rather than 5 power conferences. It would have also been a fine basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut.

.

Two other things:

1) There's no comparison between the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) and that of the old Big East (7 non-FB schools).

2) The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broken up for the same basic reason that the old Big East was - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached (given offers that they couldn't refuse) by the Big Eight (which then became the Big 12).

.

What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal?

Oh but it did, the reason the BIG EAST was so vulnerable from the minute that they added football is because of the hybrid conference, the original BIG EAST was a basketball powerhouse from the very beginning.

Some schools refused to look beyond that, that's why Penn State was voted down, when Miami joined it was a huge battle to get them in order to strengthen the football profile, also the BIG EAST was stuck at 8 because the C-7 + Notre Dame never wanted to be in the minority (vote) regarding conference makeup, so much so that when Miami, BC and VT left the Conference could only add UConn Football, Cincinnati and Louisville if they also added Marquette and DePaul.
01-26-2021 08:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,088
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 172
I Root For: No CFP BIAS
Location: 12Team (6+6) Playoff
Post: #194
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 07:18 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 05:03 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.

The old SWC and Big East have very literally in common. This is a great read...

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ears-later

'With fire in its belly and pettiness in its heart"... THIS SAYS IT ALL!! 04-cheers04-cheers good find.
01-26-2021 08:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #195
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 07:18 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 05:03 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.

The old SWC and Big East ..." literally in common."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ears-later


Aye, the stories of their poachings are practically, if not "literally" identical.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2021 08:57 PM by jedclampett.)
01-26-2021 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
herdfan129 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,033
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 356
I Root For: Marshall & Liberty
Location:
Post: #196
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
The only program currently worth adding (unless ESPN says otherwise) is BYU. No other team/program will improve the AAC. Yeah there's other programs who will be a solid additions, but there's no reason to add anyone unless they are improving the conference as a whole. Right now, the only school who can do that is BYU.
01-26-2021 09:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #197
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 09:48 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  The only program currently worth adding (unless ESPN says otherwise) is BYU. No other team/program will improve the AAC. Yeah there's other programs who will be a solid additions, but there's no reason to add anyone unless they are improving the conference as a whole. Right now, the only school who can do that is BYU.

If you're referring to BYU FB's attendance and viewership numbers, or their combined success in FB & BB, you may be right, but Boise has led BYU in almost every FB performance category (average winning percentage, number of top 25 teams, number of bowl games, etc.).

It's also notable that App. State has averaged 10.5 wins over the past 6 seasons, while BYU has only averaged ~ 8 wins between 2015 and 2020.

SDSU (~9 wins per year since 2015) has also won a higher % of their games than BYU has won, and like BYU, have played 10 bowl games in the past 11 years.

In addition, SDSU has had somewhat more success than BYU has had in the past decade. More SDSU teams (4 vs. 3) have finished in the Final AP BB Top 25 since 2010, and SDSU has had a better record than BYU has had in the NCAA tournament (9-7 vs. 5-5) since 2010. San Diego has won 3 MWC tournaments and 7 conference championships or co-championships since 2010. In contrast, BYU hasn't won a conference tournament or a regular season conference championship since 2010.

.

Those are the numbers. However, BYU has a unique advantage is that, like the military academies, it has a large national following, and it is considered by some to be the Notre Dame of the non-P5 independent FBS schools.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2021 11:16 PM by jedclampett.)
01-26-2021 11:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
pvtlamb Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 833
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 19
I Root For: WSU
Location: The Great Plains
Post: #198
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-26-2021 07:18 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 05:03 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.

The old SWC and Big East have very literally in common. This is a great read...

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ears-later

I am not sure I see the commonality between the old SWC and the Big East. The ESPN piece on the Southwest Conference is a great read. Having a power-conference almostly entirely in one-state created a bunch of problems that I didn't realize until that story.

It seems surprising that the old SWC didn't implode before it did.

Gotta love the comment about Arkansas moving to the SEC, partly to get out of UTs shadow. "(The SEC) has five Texases"
01-27-2021 11:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TUowl06 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 998
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Temple/DePaul/K-State
Location: NEPA & Manhattan, KS
Post: #199
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-27-2021 11:23 AM)pvtlamb Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 07:18 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 05:03 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.

The old SWC and Big East have very literally in common. This is a great read...

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ears-later

I am not sure I see the commonality between the old SWC and the Big East. The ESPN piece on the Southwest Conference is a great read. Having a power-conference almostly entirely in one-state created a bunch of problems that I didn't realize until that story.

It seems surprising that the old SWC didn't implode before it did.

Gotta love the comment about Arkansas moving to the SEC, partly to get out of UTs shadow. "(The SEC) has five Texases"

I meant to say "literally nothing in common". Completely changed the context of my post. The SWC was as corrupt as they come. That's what led to its downfall....

ND played an undefeated Texas A&M team in the '92 Cotton Bowl that had was completely on the outside looking in relative to Alabama and Miami. I think the famous Miami beatdown of #3 Texas two years earlier was major blow to SWC football. After that, their national stature was basically equal to that of the WAC.
01-29-2021 10:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #200
RE: AAC engaging in talks with Boise and SDSU
(01-29-2021 10:07 AM)TUowl06 Wrote:  
(01-27-2021 11:23 AM)pvtlamb Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 07:18 PM)TUowl06 Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 05:03 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-26-2021 02:07 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  "What's your response to those facts? Do they change your appraisal? "

They are not facts.

These facts seem pretty irrefutable to me. Can you refute them all, point by point? I invite you to give it your best shot.

Fact: The old Big East was a full-fledged BCS FB conference, and it was often regarded as one of the nation's elite basketball conferences.

Fact: The old Big East lost its top teams when the ACC made BC, VT, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville offers that they considered too good to refuse.

Fact: The old Big East FB schools didn't need the C-7 schools to continue along as a high-major conference.

Fact: It would have been a fine football and basketball conference, with upper echelon teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincy, Miami, and Connecticut. In fact, it might have been better than the C-7 in basketball (Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall, etc.).

Fact: The the AAC's situation (one non-FB school) is not a nearly as much of a hybrid conference as the old Big East was (7 non-FB schools).

Fact: The P5 Atlantic Coast Conference is a hybrid conference, with 14 all-sports teams and one non-FB school (Notre Dame, an affiliate member in BB and olympic sports).

Fact: The old Southwest Conference wasn't a hybrid conference, but it broke up for the same basic reason that the old Big East did - - because 4 of the top SWC schools were poached by the Big Eight.

The old SWC and Big East have very literally in common. This is a great read...

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ears-later

I am not sure I see the commonality between the old SWC and the Big East. The ESPN piece on the Southwest Conference is a great read. Having a power-conference almostly entirely in one-state created a bunch of problems that I didn't realize until that story.

It seems surprising that the old SWC didn't implode before it did.

Gotta love the comment about Arkansas moving to the SEC, partly to get out of UTs shadow. "(The SEC) has five Texases"

I meant to say "literally nothing in common". Completely changed the context of my post. The SWC was as corrupt as they come. That's what led to its downfall....

ND played an undefeated Texas A&M team in the '92 Cotton Bowl that had was completely on the outside looking in relative to Alabama and Miami. I think the famous Miami beatdown of #3 Texas two years earlier was major blow to SWC football. After that, their national stature was basically equal to that of the WAC.

Yes. I remember a highly ranked Houston getting crushed at home to Miami in that period of time too. Yes, the WAC was probably better. Even poor WAC schools were beating SWC teams in the 90’s like Texas Tech and TCU losing to New Mexico those years.
01-29-2021 01:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.