https://sunbeltsports.org/news/2023/5/31...edule.aspx

They made a few scheduling changes for the Sun Belt. One of them affects the AAC Championship Game.

Quote: The 2023 Sun Belt Football Championship Game on Saturday, Dec. 2, will air on either ABC or ESPN at 4 p.m. ET/3 p.m. CT. The game will feature the champions of the conference’s East and West Divisions and will be played at the site of the divisional winner with the best overall conference record.

Looks like AAC and SBC Championship games are now a flex, with the more favorable matchup getting the ABC broadcast.

Oh NO...Oh NO...Oh NO NO NO NO NO.

1. Already mentioned in the thread about the schedule updates.

2. Not actually a change. See the February announcement of the schedule, which slso says "ABC or ESPN" https://theamerican.org/news/2023/2/20/a...edule.aspx

I notice you're feeding the trolls over there as well as over here.
Nice work. (That's supposed to be in my sarcasm font)

(06-02-2023 10:43 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  1. Already mentioned in the thread about the schedule updates.

2. Not actually a change. See the February announcement of the schedule, which slso says "ABC or ESPN" https://theamerican.org/news/2023/2/20/a...edule.aspx

How did I miss that when it was announced? Probably too focused on the regular schedule being released. Why would the Sun Belt include it on an article specifying about schedule updates?

Guess a mod can delete/close if they want.

(06-02-2023 10:50 AM)MeepMeep Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 10:43 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  1. Already mentioned in the thread about the schedule updates.

2. Not actually a change. See the February announcement of the schedule, which slso says "ABC or ESPN" https://theamerican.org/news/2023/2/20/a...edule.aspx

How did I miss that when it was announced? Probably too focused on the regular schedule being released. Why would the Sun Belt include it on an article specifying about schedule updates?

Guess a mod can delete/close if they want.

It's possibly worth its own thread. Perhaps a merge with the existing thread. Goodness knows what tales the trolls would make up if this were to be deleted.

For precision, let me say that this week's announcement wasnt an "update" because it was consistent with February.
It is a "change" in that last year we WERE locked in to ABC.
It is worth talking about.

It's obviously a bigger deal for the Sun Belt hq. Of course they would want to make a big deal of any potential approach to the AAC's level.

What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

any direct comparison for 2023 would ultimately be worthless since every AAC championship game sans 2016 had at least one member who is no longer in the conference.

I can't find any data on the 2016 game ratings, but that would be an interesting look if it did work out that the SBC was on ABC.

(06-02-2023 02:45 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

any direct comparison for 2023 would ultimately be worthless since every AAC championship game sans 2016 had at least one member who is no longer in the conference.

I can't find any data on the 2016 game ratings, but that would be an interesting look if it did work out that the SBC was on ABC.

The 2016 Temple at Navy AAC CCG had 2.05 million viewers.
On one hand, second lowest of our CCGs. On the other hand, better than Cincinnati-Tulsa.
One context point is that Cincinnati still had CFP hopes vs WMU had already completed their undefeated season.
Another context point would be 2016 at noon vs Big12 and 2020 at 3:30 vs SEC.

My bottom line is that the AAC#1 and AAC#2 will get the slots and get the viewers. 0-fer UCF wasn't our ratings draw. Post-Tuberville Fickell wasn't our ratings draw. 8-4 firing offense Houston wasn't our ratings draw. Navy has, Temple has, Memphis has, Tulane has drawn ratings.

But that's why this CCG window is significant. Less so, but 19 October network is significant.

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

Facts are great but AAC past vs SB present would not be apples to apples.

The SB has much bigger goals than possibly stealing a time slot or two from the AAC...we plan and expect to be the best G5 conference in the years to come.

(06-03-2023 05:26 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

Facts are great but AAC past vs SB present would not be apples to apples.

The SB has much bigger goals than possibly stealing a time slot or two from the AAC...we plan and expect to be the best G5 conference in the years to come.

Then AAC 2023 onward against Sun Belt present isn't apples to apples either. Your fundamental error is thinking that the three leaving are any different from the eight staying -' there really isn't any difference. They are three of our top half, not some Big Three.

I expect you'll be disappointed in your bigger goals.

Come back in six months and we'll see what's transpired.

(06-03-2023 05:55 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:26 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

Facts are great but AAC past vs SB present would not be apples to apples.

The SB has much bigger goals than possibly stealing a time slot or two from the AAC...we plan and expect to be the best G5 conference in the years to come.

Then AAC 2023 onward against Sun Belt present isn't apples to apples either. Your fundamental error is thinking that the three leaving are any different from the eight staying -' there really isn't any difference. They are three of our top half, not some Big Three.

I expect you'll be disappointed in your bigger goals.

Come back in six months and we'll see what's transpired.

I'm no going anywhere compadre. I don't mean to downplay the leftovers but the AAC will never be what it was bc if what it has lost. You are similar to CUSA in that regard.

(06-03-2023 07:28 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:55 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:26 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 12:09 PM)everyone Wrote:  What are you all going to do with all these trolls in this thread? I don't see this as a big deal. We may or may not get the ABC game. Even if we did get ABC...Navy91 would make it in to a viewership war vs previous AAC ABC broadcasts and that is a waste of time to argue over.

Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

Facts are great but AAC past vs SB present would not be apples to apples.

The SB has much bigger goals than possibly stealing a time slot or two from the AAC...we plan and expect to be the best G5 conference in the years to come.

Then AAC 2023 onward against Sun Belt present isn't apples to apples either. Your fundamental error is thinking that the three leaving are any different from the eight staying -' there really isn't any difference. They are three of our top half, not some Big Three.

I expect you'll be disappointed in your bigger goals.

Come back in six months and we'll see what's transpired.

I'm no going anywhere compadre. I don't mean to downplay the leftovers but the AAC will never be what it was bc if what it has lost. You are similar to CUSA in that regard.

I try to ignore Belt comments, but this has to be addressed....

1st, the Sun Belt isn't going to achieve "bigger goals" with less commitment. It takes money and resources to be the best overall conference. The Sun Belt has chosen to focus on cost saving measures, not higher caliber recruiting or nationally relevant schedules, which is what it will take to earn one of the 6 auto-bids.

2nd, the new AAC is nothing like C-USA 3.0. 3.0 failed because there were too many small time thinkers that wouldn't invest and commit to elevating their programs. The pro-growth programs were invited to the AAC. That's why the teams that won the last 5 C-USA football title and the last 3 C-USA basketball titles (Plus, a 2023 Final Four appearance, 2023 NIT Title, & 2023 CBI Title) are now in the AAC.

I'm glad USM and the others are happy in the Sun Belt. But if that is true, you should be over on your board, instead of trying to sell your value to AAC fans that just don't care.

The AAC is like, the best G5 conference that no one really wants to stay in. The big 3 are out the door, 2 or 3 more are shoring up their facilities in hopes of getting out. What this conference looks like when all of the shuffling is done is a pretty major question mark. Everyone will do the usual super conference pride thing until the invite comes and then they're elated. It's fun to watch.

(06-03-2023 09:00 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 07:28 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:55 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:26 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-02-2023 01:40 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Interesting.

I would view it as a big deal. It's a good get for the Sun Belt -- taking something of ours. Or just as important framing -- being deemed worthy of it by our shared media partner.

Your board had multiple threads about taking AAC timeslots, specifically the CCG, but it wouldn't be a big deal? Sure, Jan.

And then it would be worth comparing viewership numbers.
It would be a great apples to apples comparison.

Funny that you think data driven, factual discussions are a waste of time.

Facts are great but AAC past vs SB present would not be apples to apples.

The SB has much bigger goals than possibly stealing a time slot or two from the AAC...we plan and expect to be the best G5 conference in the years to come.

Then AAC 2023 onward against Sun Belt present isn't apples to apples either. Your fundamental error is thinking that the three leaving are any different from the eight staying -' there really isn't any difference. They are three of our top half, not some Big Three.

I expect you'll be disappointed in your bigger goals.

Come back in six months and we'll see what's transpired.

I'm no going anywhere compadre. I don't mean to downplay the leftovers but the AAC will never be what it was bc if what it has lost. You are similar to CUSA in that regard.

I try to ignore Belt comments, but this has to be addressed....

1st, the Sun Belt isn't going to achieve "bigger goals" with less commitment. It takes money and resources to be the best overall conference. The Sun Belt has chosen to focus on cost saving measures, not higher caliber recruiting or nationally relevant schedules, which is what it will take to earn one of the 6 auto-bids.

2nd, the new AAC is nothing like C-USA 3.0. 3.0 failed because there were too many small time thinkers that wouldn't invest and commit to elevating their programs. The pro-growth programs were invited to the AAC. That's why the teams that won the last 5 C-USA football title and the last 3 C-USA basketball titles (Plus, a 2023 Final Four appearance, 2023 NIT Title, & 2023 CBI Title) are now in the AAC.

I'm glad USM and the others are happy in the Sun Belt. But if that is true, you should be over on your board, instead of trying to sell your value to AAC fans that just don't care.

I respect you as a poster on here and your are proud to be in the AAC...no issues there. I do take issue with "less commitment". There are no more passionate fan bases in G5 college football than the SB. Smaller fan bases but no less passionate. There has to be a balance between monetary investment and fans that care. Rice as an example has all the money in the world but an almost empty stadium for most games. That is not a recipe for success no matter how much money is involved. It just means more in the SB. With all due respect...USM fans do not need to sell anything to the AAC. I care about some teams in the AAC like Tulane and Memphis so I peruse the board.

(06-03-2023 09:16 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 09:00 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 07:28 PM)everyone Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:55 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-03-2023 05:26 PM)everyone Wrote:  Facts are great but AAC past vs SB present would not be apples to apples.

The SB has much bigger goals than possibly stealing a time slot or two from the AAC...we plan and expect to be the best G5 conference in the years to come.

Then AAC 2023 onward against Sun Belt present isn't apples to apples either. Your fundamental error is thinking that the three leaving are any different from the eight staying -' there really isn't any difference. They are three of our top half, not some Big Three.

I expect you'll be disappointed in your bigger goals.

Come back in six months and we'll see what's transpired.

I'm no going anywhere compadre. I don't mean to downplay the leftovers but the AAC will never be what it was bc if what it has lost. You are similar to CUSA in that regard.

I try to ignore Belt comments, but this has to be addressed....

1st, the Sun Belt isn't going to achieve "bigger goals" with less commitment. It takes money and resources to be the best overall conference. The Sun Belt has chosen to focus on cost saving measures, not higher caliber recruiting or nationally relevant schedules, which is what it will take to earn one of the 6 auto-bids.

2nd, the new AAC is nothing like C-USA 3.0. 3.0 failed because there were too many small time thinkers that wouldn't invest and commit to elevating their programs. The pro-growth programs were invited to the AAC. That's why the teams that won the last 5 C-USA football title and the last 3 C-USA basketball titles (Plus, a 2023 Final Four appearance, 2023 NIT Title, & 2023 CBI Title) are now in the AAC.

I'm glad USM and the others are happy in the Sun Belt. But if that is true, you should be over on your board, instead of trying to sell your value to AAC fans that just don't care.

I respect you as a poster on here and your are proud to be in the AAC...no issues there. I do take issue with "less commitment". There are no more passionate fan bases in G5 college football than the SB. Smaller fan bases but no less passionate. There has to be a balance between monetary investment and fans that care. Rice as an example has all the money in the world but an almost empty stadium for most games. That is not a recipe for success no matter how much money is involved. It just means more in the SB. With all due respect...USM fans do not need to sell anything to the AAC. I care about some teams in the AAC like Tulane and Memphis so I peruse the board.

Passion and commitment are two different things. Passion doesn't build facilities. Money does. Passion doesn't fund NIL collectives. Money does.

Rice is an extreme example. They are among the smallest universities competing in the FBS. Most universities have much more sizable fan bases, but far less money. Rice's money, history, and Houston market afford them advantages other small FBS universities just don't have.

"It Just Means More" is the SEC's tagline. Got to be more original than that.

Look, I actually enjoyed our time together in C-USA West. Everyone that was paying attention knows that I loved C-USA West. UNT supported C-USA and wanted that conference to thrive. But it didn't. Good luck moving forward, but if your plan for FBS domination revolves around your small passionate fan bases developing the Belt into the best G5, you are probably in for disappointment.

There is not a school in the SB that wouldn't move to the ACC if they were invited. End of discussion.

(06-03-2023 09:09 PM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  The AAC is like, the best G5 conference that no one really wants to stay in. The big 3 are out the door, 2 or 3 more are shoring up their facilities in hopes of getting out. What this conference looks like when all of the shuffling is done is a pretty major question mark. Everyone will do the usual super conference pride thing until the invite comes and then they're elated. It's fun to watch.

To add some clarity to your statement, "the best g5 conference no one really wants to stay in." There isn't a school in the g5 purgatory that wouldn't move to an autonomy conference yesterday (save for the academies that have completely understandable reasons.) And, there is an absolute certainty no school in the AAC is looking to leave for the SBC/MWC/et al, ever. The same can't be said for the oposite direction. That is perfectly obvious to everyone.

Good luck

(06-03-2023 09:09 PM)AlwaysSunny Wrote:  The AAC is like, the best G5 conference that no one really wants to stay in.

You mispronounced "The AAC is the one of the few G5 conferences where it's members have options". The old adage "Everyone is only as loyal as their options" applies here.

No one from a P5 conference is looking at the Sun Belt for expansion options. Don't get me wrong, I admire what your conference is built, but you don't have the Big 12 or Pac 12 looking at your teams. If you did, you'd be in the same boat as us.

Meanwhile in the past 10 years, the AAC has had more members poached by cartel conferences than the rest of the "G5" conferences combined. While you may prefer being in a more regional conference where there's a high likelihood no one leaves, I'd prefer being in one that has upward mobility.