(04-16-2024 05:05 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  I don’t want to be negative on the AAC’s future because it was a good home to UH but I’m not sure you can really compare a league that’s lost 70% of its lineup from a decade ago to a league that’s never really had defections. The MWC’s cohesion and continuity imo is its trump card. The AAC still has several very respectable programs but I view it more as a collection of schools than a real league.

Mountain West schools are a bigger deal to their fans than much of the AAC. Some (but not all) MW states might be “second tier states” in the sense that they don’t have as big of TV markets, as much money, large populations etc.

But many of the schools in the MW in those states are the top tier schools of those states. The AAC schools may be similar in funding and get similar results, but they hold a slightly different niche locally. A star at Wyoming or Boise is known state wide, has every game covered, gets interviewed by the local media, makes appearances etc. A big star at a lot of AAC schools might be known around town, get covered just in that cities tv etc, but it’s rare schools at that level can achieve the mind share MWC schools do.

The results may be similar, attendance similar, income similar, but it’s still a little different scenario. Edge goes to MW IMO.

Will be interesting to see what average attendance is for the recently completed season.

2022-23 the MWC averaged almost 1,000 more per game than the AAC, and the AAC lost 3 of it's better attended programs.

(04-16-2024 05:49 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 05:05 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  I don’t want to be negative on the AAC’s future because it was a good home to UH but I’m not sure you can really compare a league that’s lost 70% of its lineup from a decade ago to a league that’s never really had defections. The MWC’s cohesion and continuity imo is its trump card. The AAC still has several very respectable programs but I view it more as a collection of schools than a real league.

Mountain West schools are a bigger deal to their fans than much of the AAC. Some (but not all) MW states might be “second tier states” in the sense that they don’t have as big of TV markets, as much money, large populations etc.

But many of the schools in the MW in those states are the top tier schools of those states. The AAC schools may be similar in funding and get similar results, but they hold a slightly different niche locally. A star at Wyoming or Boise is known state wide, has every game covered, gets interviewed by the local media, makes appearances etc. A big star at a lot of AAC schools might be known around town, get covered just in that cities tv etc, but it’s rare schools at that level can achieve the mind share MWC schools do.

The results may be similar, attendance similar, income similar, but it’s still a little different scenario. Edge goes to MW IMO.

Very good points, Todor. I agree overall. The MWC is in a good place with its men's basketball. The one advantage AAC hoops has is that most of its members are located in large cities in which basketball is a noteworthy part of those cities' cultures.

Big problem for the AAC has been their “top” programs making bad coaching hires. Houston obviously knocked it out of the park. Dawkins has been okay-to-solid at UCF. But UConn made a bad hire in Ollie which caused them to really struggle (2014 aside). Cincinnati made a bad hire in Brannen after Cronin which set UC back (still haven’t fully recovered). Memphis made a bad hire after Calipari left in Pastner. And then the weird hire in Tubby Smith. Penny has been solid but hasn’t been able to take the next step up. Temple made a really bad hire after Dunphy in McKee. Wichita made a bad interim hire after Marshall was let go.

That’s a lot of swing and misses from traditionally really good basketball programs. That’s the AAC’s number 1 problem. In a different reality the AAC could have looked like CUSA 1.0 in hoops with some better hires. But it’s been a disaster on that front.

(04-16-2024 12:15 AM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  The Transfer Portal/NIL era is going to favor programs that are in the upper/middle class - as long as they reside in good markets (and have solid visibility).

Thus, I think over time AAC basketball is going to scoop up enough "bounce back" talent from the P4 to be in that MWC-zone we saw this year.

I see a lot of people downplaying AAC basketball, but - as a long play (like the MWC) - I see AAC basketball being a (current) MWC of the East.

The MWC just got 6 bids, which is a remarkable turnaround from the 1-bid they had been getting for much of the last few years.

The AAC has never gotten 1-bid that I know of, and it's currently adjusting after the last realignment.

However, when the AAC realigned, the market-based focus was the correct one.

They brought in a Final Four team (FAU), the two NIT Finalists (North Texas and UAB), and the CIT Champion (Charlotte).

I think the AAC has more star power than the MWC at the top, but the middles are going to be quite comparable.

SDSU - Memphis
UNLV - Wichita State
NM - Temple
CSU - UAB
USU - North Texas
Boise - USF
Nevada - Charlotte
Fresno - FAU
SJSU - Tulsa
AFA - Rice
Wyoming - Tulane
WSU (hypothetically) - ECU
OSU (hypothetically) - UTSA

MWC likely gets raided by Pac2 in a year or so. Invites could come anytime after July1. So the head gets cut off MWC. very possible couple tex schools from AAC could happen as well. The Pac 2 will have minimum 8 schools by 2026. If they cherry pick, no merger pretty decent chance they get 9 to 12mil per school.

(04-17-2024 08:33 AM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  Big problem for the AAC has been their “top” programs making bad coaching hires. Houston obviously knocked it out of the park. Dawkins has been okay-to-solid at UCF. But UConn made a bad hire in Ollie which caused them to really struggle (2014 aside). Cincinnati made a bad hire in Brannen after Cronin which set UC back (still haven’t fully recovered). Memphis made a bad hire after Calipari left in Pastner. And then the weird hire in Tubby Smith. Penny has been solid but hasn’t been able to take the next step up. Temple made a really bad hire after Dunphy in McKee. Wichita made a bad interim hire after Marshall was let go.

That’s a lot of swing and misses from traditionally really good basketball programs. That’s the AAC’s number 1 problem. In a different reality the AAC could have looked like CUSA 1.0 in hoops with some better hires. But it’s been a disaster on that front.

Accurately presented. I agree overall.

(04-16-2024 12:41 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think so. I think AAC basketball has fallen and is unlikely to get up. I mean, it was never that upright to begin with, has always underperformed relative to initial expectations. But I think it has slid even further recently.

We'll see, I've been wrong before.

You haven't been wrong often, QV. And on this topic, I fear you'll be proved correct. I'm not bullish on AAC men's basketball (though I do think football and baseball should remain respectable).

The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

(04-17-2024 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:41 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think so. I think AAC basketball has fallen and is unlikely to get up. I mean, it was never that upright to begin with, has always underperformed relative to initial expectations. But I think it has slid even further recently.

We'll see, I've been wrong before.

You haven't been wrong often, QV. And on this topic, I fear you'll be proved correct. I'm not bullish on AAC men's basketball (though I do think football and baseball should remain respectable).

The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

I do recall you offered some "quiet skepticism" regarding the potential of the nBE 10 years ago.

And to be fair, nobody 10 years ago would have predicted the Big East would have won four titles since then, in large part because UConn was not a part of the original BE.

The reinvented Big East has definitely been better than I was expecting (though I kind of figured it would loosely be considered "power" in men's hoops, even before UConn rejoined).

(04-17-2024 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:41 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think so. I think AAC basketball has fallen and is unlikely to get up. I mean, it was never that upright to begin with, has always underperformed relative to initial expectations. But I think it has slid even further recently.

We'll see, I've been wrong before.

You haven't been wrong often, QV. And on this topic, I fear you'll be proved correct. I'm not bullish on AAC men's basketball (though I do think football and baseball should remain respectable).

The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

I do recall you offered some "quiet skepticism" regarding the potential of the nBE 10 years ago.

And to be fair, nobody 10 years ago would have predicted the Big East would have won four titles since then, in large part because UConn was not a part of the original BE.

The reinvented Big East has definitely been better than I was expecting (though I kind of figured it would loosely be considered "power" in men's hoops, even before UConn rejoined).

If the American Conference got what they believed what they were getting in UConn, that would have created a ripple effect earlier in their development, imo. I'm not sure the Wichita Shockers get invited if UConn wasn't losing so much.

It's all about coaching. Earlier in the Big East they had a Villanova with Jay Wright; but now it's not that "Villanova..." and a revamped UConn basically substitutes for a diminished Villanova.

(04-17-2024 04:32 PM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:41 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think so. I think AAC basketball has fallen and is unlikely to get up. I mean, it was never that upright to begin with, has always underperformed relative to initial expectations. But I think it has slid even further recently.

We'll see, I've been wrong before.

You haven't been wrong often, QV. And on this topic, I fear you'll be proved correct. I'm not bullish on AAC men's basketball (though I do think football and baseball should remain respectable).

The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

I do recall you offered some "quiet skepticism" regarding the potential of the nBE 10 years ago.

And to be fair, nobody 10 years ago would have predicted the Big East would have won four titles since then, in large part because UConn was not a part of the original BE.

The reinvented Big East has definitely been better than I was expecting (though I kind of figured it would loosely be considered "power" in men's hoops, even before UConn rejoined).

If the American Conference got what they believed what they were getting in UConn, that would have created a ripple effect earlier in their development, imo. I'm not sure the Wichita Shockers get invited if UConn wasn't losing so much.

It's all about coaching. Earlier in the Big East they had a Villanova with Jay Wright; but now it's not that "Villanova..." and a revamped UConn basically substitutes for a diminished Villanova.

The simultaneous and collective faltering of the top AAC men's hoops programs from roughly 2015 to 2020 was unexpected — and highly damaging.

And now with UConn, Cincy, Houston and SMU gone, the damage will be very difficult to repair.

As to Villanova (as you note), the Big East ideally needs two of a group of four members — Nova, Georgetown, Providence and St. John's — to be nationally relevant every season. That is not the case now and is somewhat harmful to the league. But I also foresee that changing, with St. John's and Georgetown likely to improve rapidly. Nova is a major question mark.

A agree with you: coaching is the key.

The AAC will be just be fine in hoops but it will take a little bit of patience. It's only been a year since the league had a huge overhaul of incoming and departing members.

South Florida were a huge surprise. Had a very good season and if not for a poor start to the season they could've been in the mix for an at large berth. Very bullish on UAB and North Texas prospects going forward. Wichita St and Temple will be wait and see. FAU will fall off for a bit next season but I expect them to come back with the recent hire they made. Charlotte is a wildcard. Memphis needa better coach but there has always been another strong tradition there. Give it another 2-3 seasons and I think there is potential for 3+ bids in the future when everything settles down.

What makes me nervous is none of the teams in the AAC are holding on to their key players, other than us and Memphis. FAU will certainly take a step back, and USF has lost a couple guys to the portal I believe. And then teams like Tulsa, Wichita St, etc. had good players that looked like they could be built around, and those guys leave. Idk if it takes more NIL money, more winning, both, or something else, but we gotta find a way to hold on to our best players, or at least most of them anyway.

(04-18-2024 12:03 AM)Frank Grimes Wrote:  What makes me nervous is none of the teams in the AAC are holding on to their key players, other than us and Memphis. FAU will certainly take a step back, and USF has lost a couple guys to the portal I believe. And then teams like Tulsa, Wichita St, etc. had good players that looked like they could be built around, and those guys leave. Idk if it takes more NIL money, more winning, both, or something else, but we gotta find a way to hold on to our best players, or at least most of them anyway.

In this new universe it is 90% an issue with NIL money. UAB ponied up for Yaxel and crew for next season and Memphis has very deep NIL pockets for basketball.

(04-17-2024 04:32 PM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:41 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think so. I think AAC basketball has fallen and is unlikely to get up. I mean, it was never that upright to begin with, has always underperformed relative to initial expectations. But I think it has slid even further recently.

We'll see, I've been wrong before.

You haven't been wrong often, QV. And on this topic, I fear you'll be proved correct. I'm not bullish on AAC men's basketball (though I do think football and baseball should remain respectable).

The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

I do recall you offered some "quiet skepticism" regarding the potential of the nBE 10 years ago.

And to be fair, nobody 10 years ago would have predicted the Big East would have won four titles since then, in large part because UConn was not a part of the original BE.

The reinvented Big East has definitely been better than I was expecting (though I kind of figured it would loosely be considered "power" in men's hoops, even before UConn rejoined).

If the American Conference got what they believed what they were getting in UConn, that would have created a ripple effect earlier in their development, imo. I'm not sure the Wichita Shockers get invited if UConn wasn't losing so much.

It's all about coaching. Earlier in the Big East they had a Villanova with Jay Wright; but now it's not that "Villanova..." and a revamped UConn basically substitutes for a diminished Villanova.

Well, UConn won the national title the very first year the AAC existed. Hard to kick things off better than that, at least in terms of performance at the top.

That UConn team was IMO obviously a "riding on fumes" holdover from the Big East days and Calhoun era, so in essence the AAC got a freebie to kick things off. But then UConn wilted in the desert of AAC structure and competition, especially the south/west emphasis the conference developed. Its hoops were dying on the vine IMO in the AAC.

(04-18-2024 08:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 04:32 PM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 12:41 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  You haven't been wrong often, QV. And on this topic, I fear you'll be proved correct. I'm not bullish on AAC men's basketball (though I do think football and baseball should remain respectable).

The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

I do recall you offered some "quiet skepticism" regarding the potential of the nBE 10 years ago.

And to be fair, nobody 10 years ago would have predicted the Big East would have won four titles since then, in large part because UConn was not a part of the original BE.

The reinvented Big East has definitely been better than I was expecting (though I kind of figured it would loosely be considered "power" in men's hoops, even before UConn rejoined).

If the American Conference got what they believed what they were getting in UConn, that would have created a ripple effect earlier in their development, imo. I'm not sure the Wichita Shockers get invited if UConn wasn't losing so much.

It's all about coaching. Earlier in the Big East they had a Villanova with Jay Wright; but now it's not that "Villanova..." and a revamped UConn basically substitutes for a diminished Villanova.

Well, UConn won the national title the very first year the AAC existed. Hard to kick things off better than that, at least in terms of performance at the top.

That UConn team was IMO obviously a "riding on fumes" holdover from the Big East days and Calhoun era, so in essence the AAC got a freebie to kick things off. But then UConn wilted in the desert of AAC structure and competition, especially the south/west emphasis the conference developed. Its hoops were dying on the vine IMO with Kevin Ollie at the helm.

Fify. Has to be noted that their rebuild actually began in the AAC as Hurley already had them back to competitive by year 2. They were going to be good again regardless of what league they played in.

(04-22-2024 05:51 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(04-18-2024 08:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 04:32 PM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:26 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-17-2024 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  The funny thing is, my being wrong doesn't necessarily comport with my biases, as I think it does with most. For example, I am a Big East homer, but have been very surprised at how good the Big East has been the past 10 years. I thought the nBE would be alright, would get by. But if someone had told me in the spring of 2014 that the Big East would win 4 of the next 10 national titles, and would consistently be ranked as one of the five best hoops conferences, there's no way I would have believed it.

But anyway.

I do recall you offered some "quiet skepticism" regarding the potential of the nBE 10 years ago.

And to be fair, nobody 10 years ago would have predicted the Big East would have won four titles since then, in large part because UConn was not a part of the original BE.

The reinvented Big East has definitely been better than I was expecting (though I kind of figured it would loosely be considered "power" in men's hoops, even before UConn rejoined).

If the American Conference got what they believed what they were getting in UConn, that would have created a ripple effect earlier in their development, imo. I'm not sure the Wichita Shockers get invited if UConn wasn't losing so much.

It's all about coaching. Earlier in the Big East they had a Villanova with Jay Wright; but now it's not that "Villanova..." and a revamped UConn basically substitutes for a diminished Villanova.

Well, UConn won the national title the very first year the AAC existed. Hard to kick things off better than that, at least in terms of performance at the top.

That UConn team was IMO obviously a "riding on fumes" holdover from the Big East days and Calhoun era, so in essence the AAC got a freebie to kick things off. But then UConn wilted in the desert of AAC structure and competition, especially the south/west emphasis the conference developed. Its hoops were dying on the vine IMO with Kevin Ollie at the helm.

Fify. Has to be noted that their rebuild actually began in the AAC as Hurley already had them back to competitive by year 2. They were going to be good again regardless of what league they played in.

Hurley is a great coach and, yes, I feel UConn would be very strong under him were it still an AAC member. I don't, however, think UConn would be as powerful as it is now were it not for its returning to the Big East.

There are some posters who sometimes suggest that UConn is as outstanding as it is due largely (and perhaps solely) to Big East membership. These folks tend to be either 1. pro-Big East or 2. anti-AAC (or, at the least, quick to be dismissive of the AAC).

I feel UConn will eventually be (and perhaps sooner rather than later) a member of the ACC or Big 12, and it will be interesting to see how strong UConn will be at that point (assuming Hurley is still the coach). If the Husky program remains elite, that will "minimize" (to an extent) the narrative of the helpfulness the Big East has provided. If, in contrast, UConn tails off (despite still having Hurley), that could suggest the Big East was a very positive and important influence on UConn (or perhaps that the Big East is not as deep and difficult as the either Big 12 or ACC). Time will tell.

(04-16-2024 12:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think so. I think AAC basketball has fallen and is unlikely to get up. I mean, it was never that upright to begin with, has always underperformed relative to initial expectations. But I think it has slid even further recently.

We'll see, I've been wrong before.

Unfortunately this. With Memphis and USF likely to bolt in the next 5 years to backfill the ACC, how many original members are even left?

(04-16-2024 05:49 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(04-16-2024 05:05 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  I don’t want to be negative on the AAC’s future because it was a good home to UH but I’m not sure you can really compare a league that’s lost 70% of its lineup from a decade ago to a league that’s never really had defections. The MWC’s cohesion and continuity imo is its trump card. The AAC still has several very respectable programs but I view it more as a collection of schools than a real league.

Mountain West schools are a bigger deal to their fans than much of the AAC. Some (but not all) MW states might be “second tier states” in the sense that they don’t have as big of TV markets, as much money, large populations etc.

But many of the schools in the MW in those states are the top tier schools of those states. The AAC schools may be similar in funding and get similar results, but they hold a slightly different niche locally. A star at Wyoming or Boise is known state wide, has every game covered, gets interviewed by the local media, makes appearances etc. A big star at a lot of AAC schools might be known around town, get covered just in that cities tv etc, but it’s rare schools at that level can achieve the mind share MWC schools do.

The results may be similar, attendance similar, income similar, but it’s still a little different scenario. Edge goes to MW IMO.

And this....The magic the original AAC captured was that most of its schools were hung with the "little brother" tag in their state. It had very loyal fan bases and regional headlines. I hate to say it but UTSA, UAB, UNT, Charlotte, etc can't ever fill that narrative in their respective regions.