(10-17-2022 11:29 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 10:00 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:32 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  It’s all sweet playing their easy C-USA schedules but once they have to play AAC teams week in and week out then we will truly see what they are capable of. It will more than likely be a rough few years for the C-USA teams though.

This is about the biggest pile of feces posted on this board. Moving from CUSA to the AAC without UCF, Houston, and Cincinnati is just a tick above being a lateral move.

I wish the CUSA6 arrived at the same conclusion and stayed put.

Give us Aresco and they would go back....

(10-17-2022 01:39 PM)MeepMeep Wrote:  Quality thread

I do think a couple teams are handling the coaching situations badly. UAB got hosed by Bill Clark last second and nobody faults them for that, but I don’t think they’ve even hinted at looking for a replacement and Vince isn’t it. UNT should have parted with Littrell this past offseason but didn’t. Unless they win out, he’s likely gone after the season and they open AAC play on a rebuild. These decisions are really gonna affect next them next year when conference play becomes a lot tougher.

You couldn't be more wrong about UAB. UAB AD has gone on the record to talk at length about the replacement process. It is a national search, and by his account has already started to some degree. Vincent will only be chosen if he is the best choice.

Link to latest interview... Start at 5:30 mark. https://audioboom.com/posts/8173051-10-1...ark-ingram

(10-17-2022 01:39 PM)MeepMeep Wrote:  I do think a couple teams are handling the coaching situations badly. UAB got hosed by Bill Clark last second and nobody faults them for that, but I don’t think they’ve even hinted at looking for a replacement and Vince isn’t it.

As much time as you spend on BlazerTalk you really couldn't have gotten this anymore wrong.

(10-17-2022 08:32 AM)Thewavefan Wrote:  It’s all sweet playing their easy C-USA schedules but once they have to play AAC teams week in and week out then we will truly see what they are capable of. It will more than likely be a rough few years for the C-USA teams though.

So next year Rice trades playing:
Houston, UAB, and FAU

for playing:
Houston, UAB, and FAU?

Ok got it.

We do have a soft spot in the schedule coming up, maybe we can make a little more hay.

(10-17-2022 04:41 PM)ICB Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 01:39 PM)MeepMeep Wrote:  Quality thread

I do think a couple teams are handling the coaching situations badly. UAB got hosed by Bill Clark last second and nobody faults them for that, but I don’t think they’ve even hinted at looking for a replacement and Vince isn’t it. UNT should have parted with Littrell this past offseason but didn’t. Unless they win out, he’s likely gone after the season and they open AAC play on a rebuild. These decisions are really gonna affect next them next year when conference play becomes a lot tougher.

You couldn't be more wrong about UAB. UAB AD has gone on the record to talk at length about the replacement process. It is a national search, and by his account has already started to some degree. Vincent will only be chosen if he is the best choice.

Link to latest interview... Start at 5:30 mark. https://audioboom.com/posts/8173051-10-1...ark-ingram

Thanks for the link, that was a good listen.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 10:59 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 09:47 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  UTSA 5-2
UAB 4-2
UNT 4-3
Rice 3-3
FAU 3-4
Charlotte 1-5

All 6 have now played at least half of their schedule. So AAC fans, which C-USA6 programs are out preforming your expectations, and which are underachieving based on what you expected them to do this season. Give them a grade A through F. Just wondering how expectations and perceptions may have changed now that games have been played. I hope to read some constructive comments from our future AAC conference-mates. Thanks.

The CUSA6, as a group, have outperformed expectations this season, and that's a very welcome sign.

Not sure how to grade them - - should we grade their progress over the past two years, or their W-L record?
......................program...........current...........2022
......................progress:.......W-L record.....bowl team?
UTSA 5-2...............A......................A-...............lock
UAB 4-2.................B......................B+..........near-lock
UNT 4-3.................B......................B.............possible
Rice 3-3.................A......................B.............possible
FAU 3-4.................C......................B-............possible
UNCC 1-5..............C-.....................C-.............unlikely

Average:...............B (good)............B (good)

Another way to gauge their progress is to estimate how many bowl teams there will be among them this year. According to Massey's ratings, there are likely to be 3 or 4 bowl teams from this group.

UTSA and UAB are expected to qualify for bowl games. In addition, 1 or 2* of these 3 teams are predicted by Massey to play in bowl games: UNT, Rice, FAU.

At minimum, that's the same as the % of bowl teams that the AAC remainers are likely to have.

. . . . . . .

*Key games:

11/19: FAU @ MTSU (FAU is favored to beat UTEP & FIU)

11/26: UNT @ Rice (UNT & Rice are both favored to have 5 wins before 11/26)

LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

I'm not sure that anyone needs to dispel that notion, since the CUSA6 were obviously chosen to meet the priorities of the network, in particular.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet.

Many AAC fans are thankful that UTSA, UAB, and UNT will be playing in the conference.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  ...and their status this season (is) irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

It's no more irrelevant than the status of Houston, Cincy, and UCF's programs is to the Big XII's fan base. You may not be one of them, but there are plenty of fans who care about the 2023-24 (and beyond) prospects of both conferences.

(10-17-2022 12:48 PM)ghostofclt! Wrote:  clt says we are playing better and are a big favorite this weekend.

please dont delete this.

Gotta a bye week, do ya'?

I agree, though...UNCC is definitely above expectations.

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 10:59 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 09:47 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  UTSA 5-2
UAB 4-2
UNT 4-3
Rice 3-3
FAU 3-4
Charlotte 1-5

All 6 have now played at least half of their schedule. So AAC fans, which C-USA6 programs are out preforming your expectations, and which are underachieving based on what you expected them to do this season. Give them a grade A through F. Just wondering how expectations and perceptions may have changed now that games have been played. I hope to read some constructive comments from our future AAC conference-mates. Thanks.

The CUSA6, as a group, have outperformed expectations this season, and that's a very welcome sign.

Not sure how to grade them - - should we grade their progress over the past two years, or their W-L record?
......................program...........current...........2022
......................progress:.......W-L record.....bowl team?
UTSA 5-2...............A......................A-...............lock
UAB 4-2.................B......................B+..........near-lock
UNT 4-3.................B......................B.............possible
Rice 3-3.................A......................B.............possible
FAU 3-4.................C......................B-............possible
UNCC 1-5..............C-.....................C-.............unlikely

Average:...............B (good)............B (good)

Another way to gauge their progress is to estimate how many bowl teams there will be among them this year. According to Massey's ratings, there are likely to be 3 or 4 bowl teams from this group.

UTSA and UAB are expected to qualify for bowl games. In addition, 1 or 2* of these 3 teams are predicted by Massey to play in bowl games: UNT, Rice, FAU.

At minimum, that's the same as the % of bowl teams that the AAC remainers are likely to have.

. . . . . . .

*Key games:

11/19: FAU @ MTSU (FAU is favored to beat UTEP & FIU)

11/26: UNT @ Rice (UNT & Rice are both favored to have 5 wins before 11/26)

LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

Joe,

I've posted my grades above. I'm curious what would your corresponding grades be - - about the same, or perhaps a bit higher in some cases? You probably know more about the program histories and thus about how their improvement should be graded.

(10-17-2022 08:34 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

I'm not sure that anyone needs to dispel that notion, since the CUSA6 were obviously chosen to meet the priorities of the network, in particular.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet.

Many AAC fans are thankful that UTSA, UAB, and UNT will be playing in the conference.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  ...and their status this season (is) irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

It's no more irrelevant than the status of Houston, Cincy, and UCF's programs is to the Big XII's fan base. You may not be one of them, but there are plenty of fans who care about the 2023-24 (and beyond) prospects of both conferences.

Gimme Charlotte by 2TD to win but not cover.

(10-17-2022 08:34 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

I'm not sure that anyone needs to dispel that notion, since the CUSA6 were obviously chosen to meet the priorities of the network, in particular.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet.

Many AAC fans are thankful that UTSA, UAB, and UNT will be playing in the conference.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  ...and their status this season (is) irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

It's no more irrelevant than the status of Houston, Cincy, and UCF's programs is to the Big XII's fan base. You may not be one of them, but there are plenty of fans who care about the 2023-24 (and beyond) prospects of both conferences.

1. You confirmed my point. Most newcomers are not worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit. They need to act like it rather than expressing bravado like the nonsense they are presently peers with AAC schools when they are not even official members.

2. Are the CUSA6 official members of the AAC now? If not, anything they do this season is irrelevant as it does not carry over into next season.

3. The departed three are vastly more important to legacy members than the non-members this season for (among other reasons) their contributions to the coffers and impact on the standings.

4. AAC fans caring about news from the schools presently in CUSA are welcome to visit the CUSA board. It is not hard to access (Here)

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 10:59 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 09:47 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  UTSA 5-2
UAB 4-2
UNT 4-3
Rice 3-3
FAU 3-4
Charlotte 1-5

All 6 have now played at least half of their schedule. So AAC fans, which C-USA6 programs are out preforming your expectations, and which are underachieving based on what you expected them to do this season. Give them a grade A through F. Just wondering how expectations and perceptions may have changed now that games have been played. I hope to read some constructive comments from our future AAC conference-mates. Thanks.

The CUSA6, as a group, have outperformed expectations this season, and that's a very welcome sign.

Not sure how to grade them - - should we grade their progress over the past two years, or their W-L record?
......................program...........current...........2022
......................progress:.......W-L record.....bowl team?
UTSA 5-2...............A......................A-...............lock
UAB 4-2.................B......................B+..........near-lock
UNT 4-3.................B......................B.............possible
Rice 3-3.................A......................B.............possible
FAU 3-4.................C......................B-............possible
UNCC 1-5..............C-.....................C-.............unlikely

Average:...............B (good)............B (good)

Another way to gauge their progress is to estimate how many bowl teams there will be among them this year. According to Massey's ratings, there are likely to be 3 or 4 bowl teams from this group.

UTSA and UAB are expected to qualify for bowl games. In addition, 1 or 2* of these 3 teams are predicted by Massey to play in bowl games: UNT, Rice, FAU.

At minimum, that's the same as the % of bowl teams that the AAC remainers are likely to have.

. . . . . . .

*Key games:

11/19: FAU @ MTSU (FAU is favored to beat UTEP & FIU)

11/26: UNT @ Rice (UNT & Rice are both favored to have 5 wins before 11/26)

LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

LOL, your boasting of a moral victory cannot highlight the unworthiness of NTU compared to other available candidates any better than the most elegant refutation. Thanks for making my point. Besides, NTU cannot be a peer with any AAC school now since NTU is not an AAC member.

I understand your enthusiasm with escaping CUSA6 with insufficient performance compared to alternatives, but legacy AAC fans dread next season like a long, dark, cold night void of much hope of a sunrise.

We (FAU), certainly, schmitt the bed this season. On the other hand, our 3-4 record could have been 5-2 as we had found ways to not score on game winning drives at the end of games at Ohio and Purdue. Of course, if we played better in respective third quarters, we would not be having this conversation.

(10-18-2022 08:13 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:34 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

I'm not sure that anyone needs to dispel that notion, since the CUSA6 were obviously chosen to meet the priorities of the network, in particular.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet.

Many AAC fans are thankful that UTSA, UAB, and UNT will be playing in the conference.

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  ...and their status this season (is) irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

It's no more irrelevant than the status of Houston, Cincy, and UCF's programs is to the Big XII's fan base. You may not be one of them, but there are plenty of fans who care about the 2023-24 (and beyond) prospects of both conferences.

1. You confirmed my point. Most newcomers are not worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit. They need to act like it rather than expressing bravado like the nonsense they are presently peers with AAC schools when they are not even official members.

2. Are the CUSA6 official members of the AAC now? If not, anything they do this season is irrelevant as it does not carry over into next season.

3. The departed three are vastly more important to legacy members than the non-members this season for (among other reasons) their contributions to the coffers and impact on the standings.

4. AAC fans caring about news from the schools presently in CUSA are welcome to visit the CUSA board. It is not hard to access (Here)

clt looks forward to 7.1.23

(10-18-2022 08:26 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 10:59 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 09:47 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  UTSA 5-2
UAB 4-2
UNT 4-3
Rice 3-3
FAU 3-4
Charlotte 1-5

All 6 have now played at least half of their schedule. So AAC fans, which C-USA6 programs are out preforming your expectations, and which are underachieving based on what you expected them to do this season. Give them a grade A through F. Just wondering how expectations and perceptions may have changed now that games have been played. I hope to read some constructive comments from our future AAC conference-mates. Thanks.

The CUSA6, as a group, have outperformed expectations this season, and that's a very welcome sign.

Not sure how to grade them - - should we grade their progress over the past two years, or their W-L record?
......................program...........current...........2022
......................progress:.......W-L record.....bowl team?
UTSA 5-2...............A......................A-...............lock
UAB 4-2.................B......................B+..........near-lock
UNT 4-3.................B......................B.............possible
Rice 3-3.................A......................B.............possible
FAU 3-4.................C......................B-............possible
UNCC 1-5..............C-.....................C-.............unlikely

Average:...............B (good)............B (good)

Another way to gauge their progress is to estimate how many bowl teams there will be among them this year. According to Massey's ratings, there are likely to be 3 or 4 bowl teams from this group.

UTSA and UAB are expected to qualify for bowl games. In addition, 1 or 2* of these 3 teams are predicted by Massey to play in bowl games: UNT, Rice, FAU.

At minimum, that's the same as the % of bowl teams that the AAC remainers are likely to have.

. . . . . . .

*Key games:

11/19: FAU @ MTSU (FAU is favored to beat UTEP & FIU)

11/26: UNT @ Rice (UNT & Rice are both favored to have 5 wins before 11/26)

LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

LOL, your boasting of a moral victory cannot highlight the unworthiness of NTU compared to other available candidates any better than the most elegant refutation. Thanks for making my point. Besides, NTU cannot be a peer with any AAC school now since NTU is not an AAC member.

I understand your enthusiasm with escaping CUSA6 with insufficient performance compared to alternatives, but legacy AAC fans dread next season like a long, dark, cold night void of much hope of a sunrise.

No moral victory. We lost. I made that clear. But, Memphis certainly didn't dominate UNT in that game, which from all your crowing should have been an easy win. No, UNT and Memphis do not share a conference at the moment, but we have in the past and will again soon. Even so, on the football field we are peers. Because on the football field Memphis is not some power program.

(10-18-2022 12:06 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 10:59 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 09:47 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  UTSA 5-2
UAB 4-2
UNT 4-3
Rice 3-3
FAU 3-4
Charlotte 1-5

All 6 have now played at least half of their schedule. So AAC fans, which C-USA6 programs are out preforming your expectations, and which are underachieving based on what you expected them to do this season. Give them a grade A through F. Just wondering how expectations and perceptions may have changed now that games have been played. I hope to read some constructive comments from our future AAC conference-mates. Thanks.

The CUSA6, as a group, have outperformed expectations this season, and that's a very welcome sign.

Not sure how to grade them - - should we grade their progress over the past two years, or their W-L record?
......................program...........current...........2022
......................progress:.......W-L record.....bowl team?
UTSA 5-2...............A......................A-...............lock
UAB 4-2.................B......................B+..........near-lock
UNT 4-3.................B......................B.............possible
Rice 3-3.................A......................B.............possible
FAU 3-4.................C......................B-............possible
UNCC 1-5..............C-.....................C-.............unlikely

Average:...............B (good)............B (good)

Another way to gauge their progress is to estimate how many bowl teams there will be among them this year. According to Massey's ratings, there are likely to be 3 or 4 bowl teams from this group.

UTSA and UAB are expected to qualify for bowl games. In addition, 1 or 2* of these 3 teams are predicted by Massey to play in bowl games: UNT, Rice, FAU.

At minimum, that's the same as the % of bowl teams that the AAC remainers are likely to have.

. . . . . . .

*Key games:

11/19: FAU @ MTSU (FAU is favored to beat UTEP & FIU)

11/26: UNT @ Rice (UNT & Rice are both favored to have 5 wins before 11/26)

LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

Joe,

I've posted my grades above. I'm curious what would your corresponding grades be - - about the same, or perhaps a bit higher in some cases? You probably know more about the program histories and thus about how their improvement should be graded.

I thought your comments were well thought out and helpful. Thanks. As for how I would grade out the C-USA6, I'm probably a little tougher on our group. I just feel like we have to be better and prove we deserve our spots.

UTSA 5-2...............A (Could have earned an A+ if they could have pulled off the win over Houston and made the loss to Texas a little closer.)
Rice 3-3.................A (Didn't expect much from Rice, so wins over ULL & UAB earn them big points from me.)
UAB 4-2.................B- (Liberty is a tough out this season, so a 7 point loss isn't too bad, but they get dinged for the Rice loss.)
UNT 4-3.................D+ (0-2 verses AAC programs & the loss to UNLV was embarrassing. UNT is not as good as their record.)
FAU 3-4.................D (FAU is regressing under Taggart & the bad loss to UNT is troubling.)
UNCC 1-5..............F (Just can't give a passing grade for a 1-6 record.)

(10-18-2022 06:23 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-18-2022 08:26 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-16-2022 10:59 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  The CUSA6, as a group, have outperformed expectations this season, and that's a very welcome sign.

Not sure how to grade them - - should we grade their progress over the past two years, or their W-L record?
......................program...........current...........2022
......................progress:.......W-L record.....bowl team?
UTSA 5-2...............A......................A-...............lock
UAB 4-2.................B......................B+..........near-lock
UNT 4-3.................B......................B.............possible
Rice 3-3.................A......................B.............possible
FAU 3-4.................C......................B-............possible
UNCC 1-5..............C-.....................C-.............unlikely

Average:...............B (good)............B (good)

Another way to gauge their progress is to estimate how many bowl teams there will be among them this year. According to Massey's ratings, there are likely to be 3 or 4 bowl teams from this group.

UTSA and UAB are expected to qualify for bowl games. In addition, 1 or 2* of these 3 teams are predicted by Massey to play in bowl games: UNT, Rice, FAU.

At minimum, that's the same as the % of bowl teams that the AAC remainers are likely to have.

. . . . . . .

*Key games:

11/19: FAU @ MTSU (FAU is favored to beat UTEP & FIU)

11/26: UNT @ Rice (UNT & Rice are both favored to have 5 wins before 11/26)

LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

LOL, your boasting of a moral victory cannot highlight the unworthiness of NTU compared to other available candidates any better than the most elegant refutation. Thanks for making my point. Besides, NTU cannot be a peer with any AAC school now since NTU is not an AAC member.

I understand your enthusiasm with escaping CUSA6 with insufficient performance compared to alternatives, but legacy AAC fans dread next season like a long, dark, cold night void of much hope of a sunrise.

No moral victory. We lost. I made that clear. But, Memphis certainly didn't dominate UNT in that game, which from all your crowing should have been an easy win. No, UNT and Memphis do not share a conference at the moment, but we have in the past and will again soon. Even so, on the football field we are peers. Because on the football field Memphis is not some power program.

In our exchanges I have never asserted Memphis is a football powerhouse nor have I ever boasted about the Tiger’s relative success. The Tigers are. however, better than UNT although that is a modest accomplishment at best.

My points have been consistently and repeated stated, but somehow it eludes you. Let’s try again. Simply put; performance metrics indicate UNT is a liability, a drogue, a fetter, a burden to the AAC. And the AAC could have done better.

(10-18-2022 07:24 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-18-2022 06:23 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-18-2022 08:26 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 08:28 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  LOL, there is nothing to celebrate or anything noteworthy. The abundance of bowls means almost all squads with a 6-6 or better record obtain invitations and wins are easy to obtain in enfeebled CUAS.

Please dispel the notion most newcomers are worthy of AAC invitation based on performance merit rather than by direction of the Mouse.

Besides, they are thankfully not AAC members yet and their status this season irrelevant on a board dedicated to the AAC, IMO.

Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

LOL, your boasting of a moral victory cannot highlight the unworthiness of NTU compared to other available candidates any better than the most elegant refutation. Thanks for making my point. Besides, NTU cannot be a peer with any AAC school now since NTU is not an AAC member.

I understand your enthusiasm with escaping CUSA6 with insufficient performance compared to alternatives, but legacy AAC fans dread next season like a long, dark, cold night void of much hope of a sunrise.

No moral victory. We lost. I made that clear. But, Memphis certainly didn't dominate UNT in that game, which from all your crowing should have been an easy win. No, UNT and Memphis do not share a conference at the moment, but we have in the past and will again soon. Even so, on the football field we are peers. Because on the football field Memphis is not some power program.

In our exchanges I have never asserted Memphis is a football powerhouse nor have I ever boasted about the Tiger’s relative success. The Tigers are. however, better than UNT although that is a modest accomplishment at best.

My points have been consistently and repeated stated, but somehow it eludes you. Let’s try again. Simply put; performance metrics indicate UNT is a liability, a drogue, a fetter, a burden to the AAC. And the AAC could have done better.

Wow. It must suck to be you. I hope your life gets better. I will only add this.... If the AAC could have done better, they would have done better. It's not like the AAC chose a lesser option. They took the best that was available. Aresco's no idiot.

I look forward to making someone even more bitter when we all join.

This will be fun

(10-18-2022 08:31 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-18-2022 07:24 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-18-2022 06:23 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(10-18-2022 08:26 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-17-2022 06:56 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Ha! I hate to break it to you, but Memphis only beat UNT by 10 points about 3 weeks ago in Memphis. So Memphis is a peer in athletics. Good luck with the rest of your season. I'm looking forward to next season in the AAC.

Aside from Charlotte, the C-USA6 are dominating the rest of the C-USA competition. WKU is the only other program in C-USA that is playing well this season.

LOL, your boasting of a moral victory cannot highlight the unworthiness of NTU compared to other available candidates any better than the most elegant refutation. Thanks for making my point. Besides, NTU cannot be a peer with any AAC school now since NTU is not an AAC member.

I understand your enthusiasm with escaping CUSA6 with insufficient performance compared to alternatives, but legacy AAC fans dread next season like a long, dark, cold night void of much hope of a sunrise.

No moral victory. We lost. I made that clear. But, Memphis certainly didn't dominate UNT in that game, which from all your crowing should have been an easy win. No, UNT and Memphis do not share a conference at the moment, but we have in the past and will again soon. Even so, on the football field we are peers. Because on the football field Memphis is not some power program.

In our exchanges I have never asserted Memphis is a football powerhouse nor have I ever boasted about the Tiger’s relative success. The Tigers are. however, better than UNT although that is a modest accomplishment at best.

My points have been consistently and repeated stated, but somehow it eludes you. Let’s try again. Simply put; performance metrics indicate UNT is a liability, a drogue, a fetter, a burden to the AAC. And the AAC could have done better.

Wow. It must suck to be you. I hope your life gets better. I will only add this.... If the AAC could have done better, they would have done better. It's not like the AAC chose a lesser option. They took the best that was available. Aresco's no idiot.

Personal attacks - the last refuge of those bereft of the powers of persuasion. UNT did not earn their way to the AAC by feats on the field or on the court, but only through the calculations of the bean counters at ESPN. Do not forget it.