American Athletic Conference Realignment & Expansion Thread

tkalmus · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1033

East -
UConn
Temple
Cincy
ECU
UCF
USF

West -
So Miss
Memphis
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Tulsa

Fixed it for you!

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:22 pm

fighting muskie wrote:

Quinn wrote:

Nice to see UMass on a report as a school in the mix.

I disagree. I think UMass would be a terrible add for a number of reasons. In their first year in the big league they struggled on the field and failed to attract more fans as a FBS program than they did as an FCS program. The other thing about UMass is they are most certainly being considered as a travel partner for UConn. UConn and UMass are miles apart in terms of where their programs are at so I doubt this will become a competitive rivalry. Also factor in that UConn has ZERO loyalty to this new Big East and will be out the door as soon as an ACC invite materializes leaving the Big East with an under-performing geographic outlier in UMass. For the time being UConn should be content being travel partners with Temple.

I think Army has to be the first priority for the BE---its a longshot but I think that option has to be exhausted before they look elsewhere.

I am assuming that San Diego St will be gone by the end of the week so considering Fresno St or any other Far West football only option is pointless.

Tulsa is the next program to pursue. They are the most competitive of the options on the table. After that I think the Big East should pass on Rice and pursue UTSA. Yes, they are a start up but they would help cement that western division and unlike Rice, who lives in the past, UTSA has a promising future. Southern Miss could be an option as well.

This sh*t got real :lol:

Side note: UConn has Temple as a travel partner if needed. Those 2 are kinda out of the way in the new footprint.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3752

fighting muskie wrote:

Quinn wrote:

Nice to see UMass on a report as a school in the mix.

I disagree. I think UMass would be a terrible add for a number of reasons. In their first year in the big league they struggled on the field and failed to attract more fans as a FBS program than they did as an FCS program. The other thing about UMass is they are most certainly being considered as a travel partner for UConn. UConn and UMass are miles apart in terms of where their programs are at so I doubt this will become a competitive rivalry. Also factor in that UConn has ZERO loyalty to this new Big East and will be out the door as soon as an ACC invite materializes leaving the Big East with an under-performing geographic outlier in UMass. For the time being UConn should be content being travel partners with Temple.

I think Army has to be the first priority for the BE---its a longshot but I think that option has to be exhausted before they look elsewhere.

I am assuming that San Diego St will be gone by the end of the week so considering Fresno St or any other Far West football only option is pointless.

Tulsa is the next program to pursue. They are the most competitive of the options on the table. After that I think the Big East should pass on Rice and pursue UTSA. Yes, they are a start up but they would help cement that western division and unlike Rice, who lives in the past, UTSA has a promising future. Southern Miss could be an option as well.

The Big East isn't a bus league looking for travel partners. UMass would be considered because with Uconn, it means 3 northeast members...and if UConn is fortunate enough to leave, UMass serves as their in-house replacement, with Temple as the lone other northeast member.

As for Army, you can just do a search for Army in this thread. The Big East has tried to get Army for decades and Army has passed. Army was a member of CUSA and left for independence...so with the Big East now made up of those same CUSA members with only Uconn and Temple as non-CUSA members, it would seem unlikely Army would "rejoin" CUSA under the nBE name.

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:37 pm

Quinn wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

Quinn wrote:

Nice to see UMass on a report as a school in the mix.

I disagree. I think UMass would be a terrible add for a number of reasons. In their first year in the big league they struggled on the field and failed to attract more fans as a FBS program than they did as an FCS program. The other thing about UMass is they are most certainly being considered as a travel partner for UConn. UConn and UMass are miles apart in terms of where their programs are at so I doubt this will become a competitive rivalry. Also factor in that UConn has ZERO loyalty to this new Big East and will be out the door as soon as an ACC invite materializes leaving the Big East with an under-performing geographic outlier in UMass. For the time being UConn should be content being travel partners with Temple.

I think Army has to be the first priority for the BE---its a longshot but I think that option has to be exhausted before they look elsewhere.

I am assuming that San Diego St will be gone by the end of the week so considering Fresno St or any other Far West football only option is pointless.

Tulsa is the next program to pursue. They are the most competitive of the options on the table. After that I think the Big East should pass on Rice and pursue UTSA. Yes, they are a start up but they would help cement that western division and unlike Rice, who lives in the past, UTSA has a promising future. Southern Miss could be an option as well.

The Big East isn't a bus league looking for travel partners. UMass would be considered because with Uconn, it means 3 northeast members...and if UConn is fortunate enough to leave, UMass serves as their in-house replacement, with Temple as the lone other northeast member.

As for Army, you can just do a search for Army in this thread. The Big East has tried to get Army for decades and Army has passed. Army was a member of CUSA and left for independence...so with the Big East now made up of those same CUSA members with only Uconn and Temple as non-CUSA members, it would seem unlikely Army would "rejoin" CUSA under the nBE name.

Why doesn't the nBE just wait until UConn is actually gone before adding UMass, it's not like they'll go anywhere better than the nBE. nBE is basically the CUSA footprint where UConn and Temple are out of place. The mideast/southwest/southeast nBE probably prefer Tulsa and other members in that region.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3752

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Quinn wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

Quinn wrote:

Nice to see UMass on a report as a school in the mix.

I disagree. I think UMass would be a terrible add for a number of reasons. In their first year in the big league they struggled on the field and failed to attract more fans as a FBS program than they did as an FCS program. The other thing about UMass is they are most certainly being considered as a travel partner for UConn. UConn and UMass are miles apart in terms of where their programs are at so I doubt this will become a competitive rivalry. Also factor in that UConn has ZERO loyalty to this new Big East and will be out the door as soon as an ACC invite materializes leaving the Big East with an under-performing geographic outlier in UMass. For the time being UConn should be content being travel partners with Temple.

I think Army has to be the first priority for the BE---its a longshot but I think that option has to be exhausted before they look elsewhere.

I am assuming that San Diego St will be gone by the end of the week so considering Fresno St or any other Far West football only option is pointless.

Tulsa is the next program to pursue. They are the most competitive of the options on the table. After that I think the Big East should pass on Rice and pursue UTSA. Yes, they are a start up but they would help cement that western division and unlike Rice, who lives in the past, UTSA has a promising future. Southern Miss could be an option as well.

The Big East isn't a bus league looking for travel partners. UMass would be considered because with Uconn, it means 3 northeast members...and if UConn is fortunate enough to leave, UMass serves as their in-house replacement, with Temple as the lone other northeast member.

As for Army, you can just do a search for Army in this thread. The Big East has tried to get Army for decades and Army has passed. Army was a member of CUSA and left for independence...so with the Big East now made up of those same CUSA members with only Uconn and Temple as non-CUSA members, it would seem unlikely Army would "rejoin" CUSA under the nBE name.

Why doesn't the nBE just wait until UConn is actually gone before adding UMass, it's not like they'll go anywhere better than the nBE. nBE is basically the CUSA footprint where UConn and Temple are out of place. The mideast/southwest/southeast nBE probably prefer Tulsa and other members in that region.

Not that I put a ton of credit in a Katz report, but I would think that the only reason the nBE would consider UMass would be that they would seek to groom them should UConn leave. There is already a Umass/Temple rivalry in non-football sports, so there is potential there. And with UConn, there too is potential for a football rivalry. And those types of rivalries help promote the programs and generate interest.

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:50 pm

Quinn wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

Quinn wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

Quinn wrote:

Nice to see UMass on a report as a school in the mix.

I disagree. I think UMass would be a terrible add for a number of reasons. In their first year in the big league they struggled on the field and failed to attract more fans as a FBS program than they did as an FCS program. The other thing about UMass is they are most certainly being considered as a travel partner for UConn. UConn and UMass are miles apart in terms of where their programs are at so I doubt this will become a competitive rivalry. Also factor in that UConn has ZERO loyalty to this new Big East and will be out the door as soon as an ACC invite materializes leaving the Big East with an under-performing geographic outlier in UMass. For the time being UConn should be content being travel partners with Temple.

I think Army has to be the first priority for the BE---its a longshot but I think that option has to be exhausted before they look elsewhere.

I am assuming that San Diego St will be gone by the end of the week so considering Fresno St or any other Far West football only option is pointless.

Tulsa is the next program to pursue. They are the most competitive of the options on the table. After that I think the Big East should pass on Rice and pursue UTSA. Yes, they are a start up but they would help cement that western division and unlike Rice, who lives in the past, UTSA has a promising future. Southern Miss could be an option as well.

The Big East isn't a bus league looking for travel partners. UMass would be considered because with Uconn, it means 3 northeast members...and if UConn is fortunate enough to leave, UMass serves as their in-house replacement, with Temple as the lone other northeast member.

As for Army, you can just do a search for Army in this thread. The Big East has tried to get Army for decades and Army has passed. Army was a member of CUSA and left for independence...so with the Big East now made up of those same CUSA members with only Uconn and Temple as non-CUSA members, it would seem unlikely Army would "rejoin" CUSA under the nBE name.

Why doesn't the nBE just wait until UConn is actually gone before adding UMass, it's not like they'll go anywhere better than the nBE. nBE is basically the CUSA footprint where UConn and Temple are out of place. The mideast/southwest/southeast nBE probably prefer Tulsa and other members in that region.

Not that I put a ton of credit in a Katz report, but I would think that the only reason the nBE would consider UMass would be that they would seek to groom them should UConn leave. There is already a Umass/Temple rivalry in non-football sports, so there is potential there. And with UConn, there too is potential for a football rivalry. And those types of rivalries help promote the programs and generate interest.

The problem w/ Memphis, Tulane and UMass adds is that it has/will further piss of good fb schools like ECU, UCF, Houston.

sec03 · **Joined:** Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm **Posts:** 1231

Not so far back in time, with just a few exceptions, this would be a C-USA discussion. Does the conference (nBE) do more west and/or find a NE addition?

UCONN is stuck with it for now; need to make the best of it. The nBE does not have the luxury of great choices; and what is available, there are not massive differences among them in terms of the enhancements they offer. So if you're UCONN, you would want at least a few schools in good travel distance and provide decent bb competition as well.

I doubt the nBE can afford to have many members "picky" about potential choices being too close to their market and recruiting fields. That said, how satisfied shall NE schools, even at 3, be with a conference that its core, by necessity, has shifted southward/southwest?

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:39 pm

I and most believe that the B1G and or SEC will go to 16 or that the B12 will go to at least 12 sometime soon. UConn and Cincy are the top 2 off the list when the ACC refills. So Temple would be stretching it east as it is. Why add a school further northeast? They should add Tulsa, and if Navy leaves add S.Miss, then wait and add Charlotte or ODU after UConn and Cincy leave.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3752

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

I and most believe that the B1G and or SEC will go to 16 or that the B12 will go to at least 12 sometime soon. UConn and Cincy are the top 2 off the list when the ACC refills. So Temple would be stretching it east as it is. Why add a school further northeast? They should add Tulsa, and if Navy leaves add S.Miss, then wait and add Charlotte or ODU after UConn and Cincy leave.

The problem we're seeing though, is that very little seems destined to easily change for UConn and Cincinnati.

Yes, both are probably high on the list of expansion candidates. But in order for those slots to open, it means a conference will need to go through some more drastic changes...in this case, likely the ACC.

For instance, say the Big Ten and SEC do expand to 16...you could see the ACC lose Virginia and UNC (or GA Tech) to the Big Ten and VA Tech and a 2nd ACC school (NC State, Clemson, GA Tech, Florida St). There's also some murmurs that the Big Ten could go to 18 in order to make a full play in the south with 4 schools like UVA, UNC, GA Tech, and a 4th like FSU, Duke, NC State, Clemson, Miami, FSU, etc).

Soooo...for the Big Ten and SEC to expand to 16, it likely means the ACC loses 4 schools. If the Big Ten goes to 18, then the ACC loses 6 of it's 14 schools:

ACC After a Big Ten/SEC Raid (with FSU as Big Ten #18):
= BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, Miami

If the Big Ten took Vanderbilt as #18, then the SEC at least needs a replacement which means an ACC school leaves for the SEC as a replacement.

So yes, you can slot in Uconn and Cincinnati to get to 10. And it's not a bad all-sports conference.
But it's literally the Big East from a few years back but with Louisville, Duke and WFU replacing VA Tech, Rutgers and Temple.
Not exactly a high caliber football conference.

But I would think at that point, that the Big 12 would make a play to get some of the southeast market with Clemson and Miami to team up with WVU. Hell, even Louisville and Duke could be in play by then.

For the Big East, which would now be all CUSA members plus Temple (if Uconn and Cincy left)...the TV contract would only benefit from adding northeast market schools. As we know, there are not many options. Umass is an option with their Boston DMA access.

For UMass, this is a school that CUSA in 1995 reached out to about joining for all-sports. FBS was not an option at that time though. But that conference was spread out just like the nBE is, and the TV money was nothing compared to what it is now. On top of that, markets meant much less in 1995 for TV contracts...whereby they are much more important now. "Market Penetration" was such a high value commodity for a long time...up until about a year ago. All of a sudden, due to the cable subscriber model for current and future conference networks, just being in a market holds weight.

I too agree that with the changing shape of the nBE, schools from midwest, plains, south, etc are all solid options. But I think for the sake of a TV contract, there is a benefit to having some access into markets like Philadelphia and Boston, especially given that you have an existing rivalry in non-FB sports for the lone two northeast schools being discussed: Temple and UMass.

tkalmus · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1033

Quinn here's my issue with UMass...they are a good option in the current setup but most likely will end up being a burden on the nBE rather than an asset.

If the B1G goes to 18 I think we all agree that UNC/UVA/GT and a mystery ACC school. And if the SEC also takes advantage and grabs NCSU/VPI then the ACC has gone from 14 to 8. UConn/Cincy are obvious #1/2 and Temple is most likely number 3 and they'll still need a fourth to have their CCG. Who's four? If its UMass then great but most likely it will be USF (yeah even with FSU/Miami, they're the final former AQ school not in the Big 5) and then you have UMass out all alone with the closest current member being East Carolina?

The nBE would have 1 school out there with no true rivals (local/historical) and would have to reload with Marshall or MAC schools like Buffalo to get them any school nearby. If we're looking forward this is the move that I think USF/UCF Houston/SMU should avoid especially when they know realignment isn't done. When UConn/Cincy join the ACC just stop expanding to the NorthEast and become the most dominant Southern non AQ conference. Separate your Western division of TX/OK/LA/TN/MS off and build around it then when UConn/Cincy leave just build a new base around USF/UCF/ECU with UNCC (partner for ECU), possbly GA State (for the market) and if Temple is still around ODU (gives Temple a school nearby w/o over-expanding the footprint if they leave) and if not UAB would complete the circuit from East to West (TX/OK>LA>TN/MS>AL>GA>FL/NC (only really missing SC/Ark).

fighting muskie · **Joined:** Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am **Posts:** 380

What worries me about UMass is they could potentially become an island in the New Big East and their football program does not appear ready to move up to the level of competition that will exist in the new Big East. If they were attracting 30,000 a game and slaying MAC opponents left and right it would be one thing but they aren't. I'm not sure where UConn was attendance-wise in 2004 and 2005 but UMass seems to be really hurting to generate interest. Let's look at UMass's attendance this year vs. UTSA:

Texas A&M-Commerce 30,416 Indiana 16,304
Northwestern OK St 25,742 Ohio 8,321
San Jose St 30,862 Bowling Green 10,846
Utah St 23,519 Buffalo 12,649
McNeese St 25,784 Central Mich 6,385
Texas St 39,032

To me this is not indicative of a healthy program. UTSA's worst game attracted 7,000 more people than UMass's best--or to put that in perspective, if you put all the people who were at the Indiana game in Gillette with all the people that watched the CMU game you still wouldn't have as many people who came to see UTSA vs Utah St in person.

With that said, I'm not completely anti-UMass. In a few years, possibly when UConn leaves, if UMass's program has improved and they are MAC contenders on a regular basis and get their attendance up I would like to see them come in to give Temple a rival. I'm also a believer in the maxim "wins build fanbases" and I think UMass needs to get some wins under its belt in the MAC in order to build a fanbase on par with the nBE average.

tkalmus · **Joined:** Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm **Posts:** 1033

fighting muskie wrote:

What worries me about UMass is they could potentially become an island in the New Big East and their football program does not appear ready to move up to the level of competition that will exist in the new Big East. If they were attracting 30,000 a game and slaying MAC opponents left and right it would be one thing but they aren't. I'm not sure where UConn was attendance-wise in 2004 and 2005 but UMass seems to be really hurting to generate interest. Let's look at UMass's attendance this year vs. UTSA:

Texas A&M-Commerce 30,416 Indiana 16,304
Northwestern OK St 25,742 Ohio 8,321
San Jose St 30,862 Bowling Green 10,846
Utah St 23,519 Buffalo 12,649
McNeese St 25,784 Central Mich 6,385
Texas St 39,032

To me this is not indicative of a healthy program. UTSA's worst game attracted 7,000 more people than UMass's best--or to put that in perspective, if you put all the people who were at the Indiana game in Gillette with all the people that watched the CMU game you still wouldn't have as many people who came to see UTSA vs Utah St in person.

With that said, I'm not completely anti-UMass. In a few years, possibly when UConn leaves, if UMass's program has improved and they are MAC contenders on a regular basis and get their attendance up I would like to see them come in to give Temple a rival. I'm also a believer in the maxim "wins build fanbases" and I think UMass needs to get some wins under its belt in the MAC in order to build a fanbase on par with the nBE average.

Not a UMass hater or fan but they aren't playing anywhere near their campus, the attendence issue should be better once the on campus stadium is ready...still UTSA is the attendence gold standard for FCS upgrades in years one, probably not realistic to compare them to that.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3752

tkalmus wrote:

fighting muskie wrote:

What worries me about UMass is they could potentially become an island in the New Big East and their football program does not appear ready to move up to the level of competition that will exist in the new Big East. If they were attracting 30,000 a game and slaying MAC opponents left and right it would be one thing but they aren't. I'm not sure where UConn was attendance-wise in 2004 and 2005 but UMass seems to be really hurting to generate interest. Let's look at UMass's attendance this year vs. UTSA:

Texas A&M-Commerce 30,416 Indiana 16,304
Northwestern OK St 25,742 Ohio 8,321
San Jose St 30,862 Bowling Green 10,846
Utah St 23,519 Buffalo 12,649
McNeese St 25,784 Central Mich 6,385
Texas St 39,032

To me this is not indicative of a healthy program. UTSA's worst game attracted 7,000 more people than UMass's best--or to put that in perspective, if you put all the people who were at the Indiana game in Gillette with all the people that watched the CMU game you still wouldn't have as many people who came to see UTSA vs Utah St in person.

With that said, I'm not completely anti-UMass. In a few years, possibly when UConn leaves, if UMass's program has improved and they are MAC contenders on a regular basis and get their attendance up I would like to see them come in to give Temple a rival. I'm also a believer in the maxim "wins build fanbases" and I think UMass needs to get some wins under its belt in the MAC in order to build a fanbase on par with the nBE average.

Not a UMass hater or fan but they aren't playing anywhere near their campus, the attendence issue should be better once the on campus stadium is ready...still UTSA is the attendence gold standard for FCS upgrades in years one, probably not realistic to compare them to that.

Indeed. Much of what we thought about in the past regarding what is a gauge for the attractiveness of a program, has started to change. Look at Georgia St. They became attractive not due to their on field success, attendance, or even market penetration. They were brought in almost solely on potential and the market they are in. A small viewership share in Atlanta has value, a small share in Chattanooga doesn't. So for UMass, I think the only reason they are brought up ever is because of that: potential and market. If UMass football could get anything near the UMass basketball viewership from the 1990's, in todays TV economy, that would be huge. But just being on TV in the Boston AND Western MA region (Springfield) is why they are on the radar. If we were talking Maine in FBS, they wouldn't be in the conversation as Orono just wouldn't cut it.

westwolf · **Posted:** Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:23 pm

SDS likely gone to MWC:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/21516255/mountain-west-san-diego-state-talks-heating-up

Fresno St. Alum · **Posted:** Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:49 pm

Quinn wrote:

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

I and most believe that the B1G and or SEC will go to 16 or that the B12 will go to at least 12 sometime soon. UConn and Cincy are the top 2 off the list when the ACC refills. So Temple would be stretching it east as it is. Why add a school further northeast? They should add Tulsa, and if Navy leaves add S.Miss, then wait and add Charlotte or ODU after UConn and Cincy leave.

The problem we're seeing though, is that very little seems destined to easily change for UConn and Cincinnati.

Yes, both are probably high on the list of expansion candidates. But in order for those slots to open, it means a conference will need to go through some more drastic changes...in this case, likely the ACC.

For instance, say the Big Ten and SEC do expand to 16...you could see the ACC lose Virginia and UNC (or GA Tech) to the Big Ten and VA Tech and a 2nd ACC school (NC State, Clemson, GA Tech, Florida St). There's also some murmurs that the Big Ten could go to 18 in order to make a full play in the south with 4 schools like UVA, UNC, GA Tech, and a 4th like FSU, Duke, NC State, Clemson, Miami, FSU, etc).

Soooo...for the Big Ten and SEC to expand to 16, it likely means the ACC loses 4 schools. If the Big Ten goes to 18, then the ACC loses 6 of it's 14 schools:

ACC After a Big Ten/SEC Raid (with FSU as Big Ten #18):
= BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, Miami

If the Big Ten took Vanderbilt as #18, then the SEC at least needs a replacement which means an ACC school leaves for the SEC as a replacement.

So yes, you can slot in Uconn and Cincinnati to get to 10. And it's not a bad all-sports conference.
But it's literally the Big East from a few years back but with Louisville, Duke and WFU replacing VA Tech, Rutgers and Temple.
Not exactly a high caliber football conference.

But I would think at that point, that the Big 12 would make a play to get some of the southeast market with Clemson and Miami to team up with WVU. Hell, even Louisville and Duke could be in play by then.

For the Big East, which would now be all CUSA members plus Temple (if Uconn and Cincy left)...the TV contract would only benefit from adding northeast market schools. As we know, there are not many options. Umass is an option with their Boston DMA access.

For UMass, this is a school that CUSA in 1995 reached out to about joining for all-sports. FBS was not an option at that time though. But that conference was spread out just like the nBE is, and the TV money was nothing compared to what it is now. On top of that, markets meant much less in 1995 for TV contracts...whereby they are much more important now. "Market Penetration" was such a high value commodity for a long time...up until about a year ago. All of a sudden, due to the cable subscriber model for current and future conference networks, just being in a market holds weight.

I too agree that with the changing shape of the nBE, schools from midwest, plains, south, etc are all solid options. But I think for the sake of a TV contract, there is a benefit to having some access into markets like Philadelphia and Boston, especially given that you have an existing rivalry in non-FB sports for the lone two northeast schools being discussed: Temple and UMass.

The odds of all that happening at once is 0%. SEC or B1G will go to 16, not at the same time, let alone B12 joining in at that same time, giving the ACC time to backfill w/ UConn, Cincy. Even if they did lose 6 or 8. It's still better than the CUSA 2.0 they are in now.

American Athletic Conference Realignment & Expansion Thread

Who is online