NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 2:21 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5168 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318 ... 345  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:05 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7398
Mark Blaudschun blog article regarding BE FB league rebranding and expansion.He says league "should" have new name by this Saturday at http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=6318


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:43 am 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 64
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Dennis wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
tkalmus wrote:
Dennis wrote:
freaked4collegefb wrote:
Mark Blaudschun blog article discussing new BE FB name and ECU situation at http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=6023

While it certainly appears that ECU will be elevated to full member, I question whether that makes sense.

Historically, ECU has a worse basketball RPI than any team in the conference, including Tulane, UCF, and USF, current season not withstanding. Why would the basketball schools (UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, Memphis) accept a school that will lower the conference's basketball RPI, when there is really no need to do so?

As a full member, ECU would get a full share of the conference's media revenue. While the difference may be only a few hundred thousand dollars per year, this conference cannot really afford to pay more than necessary. And why pay ECU to lower the conference's basketball RPI?

There are no all-sports conference members anywhere close to ECU, making significant olympic sport travel cost savings unlikely. ECU is a flight trip, not a bus trip. Stopping at ECU to get another game on a road trip would mean another flight (or two) for the traveling team, and they could just as easily stop at Memphis, Temple, or Cincinnati. In any case, cost of a flight often has more to do with the particular lane than with distance.

Ideal conference size may be 10 full members plus 2 football-only members. Why go to 11 + 1?


I've made this very same point before too, but the general consensus is that its "the right thing to do" so they'll do it...

If I was the commish or a schools AD/prez I'd think long and hard about this issue before adding them as full members. If Navy backs out then I tend to think that it would be a no brainer to invite them because they'll want 12 all sports members but if Navy joins up it makes a lot of sense to just stay at 10.

tkalmus wrote:
Unless they want 10 all sports members and 2 fb onlys (ECU/Navy) 11 just isn't as clean (I know the Big Ten did it, but that was for Penn St, and the MWC is doing it but that was to take back BSU/SDSU and to help out long time rival Hawaii's fb)

East Carolina also doesn't really have much nonfb success 0 NCAA championships, 2 NAIA titles (57' men's swimming, '61 baseball), men's ball 2 NAIA & 2 NCAA tourney appearances (lost all four in 1st round) and in 2010 also lost first round of the CIT, women's bball made the NCAA tourney twice (and lost both time in the 1st round), baseball has made the NCAA tourney 25 time but has only gone to 1 super regional (and lost), softball has made the tourney twice but never won a regional, and it sounds like their golf and track are okay (a few all Americans, Olympians, and NCAA individual appearance) but nothing that special.

Couple all that with a small media market and I could see them not getting an invite and letting the current all sports members play round robin in bball, they have 8 for baseball/softball which is enough to sponsor the sports, and plenty for all the normal sports (they may even still be able to sponsor women's rowing) the only benefit to the Big East would be in swimming where they may be a member or two shy of being able two comfortably sponsoring the sport.

It's stupid to tell a school no that was all sports in a conf w/....
Cincinnati
Louisville
USF
Tulane
Memphis
Houston

TCU
S.Miss
UAB
UCF(added in 05)
SMU(added in 05)
Tulsa(added in 05)


...for a conf w/
Cincinnati
USF(3 tourneys)
Tulane(3 tourneys, last 1996)
Memphis
Houston(2 tourneys in last 21 years or 1 in 20)
UCF(4 tourneys)
SMU(last tourney in 1993)
Tulsa
(last tourney 2003)
Temple
UConn
Navy(fb)
ECU(2 tourneys, last 1993)

In what world are UConn, Temple so mighty that they trump Louisville, TCU? I'd take that old CUSA over this A12 and ECU good enough for that but not this? ECU middle of the pack bball, SMU, Tulane not better, Houston either. They made it to 1 tourney in 20some years so that's 1 better than ECUs last in 93.


This may be "beating a dead horse" at this point, but just to set the record straight, ECU basketball is not "middle of the pack" - they are bottom feeders.

C-USA winning % 2001 - 2011
Memphis 82.3%
Cincinnati 73.4%
Charlotte 67.2%
Marquette 65.6%
Louisville 65.6%
UTEP 64.9%
UAB 63.9%
Tulsa 59.6%
St. Louis 51.6%
DePaul 50.0%
Marshall 50.0%
Houston 49.4%
UCF 48.9%
TCU 37.5%
Southern Miss. 37.3%
Tulane 34.8%
South Florida 32.8%
SMU 30.9%
East Carolina 26.6%
Rice 25.5%

No one is surprised that ECU was elevated to full membership, but let's not pretend it was a good decision.

The last couple years they've been around 500, in the world of what have you done for me today. Even under your model that excludes the last 2 years to make the #s work in your favor, they are about the same as SMU, USF, Tulane, all full members. ECU 22-12 this year 15-16 last year


Their conference basketball records the last two years were 5-11 and 9-7, which still leaves their overall winning percentage second worst during their 12 years in the conference. They've been slightly better the last few years under Jeff Lebo, but ECU basketball has not shown the ability to sustain success - nor even mediocrity - long term. This is a bad basketball program.

The fact that this conference already has other bad basketball programs is irrelevant to this discussion because those schools are already full members. In contrast, ECU accepted a football-only membership, so there was no need for this conference to add their bad basketball program, as it will likely lower the conference basketball rating even further.

Once again, elevating ECU to full membership was a bad decision for this conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:58 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1011
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Just wondering. I believe that the old Big East (fb-nBE with name to yet be determined) should also add a second team alongside Tulsa from C-USA for the 2014-15 season, which allows C-USA to get Western Kentucky and another team (maybe South Alabama) from the Sun Belt, which allows the Sun Belt to find two other possible candidates for the Sun Belt (maybe James Madison and Liberty). You know, to make things even and not odd in terms of number pairings (16, 14, 12, 10, etc.)

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:23 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1430
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Just wondering. I believe that the old Big East (fb-nBE with name to yet be determined) should also add a second team alongside Tulsa from C-USA for the 2014-15 season, which allows C-USA to get Western Kentucky and another team (maybe South Alabama) from the Sun Belt, which allows the Sun Belt to find two other possible candidates for the Sun Belt (maybe James Madison and Liberty). You know, to make things even and not odd in terms of number pairings (16, 14, 12, 10, etc.)

CUSA doesn't want to split its money anymore than they have to, they'll have 11 in all sports and 12 in fb with Navy. The only way another team will be added is if Navy decides to stay independent or if Army (or Air Force) decides to join also as a fb only.

Also South Alabama isn't on deck for CUSA expansion. Next in line are Arkansas State, Louisiana, and possibly Georgia St.

Now that may change in a few years but for now those are the top choices if CUSA decided to jump to 16 tomorrow.

And I'm not sure by what you mean "odd" pairings...all conferences have 10/12/14 in fb/bb except the old Big East and MWC which are both setup as 11bb/12fb, and the MAC which is 12bb/13fb. The old Big East and MWC seem content at 11/12 (though both would expand for Army/BYU respectively) and the MAC is always on the lookout for fb only candidates.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:51 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 396
Dennis wrote:
Once again, elevating ECU to full membership was a bad decision for this conference.


It's a question of totality, building rivalries in multiple sports within the conference. This conference's roots were set in hybrid designs--in for this sport, out for that one. It didn't work for the long term, being an ongoing source for conflict and divided interests.
Including ECU as only a fb stepchild is neither healthy for the conference in the long-run, and certainly negative and disjointed for ECU. If the reconfigured conference is to be truly (or near) all-sports, building needs to be inclusive, and all these schools have certain sports with not so flattering records.

Navy is understandable with their Patriot League affiliation and their agreement with the fb/nBE, if they keep it, as their preferable structure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:00 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1011
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
tkalmus wrote:
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Just wondering. I believe that the old Big East (fb-nBE with name to yet be determined) should also add a second team alongside Tulsa from C-USA for the 2014-15 season, which allows C-USA to get Western Kentucky and another team (maybe South Alabama) from the Sun Belt, which allows the Sun Belt to find two other possible candidates for the Sun Belt (maybe James Madison and Liberty). You know, to make things even and not odd in terms of number pairings (16, 14, 12, 10, etc.)

CUSA doesn't want to split its money anymore than they have to, they'll have 11 in all sports and 12 in fb with Navy. The only way another team will be added is if Navy decides to stay independent or if Army (or Air Force) decides to join also as a fb only.

Also South Alabama isn't on deck for CUSA expansion. Next in line are Arkansas State, Louisiana, and possibly Georgia St.

Now that may change in a few years but for now those are the top choices if CUSA decided to jump to 16 tomorrow.

And I'm not sure by what you mean "odd" pairings...all conferences have 10/12/14 in fb/bb except the old Big East and MWC which are both setup as 11bb/12fb, and the MAC which is 12bb/13fb. The old Big East and MWC seem content at 11/12 (though both would expand for Army/BYU respectively) and the MAC is always on the lookout for fb only candidates.


First, I personally wanna see in-state rivalries within the Sun Belt like Arkansas State vs. UALR and ULL vs. ULM, in a basis of conference play. Second, I want to see division play for the TBD conference (old Big East) once it has 12 teams for all-sports (aside from the football side with Navy as the football-only member). Hope this helps clarify a sort of things.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:39 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
Dennis wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Dennis wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
tkalmus wrote:
Dennis wrote:
freaked4collegefb wrote:
Mark Blaudschun blog article discussing new BE FB name and ECU situation at http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=6023

While it certainly appears that ECU will be elevated to full member, I question whether that makes sense.

Historically, ECU has a worse basketball RPI than any team in the conference, including Tulane, UCF, and USF, current season not withstanding. Why would the basketball schools (UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, Memphis) accept a school that will lower the conference's basketball RPI, when there is really no need to do so?

As a full member, ECU would get a full share of the conference's media revenue. While the difference may be only a few hundred thousand dollars per year, this conference cannot really afford to pay more than necessary. And why pay ECU to lower the conference's basketball RPI?

There are no all-sports conference members anywhere close to ECU, making significant olympic sport travel cost savings unlikely. ECU is a flight trip, not a bus trip. Stopping at ECU to get another game on a road trip would mean another flight (or two) for the traveling team, and they could just as easily stop at Memphis, Temple, or Cincinnati. In any case, cost of a flight often has more to do with the particular lane than with distance.

Ideal conference size may be 10 full members plus 2 football-only members. Why go to 11 + 1?


I've made this very same point before too, but the general consensus is that its "the right thing to do" so they'll do it...

If I was the commish or a schools AD/prez I'd think long and hard about this issue before adding them as full members. If Navy backs out then I tend to think that it would be a no brainer to invite them because they'll want 12 all sports members but if Navy joins up it makes a lot of sense to just stay at 10.

tkalmus wrote:
Unless they want 10 all sports members and 2 fb onlys (ECU/Navy) 11 just isn't as clean (I know the Big Ten did it, but that was for Penn St, and the MWC is doing it but that was to take back BSU/SDSU and to help out long time rival Hawaii's fb)

East Carolina also doesn't really have much nonfb success 0 NCAA championships, 2 NAIA titles (57' men's swimming, '61 baseball), men's ball 2 NAIA & 2 NCAA tourney appearances (lost all four in 1st round) and in 2010 also lost first round of the CIT, women's bball made the NCAA tourney twice (and lost both time in the 1st round), baseball has made the NCAA tourney 25 time but has only gone to 1 super regional (and lost), softball has made the tourney twice but never won a regional, and it sounds like their golf and track are okay (a few all Americans, Olympians, and NCAA individual appearance) but nothing that special.

Couple all that with a small media market and I could see them not getting an invite and letting the current all sports members play round robin in bball, they have 8 for baseball/softball which is enough to sponsor the sports, and plenty for all the normal sports (they may even still be able to sponsor women's rowing) the only benefit to the Big East would be in swimming where they may be a member or two shy of being able two comfortably sponsoring the sport.

It's stupid to tell a school no that was all sports in a conf w/....
Cincinnati
Louisville
USF
Tulane
Memphis
Houston

TCU
S.Miss
UAB
UCF(added in 05)
SMU(added in 05)
Tulsa(added in 05)


...for a conf w/
Cincinnati
USF(3 tourneys)
Tulane(3 tourneys, last 1996)
Memphis
Houston(2 tourneys in last 21 years or 1 in 20)
UCF(4 tourneys)
SMU(last tourney in 1993)
Tulsa
(last tourney 2003)
Temple
UConn
Navy(fb)
ECU(2 tourneys, last 1993)

In what world are UConn, Temple so mighty that they trump Louisville, TCU? I'd take that old CUSA over this A12 and ECU good enough for that but not this? ECU middle of the pack bball, SMU, Tulane not better, Houston either. They made it to 1 tourney in 20some years so that's 1 better than ECUs last in 93.


This may be "beating a dead horse" at this point, but just to set the record straight, ECU basketball is not "middle of the pack" - they are bottom feeders.

C-USA winning % 2001 - 2011
Memphis 82.3%
Cincinnati 73.4%
Charlotte 67.2%
Marquette 65.6%
Louisville 65.6%
UTEP 64.9%
UAB 63.9%
Tulsa 59.6%
St. Louis 51.6%
DePaul 50.0%
Marshall 50.0%
Houston 49.4%
UCF 48.9%
TCU 37.5%
Southern Miss. 37.3%
Tulane 34.8%
South Florida 32.8%
SMU 30.9%
East Carolina 26.6%
Rice 25.5%

No one is surprised that ECU was elevated to full membership, but let's not pretend it was a good decision.

The last couple years they've been around 500, in the world of what have you done for me today. Even under your model that excludes the last 2 years to make the #s work in your favor, they are about the same as SMU, USF, Tulane, all full members. ECU 22-12 this year 15-16 last year


Their conference basketball records the last two years were 5-11 and 9-7, which still leaves their overall winning percentage second worst during their 12 years in the conference. They've been slightly better the last few years under Jeff Lebo, but ECU basketball has not shown the ability to sustain success - nor even mediocrity - long term. This is a bad basketball program.

The fact that this conference already has other bad basketball programs is irrelevant to this discussion because those schools are already full members. In contrast, ECU accepted a football-only membership, so there was no need for this conference to add their bad basketball program, as it will likely lower the conference basketball rating even further.

Once again, elevating ECU to full membership was a bad decision for this conference.

It's not irrelevant unless basketball as a whole is irrelevant. You take Tulane, SMU lesser fb programs and lesser basketball programs as a full members but not ECU would have been the dumbest thing the A12 could have done, thus ECU got a full invite. ECU was a full member in CUSA and is a full member of this CUSA w/ a different name, same schools. ECU has a higher RPI than SMU and Tulane? Yes, so they won't lower it, making sh*t up to make a point does nothing for your argument. You choose to ignore the facts that Tulane and SMU have sucked for 20 years, you ignore the last year of ECU basketball to make a pointless point. Why b/c they're in for all sports. Thank god you're not in charge, you'd make the conference worse than it is.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:54 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
keep making stuff up about how they'll bring down the RPI

12 Memphis 19-0 30-4 0.6283 73 0.5477
102 UCF 9-7 18-11 0.5379 122 0.5230

104 East Carolina 9-8 22-12 0.5368 92 0.5376
128 Tulsa 9-9 16-15 0.5209 123 0.5222
178 Tulane 7-11 18-14 0.4948 202 0.4803
197 Houston 8-10 18-12 0.4804 302 0.4457
219 South. Methodist 5-12 14-17 0.4660 235 0.4708

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:54 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1430
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
keep making stuff up about how they'll bring down the RPI

12 Memphis 19-0 30-4 0.6283 73 0.5477
102 UCF 9-7 18-11 0.5379 122 0.5230

104 East Carolina 9-8 22-12 0.5368 92 0.5376
128 Tulsa 9-9 16-15 0.5209 123 0.5222
178 Tulane 7-11 18-14 0.4948 202 0.4803
197 Houston 8-10 18-12 0.4804 302 0.4457
219 South. Methodist 5-12 14-17 0.4660 235 0.4708

So let's just add more sub 100 RPIs? ECU's nonfb sports are sub par, so saying the rest of the league is worse doesn't help the arguement. They have markets while ECU doesn't. I agree with him ECU's full invite doesn't make sense from a business stand point. Talking about good will and hurt feelings is best left to Oprah. ;)

Still saying their RPI is bad w/o looking it up is a rookie move. :D

louisvillecard01 wrote:
Dennis wrote:
Once again, elevating ECU to full membership was a bad decision for this conference.


It's a question of totality, building rivalries in multiple sports within the conference. This conference's roots were set in hybrid designs--in for this sport, out for that one. It didn't work for the long term, being an ongoing source for conflict and divided interests.
Including ECU as only a fb stepchild is neither healthy for the conference in the long-run, and certainly negative and disjointed for ECU. If the reconfigured conference is to be truly (or near) all-sports, building needs to be inclusive, and all these schools have certain sports with not so flattering records.

Navy is understandable with their Patriot League affiliation and their agreement with the fb/nBE, if they keep it, as their preferable structure.


Just because it happened doesn't make it the smartest move. A lot can be said for playing round robin in all non-fb sports and building rivalries with teams like UConn, Cincy, USF, and Temple which some of the new CUSA additions don't know as well. Adding ECU as an 11th makes that hard to do.

If Navy wasn't in the conference and they had 11 full members them obviously I'd be on board with adding ECU. But Navy is here (we think) so what's the harm in leaving them as fb only members. If they want to go back to CUSA then fine add UMass as a fb only.

In all honesty, I wonder if ECU actually ran the numbers on keep the fb only invite and parking their sports in the SoCon which can basically be a bus league for them.

Big payday in fb with lots of exposure...check
More competitive in nonfb sports with less travel cost and higher post season chances...check
Feel like less of a man...apparently

The only thing hurt here would be ECU's pride, and yeah that means something but as a business decision I think it was poor.

But none of this really matters anymore, its done, let's just move on.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:55 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1541
Ummh, Witchita State, who dropped fb years ago, but otherwise...

It's C-USA redux. Expecting so much greater collective heights is not in the cards. Let them pull together the best they can. East Carolina is a FULL part of it and good for them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:16 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1011
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
sec03 wrote:
Ummh, Witchita State, who dropped fb years ago, but otherwise...

It's C-USA redux. Expecting so much greater collective heights is not in the cards. Let them pull together the best they can. East Carolina is a FULL part of it and good for them.


Things would had been different for Wichita State athletics if the Shockers hadn't dropped football, and they might follow the footsteps of Tulsa (who went Independent status in the FBS level, while still an all-sports member of the MVC for most of its non-football sports, to later join the WAC and later to C-USA in the almost 20 years of span), but either in the I-A (FBS) level or the I-AA (FCS) level.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:16 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN

American Athletic Conference is new name for former Big East, sources told @ESPN


AAC vs ACC hoping people will mix them up to the benefit of the AAC

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:00 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1011
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN

American Athletic Conference is new name for former Big East, sources told @ESPN


AAC vs ACC hoping people will mix them up to the benefit of the AAC


So it's official then.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:08 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN

American Athletic Conference is new name for former Big East, sources told @ESPN


AAC vs ACC hoping people will mix them up to the benefit of the AAC


Seems kinda D-II-ish doesn't it? Only the SWAC (because SWC was taken), MAAC (because MAC was taken), MEAC, and CAA use the word Athletic in their conference names. The conferences that use Athletic in their name are mostly D-II and below. When I hear athletic conference in your name I tend to think your conference isn't very good at said athletics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:11 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1011
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN

American Athletic Conference is new name for former Big East, sources told @ESPN


AAC vs ACC hoping people will mix them up to the benefit of the AAC


Seems kinda D-II-ish doesn't it? Only the SWAC (because SWC was taken), MAAC (because MAC was taken), MEAC, and CAA use the word Athletic in their conference names. The conferences that use Athletic in their name are mostly D-II and below. When I hear athletic conference in your name I tend to think your conference isn't very good at said athletics.


Yeah. But don't forget that the WAC is also a D-I conference with "Athletic" in its name.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5168 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318 ... 345  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group