Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[94 Bull]

But who wants to play on this field?  

[NewEnglandBull]

13 minutes ago, 94 Bull said:

But who wants to play on this field?  

Meh- once every four years...I’ll allow it...

[John Lewis]

On 8/16/2020 at 10:03 AM, Dave_Glaser said:

How is this a good thing? Economically, it seems like a mistake.

It does seem a mistake when you factor in all other sports outside of FB.

 

Edited August 17, 2020 by John Lewis

[John Lewis]

1 minute ago, brybull1970 said:

Is it still a net-negative if it means the distance between the American and the rest of the P5 is significantly less than the distance between the American and our closest G5 competition? I think the opportunity to kill off our closest competition would outweigh the potential increases in travel expenses related to a coast-to-coast conference, which could be mitigated through proper scheduling.

Tough to say that. Yes, there would be a benefit to having more separation from the rest of the G5 conferences, but I wouldn't see TV execs knocking down the door of the AAC for a huge TV deal.

I just look at the other sports and see huge expenses on travel that aren't necessary. 

Scheduling for other sports will be more regional due to the pandemic and I think that practice stays in place well into the future.

[WhoRUSF]

On 8/17/2020 at 11:34 AM, brybull1970 said:

You won't get any argument from me on the expenses side, but as a conference we need to be focusing more on the denominator and not the numerator. The AAC, and USF, can't save its way to growth.

As an alternative, I would propose that the 8 full-time members of the AAC plus Navy and Wichita State (excluding Tulsa and Tulane) leave the conference and form a new 14-team conference with 5 full-time members of the Mountain West. This would be much in the same way the majority of the Metro and Great Midwest schools left to form C-USA in 1995. Two, 7 team divisions for football would dramatically reduce travel expenses over a 16 team version, as would expenses for other sports.

At that point, the TV contract could be up for bidding, and it should be split and parceled out to maximize all of the various tiers. I would argue in this equation that the sum of Boise State, San Diego State, Air Force, Colorado State and UNLV) are greater than the sum of Tulane and Tulsa on a per school basis.

I heard that it's hard to kick teams (I dont actually know what that involves). 

Anyway I think the only teams that add value are Boise and BYU. Colorado state and SDSU would be decent adds, but have their drawbacks. Air force and UNLV dont do anything for us imo and I think we should pass on them. 

[79 Bull]

I think having all 3 service academies would be a value add for prestige (Power 5.5?) and revenues.

[puc86]

1 hour ago, brybull1970 said:

We wouldn't be kicking anyone out - we'd be leaving with the majority of the conference to foirm a new conference. This is what the Great Midwest did to Dayton in 1995 when all of their members left to join C-USA, leaving Dayton the only school left in the conference.

What I am proposing is that we, along with the majority of the AAC, leave to form a new conference with select members of the MWC, leaving Tulsa and Tulane as the only remaining members of the AAC.

Perfectly legal and all we have to do is give notice and pay the exit fee.

Can we go last, collect the prorated portion of the exit fees and then use them to pay our exit fees?

[puc86]

3 hours ago, 79 Bull said:

I think having all 3 service academies would be a value add for prestige (Power 5.5?) and revenues.

Outside of one game a year are they a big draw?

[chapelbull]

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Can we go last, collect the prorated portion of the exit fees and then use them to pay our exit fees?

Or not go at all and declare ourselves Conference Champs every year

[puc86]

5 minutes ago, chapelbull said:

Or not go at all and declare ourselves Conference Champs every year

Smart! Our trophy case will be littered with AAC trophies