Also 0-5 vs FBS

(09-04-2018 09:04 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I did not realize how many FCS teams have beat AAC teams since 2013. The AAC has to have the most FCS losses by any FBS conference, no?

2013
Towson (UConn)
McNeese State (USF)
Fordham (Temple)

2015
Furman (UCF)
James Madison (SMU)

2017
James Madison (ECU)

2018
Villanova (Temple)
North Carolina A&T (ECU)

That distingushiment belongs to the funbelt. They had something like 11 fcs losses from 2013-2017. The ACC holds the honor of the least losses to the FCS since 2013 with 1, while the Big 12 has the most losses by a P5 conference at 7.

All that said, I find the American's fcs loss count completely embarrassing. However I take some pride in the fact that 7 of those 8 losses belong to the East, as well as the fact that UH has never lost to an FCS program.

(09-03-2018 01:52 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Go ahead and hate, the AAC will have the last laff when our big money TV contract comes in next year

Ooooooh

The very fact that this thread was started by some g4 fan kinda proves the point doesn't it?

(09-04-2018 09:35 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 09:04 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I did not realize how many FCS teams have beat AAC teams since 2013. The AAC has to have the most FCS losses by any FBS conference, no?

2013
Towson (UConn)
McNeese State (USF)
Fordham (Temple)

2015
Furman (UCF)
James Madison (SMU)

2017
James Madison (ECU)

2018
Villanova (Temple)
North Carolina A&T (ECU)

Big 12 over the same period:

2013
Northern Iowa over Iowa State
North Dakota State over Kansas State

2014
North Dakota State over Iowa State

2015
South Dakota State over Kansas

2016
Northern Iowa over Iowa State

2017
Liberty over Baylor

2018
Nicholls State over Kansas


Granted, the AAC trails the Big 12 8-7 in this category, but that is pretty close. IMHO the 7 losses by the Big 12 is much considering the advantages they have as a member of the Power 5.

I’d also add the Big12 only has 10 members vs the AAC’s 12 members. So, average FCS losses per team during that period is actually higher for the Big12—though the number is almost identical.

(09-04-2018 09:04 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I did not realize how many FCS teams have beat AAC teams since 2013. The AAC has to have the most FCS losses by any FBS conference, no?

2013
Towson (UConn)
McNeese State (USF)
Fordham (Temple)

2015
Furman (UCF)
James Madison (SMU)

2017
James Madison (ECU)

2018
Villanova (Temple)
North Carolina A&T (ECU)

With the exception of 2015 Furman, those are some pretty stellar FCS teams. The jury is still out on Villanova and NC A&T, but that was A&T's 14th win in a row and 3rd win in a row over FBS competition (Charlotte 2017, Kent State 2016).

(09-04-2018 11:21 AM)Chappy Wrote:  With the exception of 2015 Furman, those are some pretty stellar FCS teams. The jury is still out on Villanova and NC A&T, but that was A&T's 14th win in a row and 3rd win in a row over FBS competition (Charlotte 2017, Kent State 2016).

IMO, FCS teams are the last teams the AAC should be looking to schedule. There is zero incentive to schedule them. If they win, they are considered games they *should* win anyways. If they win by a small amount, it only fuels the anti-P6 narrative. If they lose, it can negatively impact their perception significantly. Very little to gain for the conference, especially where there is clear intent to be viewed as "one of the boys".

Obviously, the main goal is to schedule as many P5 opponents as possible. If they refuse, go after other G5 programs to clearly separate the AAC from the rest of the pack. I would even argue that, given the circumstance, scheduling an OOC AAC opponent (like UNC/WF will be doing) would be more beneficial for scheduling/perception issues rather than an FCS program.

(09-04-2018 11:33 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 11:21 AM)Chappy Wrote:  With the exception of 2015 Furman, those are some pretty stellar FCS teams. The jury is still out on Villanova and NC A&T, but that was A&T's 14th win in a row and 3rd win in a row over FBS competition (Charlotte 2017, Kent State 2016).

IMO, FCS teams are the last teams the AAC should be looking to schedule. There is zero incentive to schedule them. If they win, they are considered games they *should* win anyways. If they win by a small amount, it only fuels the anti-P6 narrative. If they lose, it can negatively impact their perception significantly. Very little to gain for the conference, especially where there is clear intent to be viewed as "one of the boys".

Obviously, the main goal is to schedule as many P5 opponents as possible. If they refuse, go after other G5 programs to clearly separate the AAC from the rest of the pack. I would even argue that, given the circumstance, scheduling an OOC AAC opponent (like UNC/WF will be doing) would be more beneficial for scheduling/perception issues rather than an FCS program.

Remember, talk of scheduling up is great for fans and pundits, but not so much for the coaches and ADs involved, who know their jobs depend on wins. And, the budget depends on playing more home games, and lesser-level teams are more willing to travel.

G5 like the AAC will continue to schedule FCS for the same reason that A5 continue to schedule G5 (and FCS too!), they actually do want cupcakes on the schedule to pad the win total. Now does every so often a cupcake bite the higher-level team in the arse, like NCAT did to ECU? Sure. But on average, scheduling the cupcakes adds up to more wins.

Because e.g. even though USF fans howl when we host an Elon instead of a Georgia Tech, bottom line is, most USF fans would rather see us *beat* Elon than *lose* to Georgia Tech. And if all you do is play tough games, you will lose more.

(09-04-2018 11:33 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 11:21 AM)Chappy Wrote:  With the exception of 2015 Furman, those are some pretty stellar FCS teams. The jury is still out on Villanova and NC A&T, but that was A&T's 14th win in a row and 3rd win in a row over FBS competition (Charlotte 2017, Kent State 2016).

IMO, FCS teams are the last teams the AAC should be looking to schedule. There is zero incentive to schedule them. If they win, they are considered games they *should* win anyways. If they win by a small amount, it only fuels the anti-P6 narrative. If they lose, it can negatively impact their perception significantly. Very little to gain for the conference, especially where there is clear intent to be viewed as "one of the boys".

Obviously, the main goal is to schedule as many P5 opponents as possible. If they refuse, go after other G5 programs to clearly separate the AAC from the rest of the pack. I would even argue that, given the circumstance, scheduling an OOC AAC opponent (like UNC/WF will be doing) would be more beneficial for scheduling/perception issues rather than an FCS program.

I wish we didn't schedule FCS at all, but I it seems we are trying to get 7 home games instead of 6 so it's a necessity.

(09-03-2018 01:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Although they have no extra access to the playoff or New Year's 6 bowl games, the AAC has been trying to promote their conference as the 6th power conference for a while now. But, in Week 1 of the college football season, some of their programs really didn't look the part. North Texas completely dominated an SMU team that won 7 games, finished tied for 3rd the AAC West, and went bowling in 2017. ECU lost to FCS program NC A&T at home. Temple, another AAC bowl team from 2017, also lost to an FCS program; losing to Villanova at home.

It is time to drop the P6 delusion.

North Texas p6 application

_____ accepted
__x___ denied

(09-04-2018 12:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 11:33 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 11:21 AM)Chappy Wrote:  With the exception of 2015 Furman, those are some pretty stellar FCS teams. The jury is still out on Villanova and NC A&T, but that was A&T's 14th win in a row and 3rd win in a row over FBS competition (Charlotte 2017, Kent State 2016).

IMO, FCS teams are the last teams the AAC should be looking to schedule. There is zero incentive to schedule them. If they win, they are considered games they *should* win anyways. If they win by a small amount, it only fuels the anti-P6 narrative. If they lose, it can negatively impact their perception significantly. Very little to gain for the conference, especially where there is clear intent to be viewed as "one of the boys".

Obviously, the main goal is to schedule as many P5 opponents as possible. If they refuse, go after other G5 programs to clearly separate the AAC from the rest of the pack. I would even argue that, given the circumstance, scheduling an OOC AAC opponent (like UNC/WF will be doing) would be more beneficial for scheduling/perception issues rather than an FCS program.

Remember, talk of scheduling up is great for fans and pundits, but not so much for the coaches and ADs involved, who know their jobs depend on wins. And, the budget depends on playing more home games, and lesser-level teams are more willing to travel.

G5 like the AAC will continue to schedule FCS for the same reason that A5 continue to schedule G5 (and FCS too!), they actually do want cupcakes on the schedule to pad the win total. Now does every so often a cupcake bite the higher-level team in the arse, like NCAT did to ECU? Sure. But on average, scheduling the cupcakes adds up to more wins.

Because e.g. even though USF fans howl when we host an Elon instead of a Georgia Tech, bottom line is, most USF fans would rather see us *beat* Elon than *lose* to Georgia Tech. And if all you do is play tough games, you will lose more.

Honestly, I dont think you will be seeing as many FCS vs AAC games in the future. Houston has already said they are eliminating those games---though we ended up with TSU this year (that was the price of using their basketball arena last year while ours was renovated) and we havnt been able to fill the 2019 slot---so there's not much hope that we can fill it with anything other than an FCS at this late date. Beyond those two, Houston's OOC model will be 2 P5's and 2G5's (with cross town Rice being one of the 2 G5's most every year--that game just makes too much sense for both parties). I believe some other AAC schools have stated they intend to phase out FCS games.

(09-03-2018 01:47 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  I hear more about the P6 moniker from fans of CUSA teams than AAC teams.

(09-04-2018 12:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 01:21 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Although they have no extra access to the playoff or New Year's 6 bowl games, the AAC has been trying to promote their conference as the 6th power conference for a while now. But, in Week 1 of the college football season, some of their programs really didn't look the part. North Texas completely dominated an SMU team that won 7 games, finished tied for 3rd the AAC West, and went bowling in 2017. ECU lost to FCS program NC A&T at home. Temple, another AAC bowl team from 2017, also lost to an FCS program; losing to Villanova at home.

It is time to drop the P6 delusion.

AAC p6 application

_____ accepted
__x___ denied

FIFY

(09-04-2018 07:37 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(09-03-2018 01:52 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Go ahead and hate, the AAC will have the last laff when our big money TV contract comes in next year

This.

It is best not to brag before it happens, be wise and don’t t look like a fool when it doesn’t happen.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(09-04-2018 09:04 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I did not realize how many FCS teams have beat AAC teams since 2013. The AAC has to have the most FCS losses by any FBS conference, no?

2013
Towson (UConn)
McNeese State (USF)
Fordham (Temple)

2015
Furman (UCF)
James Madison (SMU)

2017
James Madison (ECU)

2018
Villanova (Temple)
North Carolina A&T (ECU)

That certainly bolsters the P6 claim.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(09-04-2018 05:49 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 09:04 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I did not realize how many FCS teams have beat AAC teams since 2013. The AAC has to have the most FCS losses by any FBS conference, no?

2013
Towson (UConn)
McNeese State (USF)
Fordham (Temple)

2015
Furman (UCF)
James Madison (SMU)

2017
James Madison (ECU)

2018
Villanova (Temple)
North Carolina A&T (ECU)

That certainly bolsters the P6 claim.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep, puts us right on par with the Big 12.

(09-04-2018 09:35 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 09:04 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I did not realize how many FCS teams have beat AAC teams since 2013. The AAC has to have the most FCS losses by any FBS conference, no?

2013
Towson (UConn)
McNeese State (USF)
Fordham (Temple)

2015
Furman (UCF)
James Madison (SMU)

2017
James Madison (ECU)

2018
Villanova (Temple)
North Carolina A&T (ECU)

Big 12 over the same period:

2013
Northern Iowa over Iowa State
North Dakota State over Kansas State

2014
North Dakota State over Iowa State

2015
South Dakota State over Kansas

2016
Northern Iowa over Iowa State

2017
Liberty over Baylor

2018
Nicholls State over Kansas

Granted, the AAC trails the Big 12 8-7 in this category, but that is pretty close. IMHO the 7 losses by the Big 12 is much considering the advantages they have as a member of the Power 5.

It's interesting to note that per Wikipedia and my math, the FCS foes that beat AAC teams went a combined 62-19 (0.765) while the AAC teams themselves were 12-60 (0.171). The Big 12 beaters and Big 12 teams were 56-21 (0.727) and 17-56 (0.234) respectively. I excluded the three FCS over FBS wins from last weekend.

So basically the AAC had worse teams playing better opponents, though that's a bit misleading since teams the Big 12 played (almost all Missouri Valley) probably had tougher schedules given how they're usually the highest ranked FCS conference. Also one must consider that the Big 12 records are probably a bit deflated because KU and Iowa State had to play Oklahoma and TCU in conference play instead of Tulane and Tulsa. But to your point the differences are pretty small.

I have been here a long time. Threads like this serve no purpose except to start a flame war. It’s shortsighted and nothing more than trolling to ridicule a conference because some of their teams have a bad game.

UCF kicked everyone’s tail that would play them last year; Memphis and USF were also quality ball clubs with double digit wins. Hats off to The AAC for promoting itself as a power conference and backing it up on the field.

Steve Logan, then the coach at ECU, said it best when he described getting CUSA into The BCS. Logan said “If they won’t open the door we’ll kick it in”. Well UCF is kicking at the door....
CJ

(09-04-2018 07:17 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  I have been here a long time. Threads like this serve no purpose except to start a flame war. It’s shortsighted and nothing more than trolling to ridicule a conference because some of their teams have a bad game.

UCF kicked everyone that would play them last year; Memphis and USF were also quality ball clubs with double digit wins. Hats off to The AAC for promoting itself as a power conference and backing it up on the field.

CJ, you call this a troll thread but then jump in and take sides.

As far as on the field, last year the AAC was half way between the next best G5 and worst A5, so they are a tweener.

Quo,
I appreciate your opinion, not taking sides, just stating facts.
CJ