(08-02-2018 09:24 AM)memphistiger89 Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 09:21 AM)Moody Magic Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 06:43 AM)memphistiger89 Wrote:  Even if the American gets better in basketball, I don't think there is any way we reach the level of the old Big East. IMO, the Big East was the top basketball conference in the country before it fell apart. That still has to be depressing for Bearcat fans.

The old Big East was never as good as the ACC.

I respectfully disagree.

Yup. Top to bottom the old Big East was the best basketball conference in the country. More often than not, the ACC was UNC/Duke and a bunch of football schools playing mediocre basketball (at best).

Once Memphis and UConn return to form and USF and ECU continue improvement, the AAC will be on par with the BE. The rest of AAC has done its job, IMO.

(08-02-2018 09:25 AM)ShockerFever Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 09:09 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 08:33 AM)megadrone Wrote:  I think the conference should just select a spot and build it. Memphis seems to be a good spot, or maybe Philadelphia (strong basketball tradition in Philly). have the tournament become a destination. I don't think Orlando is an "it" spot like Memphis or Philly. JMO.

With Memphis surging back the tournament should be in Memphis every year. I'm not sure but I think the highest attendance fo6our tournament was in the FedEx forum and a good Memphis team will guarantee good to great fa. Support especially with UCONN and Cincy getting back to form and if Wichita state can maintain a level of strength we should have p5 level fan attendance

I’m not a big fan of playing conference tournament games on home floors of schools playing in said tournament.

There’s not a P5 tournament out there that does that.

(St Johns has a home court on their campus. MSG is not St John’s true home floor in the NBE)

Dallas/Forth Worth is the most central in terms of easy drive for a number of schools and easy flight for all. Also the future home of the conference headquarters.

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-02-2018 09:09 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 08:33 AM)megadrone Wrote:  I think the conference should just select a spot and build it. Memphis seems to be a good spot, or maybe Philadelphia (strong basketball tradition in Philly). have the tournament become a destination. I don't think Orlando is an "it" spot like Memphis or Philly. JMO.

With Memphis surging back the tournament should be in Memphis every year. I'm not sure but I think the highest attendance fo6our tournament was in the FedEx forum and a good Memphis team will guarantee good to great fa. Support especially with UCONN and Cincy getting back to form and if Wichita state can maintain a level of strength we should have p5 level fan attendance

Should? Replace should with WILL. And for the record, more P5 schools suck when it comes to attendance than don't.

(08-02-2018 08:02 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Having the conference tourney in NYC/the Northeast doesn't make sense given the current geography of the conference. The OBE had 10 members within a 6 hour drive/train of MSG. Also, the majority of OBE alumni lived along the Northeast corridor (Boston/NYC/Philly/DC). That's a big part of why that event was so special.

You hit the nail on the head. The reason the old conference was so special was because, on top of the basketball being so good, all the schools and alumni were right there. Friends were split, families were split, fan bases rubbed shoulders every week. I can't say that I personally know one alum from any American school (since Rutgers left).

The conference was designed poorly from the start, and especially impacted basketball. I think the league should have grown around a culture and some sort of geographic proximity. The new Big East did just that and it's been tremendously successful. I'd go as far as saying the new Big East is better than the old one. The old league looked more like minor league basketball than college ball. They really pioneered playing in cavernous, empty NBA arenas. More of the original teams play more games on campus than they did in the 80s, you've got Hinkle in the mix, it's great basketball.

We'll never have that. Too many schools that don't care about basketball, zero geographic proximity, no history or rivalries. If it was up to me, I'd want to run with Cincinatti, UConn, and Memphis and start from there. I'd rather play in a regional league with rivalries and history than in one that only serves our coffers.

In a fantasy world, two very good leagues could be created from the AAC if it split between the eastern and western schools. The western schools can take Gonzaga and St. Mary's as basketball onlys, a few MWC schools and BYU and you have a great conference in two sports. Same with the east, a few schools from the A10, CUSA, MAC (like VCU, URI, UMass, ODU, Marshall, Buffalo, Army & Navy football only). From there, both leagues could build an amazing culture, long term rivalries, have exciting tourneys more fans could get to.

I could see the American being the first conference to experiment with a two division, coast to coast, 20+ team format. Instead of trying to compete directly with the power schools, generate value a different way by creating a true best of the rest league that always has a handful of teams looking to make a national title run. You're never going to catch the power conferences pound for pound, so give media outlets and recruits a different reason to value the American that highly. You could have games only within your division, even in basketball, until the tournament. That creates those rivalries, that culture, but keeps major competitors across the country within the American brand and in association with one another, even if they don't meet on the field or court for years.

(I also wonder, if it was a league of say 30 schools, if the NCAA would give an auto bid to both divisions)

Well... I guess anything's possible... but I just don't see the AAC ever approaching the level of the old BE.

Now if UC, UConn, WSU and SMU start landing Ewing, Mullen, Pearl Washington and Kenyon level players again, then sure.

(and yes Memphisians, I know Penny has recruited a team that would beat the 1992 dream team, but I have to see it first).

But alas, we're stuck with this G5 stigma and all the good guys go to either Duke or Kentucky. Doesn't look like we're going to advance much higher than here.

(08-04-2018 01:11 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  Well... I guess anything's possible... but I just don't see the AAC ever approaching the level of the old BE.

Now if UC, UConn, WSU and SMU start landing Ewing, Mullen, Pearl Washington and Kenyon level players again, then sure.

(and yes Memphisians, I know Penny has recruited a team that would beat the 1992 dream team, but I have to see it first).

But alas, we're stuck with this G5 stigma and all the good guys go to either Duke or Kentucky. Doesn't look like we're going to advance much higher than here.

your realize the #1 ranked player in the nation is favored to land in the aac??

that if uconn and memphis get every player they are favored to get, we will have the most more top 10 recruits than any other conference (tied with the acc, all top 10 projected to the acc are for 1 team)

uconn and memphis are the only ones actually likely to land theres but as of today 6 different aac teams have made top 10 cuts for a 5star player

i dont think the aac will be old big east level but not for the reasons you are stating at all....
my reason is the old big east had SO MANY members that great teams could suck for a few years and it not affect there reputation as some other great team will hold the conference up (it unlikely the 7/8 great teams would be down at the same time)...we have uconn and memphis down and the aac is the 7th ranked league..

but your talent reason i dont agree with at all..short term with uconn and memphis are getting elite players...

long term the aac hasnt even scratched its potential...ucf and usf cant recruit at all right now but are located in 2 of the hottest recruiting hotbeds in america..what ucf/usf could potentially be as the conference and their brand grows (i wont even add the kentucky of high school basketball, img academy is drivig distance from both)

Houston right now cant recruit the city houston (relying on North carolina, Lousiana recruits) but the city of houston is argubaly the biggest recruiting hotbed in america. the city by itself produces 10+ 4star and 4-5 espn 100 yearly ... add to that most of the aau in texas and louisanna/ training camps are centralized in houston. the moment houston can recruit the city its a whole different ball game

phi slama jama was 95% houston players ... and to state an example justise winslow (who lead duke to a national title) his is dad played for UH (and a mega fan/booster), his sisters play for UH, his cousins go to UH..if uh had any kind of brand at the time he played he would have picked UH...da'aron fox, jarred vanderbilt & jarrett allen were 5star in the last 4 years, that had houston top 5 but ultimately passed....note at those time we had 300 people at our games, and hadnt made a tourney as an atlarge in 30 years and still made top 5 for them...imagine what itll be as we establish ourselves

smu under the right coach can be a elite recruiter, they have the resources and location to be one (look how they did under brown, bringing in 5stars)

(08-04-2018 02:46 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 01:11 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  Well... I guess anything's possible... but I just don't see the AAC ever approaching the level of the old BE.

Now if UC, UConn, WSU and SMU start landing Ewing, Mullen, Pearl Washington and Kenyon level players again, then sure.

(and yes Memphisians, I know Penny has recruited a team that would beat the 1992 dream team, but I have to see it first).

But alas, we're stuck with this G5 stigma and all the good guys go to either Duke or Kentucky. Doesn't look like we're going to advance much higher than here.

your realize the #1 ranked player in the nation is favored to land in the aac??

that if uconn and memphis get every player they are favored to get, we will have the most more top 10 recruits than any other conference (tied with the acc, all top 10 projected to the acc are for 1 team)

uconn and memphis are the only ones actually likely to land theres but as of today 6 different aac teams have made top 10 cuts for a 5star player

i dont think the aac will be old big east level but not for the reasons you are stating at all....
my reason is the old big east had SO MANY members that great teams could suck for a few years and it not affect there reputation as some other great team will hold the conference up (it unlikely the 7/8 great teams would be down at the same time)...we have uconn and memphis down and the aac is the 7th ranked league..

but your talent reason i dont agree with at all..short term with uconn and memphis are getting elite players...

long term the aac hasnt even scratched its potential...ucf and usf cant recruit at all right now but are located in 2 of the hottest recruiting hotbeds in america..what ucf/usf could potentially be as the conference and their brand grows (i wont even add the kentucky of high school basketball, img academy is drivig distance from both)

Houston right now cant recruit the city houston (relying on North carolina, Lousiana recruits) but the city of houston is argubaly the biggest recruiting hotbed in america. the city by itself produces 10+ 4star and 4-5 espn 100 yearly ... add to that most of the aau in texas and louisanna/ training camps are centralized in houston. the moment houston can recruit the city its a whole different ball game

phi slama jama was 95% houston players ... and to state an example justise winslow (who lead duke to a national title) his is dad played for UH (and a mega fan/booster), his sisters play for UH, his cousins go to UH..if uh had any kind of brand at the time he played he would have picked UH...da'aron fox, jarred vanderbilt & jarrett allen were 5star in the last 4 years, that had houston top 5 but ultimately passed....note at those time we had 300 people at our games, and hadnt made a tourney as an atlarge in 30 years and still made top 5 for them...imagine what itll be as we establish ourselves

smu under the right coach can be a elite recruiter, they have the resources and location to be one (look how they did under brown, bringing in 5stars)

Actually I think Memphis is per capita in the top 3 nation in top level d1 players. I may be wrong.

(08-04-2018 02:46 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 01:11 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  Well... I guess anything's possible... but I just don't see the AAC ever approaching the level of the old BE.

Now if UC, UConn, WSU and SMU start landing Ewing, Mullen, Pearl Washington and Kenyon level players again, then sure.

(and yes Memphisians, I know Penny has recruited a team that would beat the 1992 dream team, but I have to see it first).

But alas, we're stuck with this G5 stigma and all the good guys go to either Duke or Kentucky. Doesn't look like we're going to advance much higher than here.

your realize the #1 ranked player in the nation is favored to land in the aac??

that if uconn and memphis get every player they are favored to get, we will have the most more top 10 recruits than any other conference (tied with the acc, all top 10 projected to the acc are for 1 team)

uconn and memphis are the only ones actually likely to land theres but as of today 6 different aac teams have made top 10 cuts for a 5star player

i dont think the aac will be old big east level but not for the reasons you are stating at all....
my reason is the old big east had SO MANY members that great teams could suck for a few years and it not affect there reputation as some other great team will hold the conference up (it unlikely the 7/8 great teams would be down at the same time)...we have uconn and memphis down and the aac is the 7th ranked league..

but your talent reason i dont agree with at all..short term with uconn and memphis are getting elite players...

long term the aac hasnt even scratched its potential...ucf and usf cant recruit at all right now but are located in 2 of the hottest recruiting hotbeds in america..what ucf/usf could potentially be as the conference and their brand grows (i wont even add the kentucky of high school basketball, img academy is drivig distance from both)

Houston right now cant recruit the city houston (relying on North carolina, Lousiana recruits) but the city of houston is argubaly the biggest recruiting hotbed in america. the city by itself produces 10+ 4star and 4-5 espn 100 yearly ... add to that most of the aau in texas and louisanna/ training camps are centralized in houston. the moment houston can recruit the city its a whole different ball game

phi slama jama was 95% houston players ... and to state an example justise winslow (who lead duke to a national title) his is dad played for UH (and a mega fan/booster), his sisters play for UH, his cousins go to UH..if uh had any kind of brand at the time he played he would have picked UH...da'aron fox, jarred vanderbilt & jarrett allen were 5star in the last 4 years, that had houston top 5 but ultimately passed....note at those time we had 300 people at our games, and hadnt made a tourney as an atlarge in 30 years and still made top 5 for them...imagine what itll be as we establish ourselves

smu under the right coach can be a elite recruiter, they have the resources and location to be one (look how they did under brown, bringing in 5stars)

Yea let's ignore the winningest program in the conference's history that by all accounts has some of the best facilities in the northeast, in a hot recruiting territory, bringing in a public philly coach with significant NBA experience and name recognition locally.

We won the regular season two years ago during a pretty significant low mark in the program's history, and still get about zero respect when people talk about the future of the league.

(08-05-2018 03:21 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  Yea let's ignore the winningest program in the conference's history that by all accounts has some of the best facilities in the northeast, in a hot recruiting territory, bringing in a public philly coach with significant NBA experience and name recognition locally.

We won the regular season two years ago during a pretty significant low mark in the program's history, and still get about zero respect when people talk about the future of the league.

wasnt ignoring temple, i didnt mention Cincinnati either but they have been the top team in the aac....

my point was more about teams who could see significant changes in the next 4 to 5 years, especially in recruiting...temples basketball brand is already established, you also arent likely to be in the hunt for a new coach for a long time

i dont think Cincinnati will have a significant change in the next 4 to5 years, but they dont need change as there status quo is making the tournament, and temple is always in the tourney conversation

The old and the new diminish big east conference has always favored buses... lol... over airplanes... Thinking small should get conferences penalized.

(08-06-2018 09:37 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  The old and the new diminish big east conference has always favored buses... lol... over airplanes... Thinking small should get conferences penalized.

Thinking small is what made both those conferences great. Thinking small is exactly what conferences should be doing. Thinking big is one of the things that leaves AAC basketball gyms mostly empty and lifeless. That leaves the conference with no true rivalries, no history, no culture. You want to tell me we've built a better conference than the new big east?

(08-06-2018 10:43 AM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 09:37 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  The old and the new diminish big east conference has always favored buses... lol... over airplanes... Thinking small should get conferences penalized.

Thinking small is what made both those conferences great. Thinking small is exactly what conferences should be doing. Thinking big is one of the things that leaves AAC basketball gyms mostly empty and lifeless. That leaves the conference with no true rivalries, no history, no culture. You want to tell me we've built a better conference than the new big east?

This league was created to reach the most market penetration as possible and given the current foot print outcome I must say this league finds itself in pretty strong shape... And if The AAC can manage in keeping the same nucleus intact there's no reason it couldn't WOW everyone.

(08-04-2018 12:42 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 08:02 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Having the conference tourney in NYC/the Northeast doesn't make sense given the current geography of the conference. The OBE had 10 members within a 6 hour drive/train of MSG. Also, the majority of OBE alumni lived along the Northeast corridor (Boston/NYC/Philly/DC). That's a big part of why that event was so special.

You hit the nail on the head. The reason the old conference was so special was because, on top of the basketball being so good, all the schools and alumni were right there. Friends were split, families were split, fan bases rubbed shoulders every week. I can't say that I personally know one alum from any American school (since Rutgers left).

The conference was designed poorly from the start, and especially impacted basketball. I think the league should have grown around a culture and some sort of geographic proximity. The new Big East did just that and it's been tremendously successful. I'd go as far as saying the new Big East is better than the old one. The old league looked more like minor league basketball than college ball. They really pioneered playing in cavernous, empty NBA arenas. More of the original teams play more games on campus than they did in the 80s, you've got Hinkle in the mix, it's great basketball.

We'll never have that. Too many schools that don't care about basketball, zero geographic proximity, no history or rivalries. If it was up to me, I'd want to run with Cincinatti, UConn, and Memphis and start from there. I'd rather play in a regional league with rivalries and history than in one that only serves our coffers.

In a fantasy world, two very good leagues could be created from the AAC if it split between the eastern and western schools. The western schools can take Gonzaga and St. Mary's as basketball onlys, a few MWC schools and BYU and you have a great conference in two sports. Same with the east, a few schools from the A10, CUSA, MAC (like VCU, URI, UMass, ODU, Marshall, Buffalo, Army & Navy football only). From there, both leagues could build an amazing culture, long term rivalries, have exciting tourneys more fans could get to.

I could see the American being the first conference to experiment with a two division, coast to coast, 20+ team format. Instead of trying to compete directly with the power schools, generate value a different way by creating a true best of the rest league that always has a handful of teams looking to make a national title run. You're never going to catch the power conferences pound for pound, so give media outlets and recruits a different reason to value the American that highly. You could have games only within your division, even in basketball, until the tournament. That creates those rivalries, that culture, but keeps major competitors across the country within the American brand and in association with one another, even if they don't meet on the field or court for years.

(I also wonder, if it was a league of say 30 schools, if the NCAA would give an auto bid to both divisions)

The Big East had good basketball, better coaches, and geographic proximity. The problem is that the good teams in most geographic locations have already coalesced into the P5. The leftover good all-sports schools are spread out all over hells half acre. So, the AAC is what it is. It will never have the rivalries created from geographic compression. It will never have a MSG type tournament that is easily accessible to most of the conference. We might end up with a something decent in Frisco simply because it is in the one location of the AAC where the league actually has a small hub of geographically coherence. We will see if that pans out.

Otherwise---we are basically a best of the rest spare parts league that will rely on local fan bases to fill seats. Its largely a made for TV league. It may lack rivalries and easy travel---but it has excellent athletic programs with big G5 budgets. Becasue of those quality athletic programs---AAC champions in every sport will be competitive with the best in all of college sports. For now---a high level of performance and a high level of exposure will have to suffice for the schools of the AAC.

(08-06-2018 12:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 12:42 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 08:02 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Having the conference tourney in NYC/the Northeast doesn't make sense given the current geography of the conference. The OBE had 10 members within a 6 hour drive/train of MSG. Also, the majority of OBE alumni lived along the Northeast corridor (Boston/NYC/Philly/DC). That's a big part of why that event was so special.

You hit the nail on the head. The reason the old conference was so special was because, on top of the basketball being so good, all the schools and alumni were right there. Friends were split, families were split, fan bases rubbed shoulders every week. I can't say that I personally know one alum from any American school (since Rutgers left).

The conference was designed poorly from the start, and especially impacted basketball. I think the league should have grown around a culture and some sort of geographic proximity. The new Big East did just that and it's been tremendously successful. I'd go as far as saying the new Big East is better than the old one. The old league looked more like minor league basketball than college ball. They really pioneered playing in cavernous, empty NBA arenas. More of the original teams play more games on campus than they did in the 80s, you've got Hinkle in the mix, it's great basketball.

We'll never have that. Too many schools that don't care about basketball, zero geographic proximity, no history or rivalries. If it was up to me, I'd want to run with Cincinatti, UConn, and Memphis and start from there. I'd rather play in a regional league with rivalries and history than in one that only serves our coffers.

In a fantasy world, two very good leagues could be created from the AAC if it split between the eastern and western schools. The western schools can take Gonzaga and St. Mary's as basketball onlys, a few MWC schools and BYU and you have a great conference in two sports. Same with the east, a few schools from the A10, CUSA, MAC (like VCU, URI, UMass, ODU, Marshall, Buffalo, Army & Navy football only). From there, both leagues could build an amazing culture, long term rivalries, have exciting tourneys more fans could get to.

I could see the American being the first conference to experiment with a two division, coast to coast, 20+ team format. Instead of trying to compete directly with the power schools, generate value a different way by creating a true best of the rest league that always has a handful of teams looking to make a national title run. You're never going to catch the power conferences pound for pound, so give media outlets and recruits a different reason to value the American that highly. You could have games only within your division, even in basketball, until the tournament. That creates those rivalries, that culture, but keeps major competitors across the country within the American brand and in association with one another, even if they don't meet on the field or court for years.

(I also wonder, if it was a league of say 30 schools, if the NCAA would give an auto bid to both divisions)

The Big East had good basketball, better coaches, and geographic proximity. The problem is that the good teams in most geographic locations have already coalesced into the P5. The leftover good all-sports schools are spread out all over hells half acre. So, the AAC is what it is. It will never have the rivalries created from geographic compression. I will never have a MSG type tournament that is easily accessible to most of the conference. We might end up with a something decent in Frisco simply because it is in the one location of the AAC where the league actually has a small hub of geographically coherence. We will see if that pans out.

Otherwise---we are basically a best of the rest spare parts league that will rely on local fan bases to fill seats. Its largely a made for TV league. It may lack rivalries and easy travel---but it has excellent athletic programs with big G5 budgets. Becasue of those quality athletic programs---AAC champions in every sport will be competitive with the best in all of college sports. For now---a high level of performance and a high level of exposure will have to suffice for the schools of the AAC.

My stance is that being a best of the rest league wasn't the right strategy. I think two good leagues could've been created out of the core of the American that might not have been as strong on the field/court right out of the gate, but had the potential to create amazing conferences with great cultures. There are a lot of schools that are well positioned to compete with the developing landscape of college sports, and I think the conference presidents should've planned more strategically instead of hobbling together the dozen best football programs east of the Rockies. What was the best option for the 2013 season probably wasn't the best long term solution.

(08-06-2018 01:17 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 12:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 12:42 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 08:02 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Having the conference tourney in NYC/the Northeast doesn't make sense given the current geography of the conference. The OBE had 10 members within a 6 hour drive/train of MSG. Also, the majority of OBE alumni lived along the Northeast corridor (Boston/NYC/Philly/DC). That's a big part of why that event was so special.

You hit the nail on the head. The reason the old conference was so special was because, on top of the basketball being so good, all the schools and alumni were right there. Friends were split, families were split, fan bases rubbed shoulders every week. I can't say that I personally know one alum from any American school (since Rutgers left).

The conference was designed poorly from the start, and especially impacted basketball. I think the league should have grown around a culture and some sort of geographic proximity. The new Big East did just that and it's been tremendously successful. I'd go as far as saying the new Big East is better than the old one. The old league looked more like minor league basketball than college ball. They really pioneered playing in cavernous, empty NBA arenas. More of the original teams play more games on campus than they did in the 80s, you've got Hinkle in the mix, it's great basketball.

We'll never have that. Too many schools that don't care about basketball, zero geographic proximity, no history or rivalries. If it was up to me, I'd want to run with Cincinatti, UConn, and Memphis and start from there. I'd rather play in a regional league with rivalries and history than in one that only serves our coffers.

In a fantasy world, two very good leagues could be created from the AAC if it split between the eastern and western schools. The western schools can take Gonzaga and St. Mary's as basketball onlys, a few MWC schools and BYU and you have a great conference in two sports. Same with the east, a few schools from the A10, CUSA, MAC (like VCU, URI, UMass, ODU, Marshall, Buffalo, Army & Navy football only). From there, both leagues could build an amazing culture, long term rivalries, have exciting tourneys more fans could get to.

I could see the American being the first conference to experiment with a two division, coast to coast, 20+ team format. Instead of trying to compete directly with the power schools, generate value a different way by creating a true best of the rest league that always has a handful of teams looking to make a national title run. You're never going to catch the power conferences pound for pound, so give media outlets and recruits a different reason to value the American that highly. You could have games only within your division, even in basketball, until the tournament. That creates those rivalries, that culture, but keeps major competitors across the country within the American brand and in association with one another, even if they don't meet on the field or court for years.

(I also wonder, if it was a league of say 30 schools, if the NCAA would give an auto bid to both divisions)

The Big East had good basketball, better coaches, and geographic proximity. The problem is that the good teams in most geographic locations have already coalesced into the P5. The leftover good all-sports schools are spread out all over hells half acre. So, the AAC is what it is. It will never have the rivalries created from geographic compression. I will never have a MSG type tournament that is easily accessible to most of the conference. We might end up with a something decent in Frisco simply because it is in the one location of the AAC where the league actually has a small hub of geographically coherence. We will see if that pans out.

Otherwise---we are basically a best of the rest spare parts league that will rely on local fan bases to fill seats. Its largely a made for TV league. It may lack rivalries and easy travel---but it has excellent athletic programs with big G5 budgets. Becasue of those quality athletic programs---AAC champions in every sport will be competitive with the best in all of college sports. For now---a high level of performance and a high level of exposure will have to suffice for the schools of the AAC.

My stance is that being a best of the rest league wasn't the right strategy. I think two good leagues could've been created out of the core of the American that might not have been as strong on the field/court right out of the gate, but had the potential to create amazing conferences with great cultures. There are a lot of schools that are well positioned to compete with the developing landscape of college sports, and I think the conference presidents should've planned more strategically instead of hobbling together the dozen best football programs east of the Rockies. What was the best option for the 2013 season probably wasn't the best long term solution.

Yes--2 leagues could have been created. But to do that---you water down the product by adding schools with lower budgets and brands. What you are describing is EXACTLY what CUSA did---which was a HUGE error. They went for geographic coherence rather than "best possible collection of schools" (which would have been the best course and easily accomplished by simply completing the planned MW merger). It was a massive step backwards for that conference--and a step that was completely unnecessary.


The only way geography returns to being the primary focus for G5 teams is if G5 TV money completely dies and there is no longer any financial advantage to producing NCAA bids tournament and access bowl teams. At that point---travel costs and traveling fans become important to filling seats (like in the old days). That game day reliance on self generating revenue and minimizing travel expenses is why small compact conferences were the rule in the early days of college sports.

(08-06-2018 01:39 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 01:17 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 12:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-04-2018 12:42 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 08:02 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Having the conference tourney in NYC/the Northeast doesn't make sense given the current geography of the conference. The OBE had 10 members within a 6 hour drive/train of MSG. Also, the majority of OBE alumni lived along the Northeast corridor (Boston/NYC/Philly/DC). That's a big part of why that event was so special.

You hit the nail on the head. The reason the old conference was so special was because, on top of the basketball being so good, all the schools and alumni were right there. Friends were split, families were split, fan bases rubbed shoulders every week. I can't say that I personally know one alum from any American school (since Rutgers left).

The conference was designed poorly from the start, and especially impacted basketball. I think the league should have grown around a culture and some sort of geographic proximity. The new Big East did just that and it's been tremendously successful. I'd go as far as saying the new Big East is better than the old one. The old league looked more like minor league basketball than college ball. They really pioneered playing in cavernous, empty NBA arenas. More of the original teams play more games on campus than they did in the 80s, you've got Hinkle in the mix, it's great basketball.

We'll never have that. Too many schools that don't care about basketball, zero geographic proximity, no history or rivalries. If it was up to me, I'd want to run with Cincinatti, UConn, and Memphis and start from there. I'd rather play in a regional league with rivalries and history than in one that only serves our coffers.

In a fantasy world, two very good leagues could be created from the AAC if it split between the eastern and western schools. The western schools can take Gonzaga and St. Mary's as basketball onlys, a few MWC schools and BYU and you have a great conference in two sports. Same with the east, a few schools from the A10, CUSA, MAC (like VCU, URI, UMass, ODU, Marshall, Buffalo, Army & Navy football only). From there, both leagues could build an amazing culture, long term rivalries, have exciting tourneys more fans could get to.

I could see the American being the first conference to experiment with a two division, coast to coast, 20+ team format. Instead of trying to compete directly with the power schools, generate value a different way by creating a true best of the rest league that always has a handful of teams looking to make a national title run. You're never going to catch the power conferences pound for pound, so give media outlets and recruits a different reason to value the American that highly. You could have games only within your division, even in basketball, until the tournament. That creates those rivalries, that culture, but keeps major competitors across the country within the American brand and in association with one another, even if they don't meet on the field or court for years.

(I also wonder, if it was a league of say 30 schools, if the NCAA would give an auto bid to both divisions)

The Big East had good basketball, better coaches, and geographic proximity. The problem is that the good teams in most geographic locations have already coalesced into the P5. The leftover good all-sports schools are spread out all over hells half acre. So, the AAC is what it is. It will never have the rivalries created from geographic compression. I will never have a MSG type tournament that is easily accessible to most of the conference. We might end up with a something decent in Frisco simply because it is in the one location of the AAC where the league actually has a small hub of geographically coherence. We will see if that pans out.

Otherwise---we are basically a best of the rest spare parts league that will rely on local fan bases to fill seats. Its largely a made for TV league. It may lack rivalries and easy travel---but it has excellent athletic programs with big G5 budgets. Becasue of those quality athletic programs---AAC champions in every sport will be competitive with the best in all of college sports. For now---a high level of performance and a high level of exposure will have to suffice for the schools of the AAC.

My stance is that being a best of the rest league wasn't the right strategy. I think two good leagues could've been created out of the core of the American that might not have been as strong on the field/court right out of the gate, but had the potential to create amazing conferences with great cultures. There are a lot of schools that are well positioned to compete with the developing landscape of college sports, and I think the conference presidents should've planned more strategically instead of hobbling together the dozen best football programs east of the Rockies. What was the best option for the 2013 season probably wasn't the best long term solution.

Yes--2 leagues could have been created. But to do that---you water down the product by adding schools with lower budgets and brands. What you are describing is EXACTLY what CUSA did---which was a HUGE error. They went for geographic coherence rather than "best possible collection of schools" (which would have been the best course and easily accomplished by simply completing the planned MW merger). It was a massive step backwards for that conference--and a step that was completely unnecessary.


The only way geography returns to being the primary focus for G5 teams is if G5 TV money completely dies and there is no longer any financial advantage to producing NCAA bids tournament and access bowl teams. At that point---travel costs and traveling fans become important to filling seats (like in the old days). That game day reliance on self generating revenue and minimizing travel expenses is why small compact conferences were the rule in the early days of college sports.

Comparing the CUSA to the eventual AAC is apples and oranges. The core of SMU, Houston, Tulsa, and Tulane probably could've partnered with a handful of MWC schools plus Wichita, Gonzaga, and Mary's (although everyone was gun shy about basketball onlys at the time, we still largely are). The eastern teams could've poached the top CUSA, A10, and MAC brands. Those conferences would both be lightyears ahead of the current CUSA.

Think a west of those 7 schools mentioned plus UNLV, SDSU, Nevada, Boise, and an east of Temple, UConn, Memphis, UCF, USF, Cinci, UMass, ODU, Buffalo, Marshall. I think you're betting on a higher ceiling all around. Obviously this is all hypothetical, who knows if, especially at the time, those MWC schools would've thought there was more value in that than their status quo.