(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

(10-14-2021 11:10 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:21 AM)Johns1124 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:00 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  It boils down to financial commitment and facilities. When it all comes out you will be able to see the bread crumbs.

Makes no sense.

Why would anyone go ALL IN financially to a conference that may look radically different before the start of the next football season?

Because if everyone left is willing to spend at a high level--then the quality will still be there regardless of who the players are (see Liberty as an example). There may not be a dominant team---but every year there will be someone playing at a high level---and much of the rest of the league probably wont be far behind due to their financial commitment level. Sure---teams will ebb and flow---and some years the league might knock each other off--but the overall quality of a league where all the athletic departments are willing to spend at a high level should be solid. There is a definite logical method to the madness. Maybe it workds---maybe it doesnt---but I can certainly see what the thinking is.

No offense but except for a succession of incompetent and neglectful Rice Presidents and ADs, UH would still be in the Missouri Valley. Gaining membership in the Big12 will give UH athletic legitimacy they haven't had since the days of the Southwest Conference. UH's membership did nothing for the SWC and was no doubt detrimental to Rice athletics.

(Throwing money at a problem is only part of any solution.)

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

(10-14-2021 10:12 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:03 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:00 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:00 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  It seems to me (like others have said) they are feeling out who to add and how many. My guess is that they will add 4. UAB seems like a lock. Charlotte is gaining steam. They need another Texas team for Navy (Rice). The holdup is probably who team #4 is. My guess is it is between Marshall, ODU, App State, and Buffalo. I have a feeling the AAC wants to avoid state directionals.

A conference with CENTRAL Florida, EAST Carolina, SOUTH Florida is concerned with "directional" names?

That's 3/11. USF was added in the Big East and UCF is leaving. Only 2/8 remaining schools are directionals.

University of South Florida, Southern Methodist University, East Carolina University will remain.

Again, why would the current Presidents say "directional" is an immediate disqualifier when nearly 40% of their membership are directional?

SMU is a private, not a state directional.

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Can't gnaw.

ran out of teeth

EDIT: Forgot the important part. You're right, of course. The AAC has been gutted, and the pecking order has been changed. But I don't think that's the perception unless the Big XII drops a hammer and takes 2 more AAC schools plus Boise.

If that happens, then realignment will get really nuts.

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Their tv contract for the next couple of years says otherwise.

(10-14-2021 11:34 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Can't gnaw.

ran out of teeth

Good luck with that.

I've always thought of La Tech as the awkward cousin you secretly admired, but weren't quite sure why?

(10-14-2021 10:00 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:57 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:52 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  They have agreed to three schools. The fourth is the issue.

UAB, Rice, Charlotte?

I am not at liberty to say. Its not what many think. It boils down to financial commitment and facilities. When it all comes out you will be able to see the bread crumbs.

Upper Iowa?

(10-14-2021 11:12 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:27 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Believe the MAC had conversations with Marshall, JMU and UMass per a post on the MAC board. The president said the future of UMass football will be discussed at the end of the season and both the AD and HC have specifically mentioned the MAC and a need for a conference home and Walt Bell said a financial commitment to be in a conference. Don't expect any changes with the MAC, but everyone is being prudent. Will add, even though not very good, taking UConn-UMass adds a built in rivalry but has to be FB only as UConn is not leaving the Big East.

I would take UMASS for all sports....neither of you should get invited to anywhere as a football only lol

Thanks, the ironic thing is as basketball continues to under perform, the chances of leaving the A10 increase some. We are inching in that direction. Did not do CUSA to a post on UMassHoops board since travel was to difficult to figure out.

This is what I know:

Mid-American Conference $15,380,427.86 from CFP distribution.
The MAC receives 10 Million from ESPN media contract
Say 300k per NCAA credit so 6 credits plus 3 for advancing to second round 50% so 2.7 Million. If the team wins it keeps 30% for the first 2 rounds for two years, not all six years as in the A10.
So 2.34 Million by 12 teams or 195k per team.
2.311 Million per team in the MAC


The A10 5 Million for media contract or 357k per team.
Lets say 3 per year at 18 credits and another 3 each year advancing so 36credit and 10.8 million.
We have not earned in the past 6 years so it's the 25% pool or 2.7 Million among 14 teams or 193k
0.55 Million for our share in the A10.

UMassHoops thread - page 43

(10-14-2021 11:36 AM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Their tv contract for the next couple of years says otherwise.

I remember reading that ESPN had a clause that if either UH, Cincy, UConn or UCF left it could be restructured. I wonder what the clause is if all four of them left.

(10-14-2021 10:27 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Believe the MAC had conversations with Marshall, JMU and UMass per a post on the MAC board. The president said the future of UMass football will be discussed at the end of the season and both the AD and HC have specifically mentioned the MAC and a need for a conference home and Walt Bell said a financial commitment to be in a conference. Don't expect any changes with the MAC, but everyone is being prudent. Will add, even though not very good, taking UConn-UMass adds a built in rivalry but has to be FB only as UConn is not leaving the Big East.

What is Akron's status ? I have heard some rumblings of them dropping down

(10-14-2021 11:38 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:34 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Can't gnaw.

ran out of teeth

Good luck with that.

I've always thought of La Tech as the awkward cousin you secretly admired, but weren't quite sure why?

I like to think of us as: Delightfully tacky, yet unrefined.

oh wait

Maybe some of these university presidents and ADs are talking with each other and not telling their conference commissioners about it. I can see more than a few university leaders intrigued by the idea of regional realignment, just not necessarily via Judy's proposal.

Wouldn't be the first time there was an airport meeting.

And let's be honest, Judy's letter may have been addressed to Aresco, but it wasn't meant for him. She knew "his" answer before she sent it.

(10-14-2021 11:36 AM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Their tv contract for the next couple of years says otherwise.

And is it subject to automatic renewal or negotiations?

If certain members, or numbers of members leave, I imagine it will be renegotiated pretty darn quick and not upward.

(10-14-2021 11:40 AM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:27 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Believe the MAC had conversations with Marshall, JMU and UMass per a post on the MAC board. The president said the future of UMass football will be discussed at the end of the season and both the AD and HC have specifically mentioned the MAC and a need for a conference home and Walt Bell said a financial commitment to be in a conference. Don't expect any changes with the MAC, but everyone is being prudent. Will add, even though not very good, taking UConn-UMass adds a built in rivalry but has to be FB only as UConn is not leaving the Big East.

What is Akron's status ? I have heard some rumblings of them dropping down

Think they are fine and no merger with Kent State.

(10-14-2021 11:39 AM)JCMiner Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:36 AM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:33 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:25 AM)LaTechBanjo Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:17 AM)banker Wrote:  Just a question. What does UAB, who seems to be the one lock, gain from joining the AAC? Yes, the current TV revenue is $6MM higher annually, but the have to pay entry and exit fees plus they have to increase their budget at least $5MM a year (based on 2020 data from USA Today).

With the loss of Cincinnati and Houston, the AAC is a guaranteed multi-bid NCAA league anymore when you consider they are adding 3-4 schools from a one bid league. In football they are just another G5 league with similar, although currently, slightly better bowl tie-ins. I can’t think of any Olympic sport that the AAC is known for.

If the TV revenue is reduced, or additional schools leave, anyone going to the AAC essentially has gained little to nothing and spent a lot of money to do it. At least that’s how I see it.

Prestige.

As long as there's any semblance of a pecking order in college football, schools will strive to stay atop it. Facts and data aside, the AAC and MWC are at the top of the perceived G5 pecking order.

I think you'd better stop gnawing on that banjo and go back to eating your apple sauce with a straw.

The AAC has just been gutted and the pecking order is subject to change everywhere but in Aresco's ego.

Their tv contract for the next couple of years says otherwise.

I remember reading that ESPN had a clause that if either UH, Cincy, UConn or UCF left it could be restructured. I wonder what the clause if if all four them left.

I think UCONN actually wasn't on the preferred list, but either way the deal can and will be restructured in some way. It's going to be worth less. Thompson during his public plea for MWC schools not to leave claims the AAC has been told it is now worth mid 40 million per year as compared to the MWC's 40 million per year as an argument why there was no financial reason for CSU/AFA to go. I'm gonna go by that's roughly the floor of where TV numbers will be, because Thompson had less than zero incentive to give high end estimates, in fact if he had heard anything that had the AAC making less than the MWC he'd have for sure thrown that out there.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spo...rado-state

“They have been told simply by the departure of those three schools, their average annual value drops to mid-$40 million,” Thompson said of the total AAC payout. “The Mountain West is $40 million. It’s a push. So you’re not going there for TV money. What are you going there for?

“When you value and balance brand, revenue and the practicality of playing in downtown Philadelphia and North Carolina and Tampa, is that what you want? You can do whatever you want in football, but you still have to address those other sports and the travel costs and the logistics.”

(10-14-2021 11:28 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 11:10 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:21 AM)Johns1124 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:00 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  It boils down to financial commitment and facilities. When it all comes out you will be able to see the bread crumbs.

Makes no sense.

Why would anyone go ALL IN financially to a conference that may look radically different before the start of the next football season?

Because if everyone left is willing to spend at a high level--then the quality will still be there regardless of who the players are (see Liberty as an example). There may not be a dominant team---but every year there will be someone playing at a high level---and much of the rest of the league probably wont be far behind due to their financial commitment level. Sure---teams will ebb and flow---and some years the league might knock each other off--but the overall quality of a league where all the athletic departments are willing to spend at a high level should be solid. There is a definite logical method to the madness. Maybe it workds---maybe it doesnt---but I can certainly see what the thinking is.

No offense but except for a succession of incompetent and neglectful Rice Presidents and ADs, UH would still be in the Missouri Valley. Gaining membership in the Big12 will give UH athletic legitimacy they haven't had since the days of the Southwest Conference. UH's membership did nothing for the SWC and was no doubt detrimental to Rice athletics.

(Throwing money at a problem is only part of any solution.)

Arent you actually making my argument? Rice didnt spend the money and got passed up by multiple schools due to a lack of success. While I agree that money is just part of the solution and does not guarantee success---in general---you get what you pay for. If you're investing a lot of money into an endeavor---there's a lot less chance that it gets neglected or that there is a lack of accountability. If you have a league full of schools spending at a high level---you're bound to have some high quality success at the top the vast majority of the time.

(10-14-2021 10:53 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:08 AM)Johns1124 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:00 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:57 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:52 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  They have agreed to three schools. The fourth is the issue.

UAB, Rice, Charlotte?

I am not at liberty to say. Its not what many think. It boils down to financial commitment and facilities. When it all comes out you will be able to see the bread crumbs.

Means he doesn't know zilch.

I actually know a lot, but I am smart enough not to throw it all over the internet. The AAC has been clear to those interested in joining, what they will need in order to get in. To some its a mountain to others its a mole hill. The financial commitment to get in is only 2.5 million dollars, but the requirements for facility upgrades, sustainable budget of 40 million plus and full COA are all major factors. That is where it gets tricky. Some schools have great brands and quality teams or markets but can't realistically invest heavily into a conference that is going to be better but not light years better than what they are doing right now. Then you take into account the MWC that wants to move into Texas. UNT, UTSA, Rice, Tech, UTEP can all push for inclusion into the MWC without having to put as much financially into their programs as the AAC are requiring. Then you look at the Eastern Schools CUSA. They have an opportunity at building that Eastern Conference they have been dreaming of if things fall the right way. With no Texas schools, no USM or Tech, they could add Liberty, JMU and maybe another to the CUSA and not have to drown their Athletic Department in red. They keep the CUSA brand, keep exit fees and keep the NCAA units that go with CUSA. It comes down to who in this situation stands to lose the most by realignment, who stands the most to gain, and who is desperate enough to plunk down some serious cash to step up to the AAC.

Ok then, make up a fictitious name "On the Internet" and say what you allegedly know.

That way no one knows you are.

(10-14-2021 11:40 AM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 10:27 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Believe the MAC had conversations with Marshall, JMU and UMass per a post on the MAC board. The president said the future of UMass football will be discussed at the end of the season and both the AD and HC have specifically mentioned the MAC and a need for a conference home and Walt Bell said a financial commitment to be in a conference. Don't expect any changes with the MAC, but everyone is being prudent. Will add, even though not very good, taking UConn-UMass adds a built in rivalry but has to be FB only as UConn is not leaving the Big East.

What is Akron's status ? I have heard some rumblings of them dropping down

They have a new and nice stadium. I'll be surprised if they drop down, but I do think some of the MAC schools should drop down....but they wont.

(10-14-2021 10:00 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:57 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(10-14-2021 09:52 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  They have agreed to three schools. The fourth is the issue.

UAB, Rice, Charlotte?

I am not at liberty to say. Its not what many think. It boils down to financial commitment and facilities. When it all comes out you will be able to see the bread crumbs.

Hmmm