AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

This was one of the worst brackets I have seen in a long time

Who cares? Why is there this obsession with trying to measure up with the other conferences? I don't care if the AAC is a power or not, just if it's competitive enough to win in.

We beat 7 teams in the tourney

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

Obviously the AAC belongs in the same breath as the ACC and Big 10

(03-13-2016 06:46 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

Obviously the AAC belongs in the same breath as the ACC and Big 10

Tell that to ESPiN!

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

RPI rankings, which do not discriminate against SMU, have the AAC as the 8th best conference, same as it has been the last three years.

Nothing "powerful" about that.

I ask again, who cares? If the AAC was a power conference, we wouldn't have to ask about it. Just let things flow the way they flow.

(03-13-2016 06:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

RPI rankings, which do not discriminate against SMU, have the AAC as the 8th best conference, same as it has been the last three years.

Nothing "powerful" about that.

But not far off either. My premise was that you really can't fit the AAC into either power or mid major status because of football and basketball both being fairly successful and a notch above everyone outside of the 'Power'' conferences. On performance alone the AAC is closer to the P5 than the G4 & if the Big 12 doesn't expand the pay will substantially increase here soon.

(03-13-2016 06:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

RPI rankings, which do not discriminate against SMU, have the AAC as the 8th best conference, same as it has been the last three years.

Nothing "powerful" about that.

All that says is that the AAC went into the program building business when it invited its last teams, as opposed to inviting ready-made programs.

4 bids is a great statement on the core of the conference (and doesn't even include SMU).

Personally, I couldn't care less about what Creighton and Marquette do versus UCF and Tulane; unless they have prospective coaching candidates. The new ADs at UCF and Tulane are on the hunt.

The AAC will continue to build and thrive.

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

Good to get 4 schools, but if you think that will be a factor in the Media calling the AAC a power conference you haven't been paying attention. Remember a couple years ago when the MWC had either 4 out of 8 or 5 of their 9 schools make the NCAA tpurnament? Remember a couple of years ago when AAC conference member UCONN won the NCAA Tournament? I could use more examples but it's pointless...Like life, college athletics--P5/ESPN--ain't fair...well, life is probably a bit more fair. Cheers!

(03-13-2016 08:03 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

Good to get 4 schools, but if you think that will be a factor in the Media calling the AAC a power conference you haven't been paying attention. Remember a couple years ago when the MWC had either 4 out of 8 or 5 of their 9 schools make the NCAA tpurnament? Remember a couple of years ago when AAC conference member UCONN won the NCAA Tournament? I could use more examples but it's pointless...Like life, college athletics--P5/ESPN--ain't fair...well, life is probably a bit more fair. Cheers!

This was actually a down year for the AAC. I'll take 4 in a down year.

(03-13-2016 07:20 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

RPI rankings, which do not discriminate against SMU, have the AAC as the 8th best conference, same as it has been the last three years.

Nothing "powerful" about that.

All that says is that the AAC went into the program building business when it invited its last teams, as opposed to inviting ready-made programs.

4 bids is a great statement on the core of the conference (and doesn't even include SMU).

Problem is, UCF and Tulane are as much a part of the "core" as are Memphis and UConn.

Every conference has a top and a bottom. The AAC's top and bottom average out to #8, and that just isn't very good.

For basketball, there is a Power 6, the next tier is A-10, AAC and occasionally the MWC, MVC and WCC.....

(03-13-2016 11:01 PM)Jet915 Wrote:  For basketball, there is a Power 6, the next tier is A-10, AAC and occasionally the MWC, MVC and WCC.....

lmao... I love made up titles.. they are almost as nice as self-bestowed nicknames

(03-13-2016 10:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 07:20 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:27 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote:  AAC only has 11 teams (only 10 eligible) but despite a 'down' year would have had over half the league in if not for SMU's ban & UH's flukey loss to Tulane in the AAC tournament. Some of the media calls the AAC a power conference at least in basketball while many brand the AAC as a 'mid major". With football on the rise as well I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to define or place the AAC into a specific category.

RPI rankings, which do not discriminate against SMU, have the AAC as the 8th best conference, same as it has been the last three years.

Nothing "powerful" about that.

All that says is that the AAC went into the program building business when it invited its last teams, as opposed to inviting ready-made programs.

4 bids is a great statement on the core of the conference (and doesn't even include SMU).

Problem is, UCF and Tulane are as much a part of the "core" as are Memphis and UConn.

Every conference has a top and a bottom. The AAC's top and bottom average out to #8, and that just isn't very good.

That's no problem. New UCF and Tulane AD's Dannen and White are hiring new coaches this year.

By "Core" I was referring to the tradition-rich programs. This was always going to be a process. It was never an expectation that the "bottom" was going to hit the ground running. This was a build from Day 1.

The criteria for those invites wasn't basketball-centric, so the avg was irrelevant.

(03-13-2016 11:18 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 11:01 PM)Jet915 Wrote:  For basketball, there is a Power 6, the next tier is A-10, AAC and occasionally the MWC, MVC and WCC.....

lmao... I love made up titles.. they are almost as nice as self-bestowed nicknames

Honest truth, when half your league is a dumpster fire of crappy basketball teams and the other half is jockeying to leave the league at any sight of a P5 invite, it is what it is....

Really, does this look like a power conference to you???

Well the Big East got 5....so....

Holy Cross should not have gone period even if they won the Patriot tournament. A lot of good teams got left out. 19 teams with 9 or less loses are not going to the big dance.
Holy Cross
Vanderbilt
FDU
Austin Peay State
Oregon State
Texas Tech
Syracuse
All those teams are taken up spots that 20 + win teams deserved it more.

Power conferences are defined by one thing - MONEY.

By that standard, AAC isn't close. Have to keep winning and building up programs to even sniff 1/2 the money that P5 conferences get.