While certainly not Ohio St, Alabama, and Texas, the 3 service academies have a national following and generally play some half way decent college football. Possessing all 3 would certainly help the AAC media deal but what would it take to get them all to join?

Would Army and Navy be willing to break tradition and play in week 0 so that they could be division mates?

(06-25-2018 07:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  While certainly not Ohio St, Alabama, and Texas, the 3 service academies have a national following and generally play some half way decent college football. Possessing all 3 would certainly help the AAC media deal but what would it take to get them all to join?

Would Army and Navy be willing to break tradition and play in week 0 so that they could be division mates?

Seems like a good idea to me. Navy and Air Force would have two more free games to schedule. Army would still have 4 free.

I think Army, and Navy for that matter, would have to be assured that the A-N game would not factor into the conference championship race or the traditional date. Perhaps it could be moved up to Veterans Day but I doubt that would fly. Speaking of flying, Air Force would likely ask for one if not two travel partners, meaning the AAC would likely go with some kind of 16-team setup of its current membership, Army, AFA, and two of CSU, Wyoming, New Mexico or BYU, should they become interested.

A place to park the rest of Air Forces sports in another conference, both would be FB only. The WAC would probably give them a sweetheart deal to have them for Olympic sports. Army never wants to put their Olympic sports in a conference above Patriot.

(06-25-2018 07:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  While certainly not Ohio St, Alabama, and Texas, the 3 service academies have a national following and generally play some half way decent college football. Possessing all 3 would certainly help the AAC media deal but what would it take to get them all to join?

Would Army and Navy be willing to break tradition and play in week 0 so that they could be division mates?

No.

Air Force is not going anywhere. They actually value their relationship with Colorado State, Wyoming and to some extent, New Mexico. Plus, they play Boise State, Navy and Army every year. Why give all that up for a conference they have nothing in common with?

Army could be convinced though.

This is one of those things that sounds good to college football fans but won't happen because there isn't sufficient monetary incentive to do it.

Not enough money to convince AFA to leave their current geographically friendly situation behind, and no reason for AFA to send all of their sports teams up and down the east coast every year. The "football only" idea is a deal breaker for Air Force as well, because every other possible home for Air Force sports is, from AFA's point of view, far inferior to the MWC. We could apply "the Boise test" to any MWC member as to the AAC. Boise was interested when they were being told the then-Big East's conference distribution to them would be about 5 times the MWC distribution, and when it turned out that wasn't the case, Boise was no longer interested. In other words, the AAC would have to deliver at least a few times as much money as the MWC pays or it doesn't make sense.

It doesn't work for the AAC, either. If an AAC president asks, "Why should we bring Air Force into our conference?" the only good answer would be, "Because your school will make substantially more money if we do," and because that's not the case, there is no good answer to that question. They won't make more money if AFA is in the AAC, and if in the future the AAC does make a lot more money, then they have no reason to split their bounty with AFA or anyone else not already in the league.

I don't see the allure of adding them. Maybe if the AAC hadn't decided to overexpand they'd have more room. OTOH, splitting into two 8-team divisions with that geography might actually be a good service to the league.

(06-25-2018 08:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  This is one of those things that sounds good to college football fans but won't happen because there isn't sufficient monetary incentive to do it.

Not enough money to convince AFA to leave their current geographically friendly situation behind, and no reason for AFA to send all of their sports teams up and down the east coast every year. The "football only" idea is a deal breaker for Air Force as well, because every other possible home for Air Force sports is, from AFA's point of view, far inferior to the MWC. We could apply "the Boise test" to any MWC member as to the AAC. Boise was interested when they were being told the then-Big East's conference distribution to them would be about 5 times the MWC distribution, and when it turned out that wasn't the case, Boise was no longer interested. In other words, the AAC would have to deliver at least a few times as much money as the MWC pays or it doesn't make sense.

It doesn't work for the AAC, either. If an AAC president asks, "Why should we bring Air Force into our conference?" the only good answer would be, "Because your school will make substantially more money if we do," and because that's not the case, there is no good answer to that question. They won't make more money if AFA is in the AAC, and if in the future the AAC does make a lot more money, then they have no reason to split their bounty with AFA or anyone else not already in the league.

AFA may actually do better in Olympic sports in a less competitive conference. They'd certainly do better in basketball in the WAC or Summit.

Army wants to be competitive and their last conference experiment crippled the program for like 10 years. So unless Houston gets an invite to the Big XII and they end up in a division with Navy, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, and Rice, I don't see it happening.

This is the same program who not very long ago scheduled multiple FCS games, including one against Yale, pretty much killing any chance of bowl eligibility?

It's cool they're finally getting a bit better. Let's not get too carried away, though...

Come on, it's not like Army was a power before they joined C-USA. The academies aren't gonna compete for national titles and aren't typically gonna compete for the Access Bowl. The good thing about being indy is that it frees you up to play a national schedule and gives you extra bye weeks in case of Army and Navy should they choose to go back that way. Why Navy would choose to play an AAC schedule instead of a national one behooves me.

If Army wants to join a conference they should do so in tandem with UMass and seek football only membership in CUSA, but that would take some CUSA defections like UTEP and Rice to the MWC or a scenario where two other CUSA teams serve as backfill for AAC to a P5 league, or, less likely decamp to the Funbelt. I don’t see how joining the AAC would be worth it to Army when they’d have to either move the Army-Navy game, and lose prestige, and exclusivity of playing after the CCGs but before the beginning of bowl season, and possibly the TV money, or have to only schedule Navy as an out of conference game and still run the risk of diminishing the real game should the two of them win their divisions meet the prior week in an AAC CCG.

(06-25-2018 07:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  While certainly not Ohio St, Alabama, and Texas, the 3 service academies have a national following and generally play some half way decent college football. Possessing all 3 would certainly help the AAC media deal but what would it take to get them all to join?

Would Army and Navy be willing to break tradition and play in week 0 so that they could be division mates?

It'd be a bit warm wearing those Long O's in August.

I am curious, where do Army and Air Force pull most of their recruits from? I know Navy was/is adamant of having a presence in Texas (hence why they are in the AAC West), so they are guaranteed of always having at least one home game each year in the area (either Houston or SMU). If Air Force is adamant about maintaining a relationship with Colorado State, I would guess that the American would be unable to pry them away with extending an invitation to them as well - and I do think an invitation to CSU would be on the horizon unless the AAC lost members, or it was guaranteed to increase value in the next TV deal).

I could see an Army addition if it was balanced by another full-membership as well as an Olympic sports addition (most likely VCU). However, getting Army, at that cost, likely is counter-productive.

As long as Army/Navy are happy with the current set-up, I think it remains the status quo until another radical shift occurs.

MWC just too geographically-friendly for Air Force to give up, especially with Army/Navy games guaranteed OOC.

AFA:
CSU - 1:56
WYO - 3:03
UNM - 5:30


If AFA ended up in Alton, IL (St Louis) they’d be in the AAC today.

(06-25-2018 08:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  This is one of those things that sounds good to college football fans but won't happen because there isn't sufficient monetary incentive to do it.

Not enough money to convince AFA to leave their current geographically friendly situation behind, and no reason for AFA to send all of their sports teams up and down the east coast every year. The "football only" idea is a deal breaker for Air Force as well, because every other possible home for Air Force sports is, from AFA's point of view, far inferior to the MWC. We could apply "the Boise test" to any MWC member as to the AAC. Boise was interested when they were being told the then-Big East's conference distribution to them would be about 5 times the MWC distribution, and when it turned out that wasn't the case, Boise was no longer interested. In other words, the AAC would have to deliver at least a few times as much money as the MWC pays or it doesn't make sense.

It doesn't work for the AAC, either. If an AAC president asks, "Why should we bring Air Force into our conference?" the only good answer would be, "Because your school will make substantially more money if we do," and because that's not the case, there is no good answer to that question. They won't make more money if AFA is in the AAC, and if in the future the AAC does make a lot more money, then they have no reason to split their bounty with AFA or anyone else not already in the league.

I dont think thats true at all. Air Force has investigated the possibility of moving to another conference for olympic sports because they simply are not very competitive in the MW. I know they looked VERY hard at the MVC at one point. Football, of course, would have remained in the MW where it does just fine---but I would not dismiss AF being quite happy with a move to a conference where the AF olympic programs would be more consistently competitive. So, split affiilation where the Air Force Academy was a football only member of the AAC---and an olympic sports member of say the MVC would likely be a completely viable option for the AF (perhaps even a preferred option). I would think the Wyoming and Colorado St football games would be the bigger issue.


http://www.kansas.com/news/local/news-co...79021.html

As for Army-Navy. That games has to be played in its normal time slot and it would belong to Army-Navy. That would mean it really needs to be an OOC game. So, Army and Navy would play a complete 8 game conference schedule prior to Championship Saturday. Army Navy would simply function as an OOC game.

No reason Navy and Air Force cant be in the west division. Put Army in the east. Decree that the Army-Air Force game is an protected crossover conference game every year. That puts 2 Commander Cup games on the conference schedule every year. Also--decree that Army will never ever meet Navy in conference play. Finally---create a AAC rule that IF Army and Navy are the 2 division winners---then there is no conference CCG. The conference winner in those years will be determined by the outcome of the regularly scheduled Army-Navy game. Yeah---its weird. But there are plenty of weird practices in college football---most of which are done out of simple respect to some tradition. Hey---that's part of the games charm. Let the commitment to protecting the sanctity of the Army-Navy game national tradition be a unifying theme among all AAC members. It would be a very good "look" for the "American" conference.

Nothing. Neither will join. Money is not an issue for the academies, so that wont convince them.

Air Force it's pretty obvious: Army and Navy are the most important opponents and they play them. After that San Diego (Marine base) Hawaii (Navy and Air Bases), plus Colorado State and Wyoming are their most important rivals. In the Mountain West they are pretty much assured of playing their rivals and being competitive. In the American they have to park their Olympics in the Summit or WAC (Yucky yucky).

For Army it's about competitiveness and their bad experience in C-USA, which are many of the same schools they faced (e.g., Tulane, Houston, ECU, Cincy, Memphis, South Florida). They have been through that, and it wasn't pretty. Saying you get to play Navy is a nothing burger, as they already do, and it's a higher revenue game for both than the American is for everyone else.

In the end I don't think there is anything the American can do. Going to 14 football schools just splits the pie tow more ways. A money loser.

This topic is pretty much a dead horse, and has been for half a decade when it first came up and was shot down by the academies. What changed?

Oh wow didn’t realize how bad Air Force hoops has been in 38 years of WAC/MWC competition.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/air-force/
3-13
3-13
2-14
3-13
2-14
3-13
5-11
4-12
6-10
3-13
2-14
3-13
3-15
3-15
4-14
1-17
2-14
2-12
2-12
4-10
3-11
3-11
3-11
12-2 At-Large
9-5
12-4 At-Large
10-6
8-8
0-16
1-15
6-10
3-11
8-8
6-12
6-12
5-13
4-14
6-12

Winning: 4/38
.500: 2/38
Losing: 32/38

0 Wins: 1/38
1 Win: 2/38
2 Wins: 6/38
3 Wins: 12/38
4 Wins: 4/38
5 Wins: 2/38
6 Wins: 5/38

3 Wins or Less: 21/38
6 Wins or Less: 32/38

(06-25-2018 11:43 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Nothing. Neither will join. Money is not an issue for the academies, so that wont convince them.

Air Force it's pretty obvious: Army and Navy are the most important opponents and they play them. After that San Diego (Marine base) Hawaii (Navy and Air Bases), plus Colorado State and Wyoming are their most important rivals. In the Mountain West they are pretty much assured of playing their rivals and being competitive. In the American they have to park their Olympics in the Summit or WAC (Yucky yucky).

For Army it's about competitiveness and their bad experience in C-USA, which are many of the same schools they faced (e.g., Tulane, Houston, ECU, Cincy, Memphis, South Florida). They have been through that, and it wasn't pretty. Saying you get to play Navy is a nothing burger, as they already do, and it's a higher revenue game for both than the American is for everyone else.

In the end I don't think there is anything the American can do. Going to 14 football schools just splits the pie tow more ways. A money loser.

This topic is pretty much a dead horse, and has been for half a decade when it first came up and was shot down by the academies. What changed?

Army, AF, and BYU are the only teams that probably would add enough value to maintain or improve the per team payout. Not really looking for it to occur---but I think it could potentially be a very good move for all involved if all the academies were in the AAC together.