Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

FormerFrog

SI: Creation of AAC is one of the 10 Best Decisions of College Football's Last 10 Years

Recommended Posts

If you truly have an efficient triple option, you don't need 4-star players to have a quality offense. Navy, AF and New Mexico prove that. The problem those schools have is never on offense, it's in having a defense good enough to keep the triple option from being outscored.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

If you truly have an efficient triple option, you don't need 4-star players to have a quality offense. Navy, AF and New Mexico prove that. The problem those schools have is never on offense, it's in having a defense good enough to keep the triple option from being outscored.

Fritz has done well everywhere he's been. Their problem will be a stacked conference/division.

hTKgPYW.jpgt8rHyxq.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jack Bauer said:

They are the recruiting champions of the world.

Recruiting reflects perception. It has everything to do with how High Schoolers view collegiate brands.

Such perception reflects the presentation on television..

It's reflected in stories such as this one in Sports Illustrated.

Because at the end of the day, the disparity in money from the G4's to the AAC's will be broadened due to the fact that the M_C's are just so horrible they don't present a decent alternative to bid on.

Speaking on bids, the 1 bid shambles of your basketball conference is symptomatic of the dead MWC brand too.

The MWC really has itself to blame. You didn't invest in your programs. 

Summary: The depths the MWC has sunken too will push the value of the AAC higher..

hTKgPYW.jpgt8rHyxq.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FormerFrog said:

Recruiting reflects perception. It has everything to do with how High Schoolers view collegiate brands.

Such perception reflects the presentation on television..

It's reflected in stories such as this one in Sports Illustrated.

Because at the end of the day, the disparity in money from the G4's to the AAC's will be broadened due to the fact that the M_C's are just so horrible they don't present a decent alternative to bid on.

Speaking on bids, the 1 bid shambles of your basketball conference is symptomatic of the dead MWC brand too.

The MWC really has itself to blame. You didn't invest in your programs. 

Summary: The depths the MWC has sunken too will push the value of the AAC higher..

Head to head results affect perception.  Nobody besides you and @pesik is running around and chest pounding about recruiting and potential.  You guys are neophytes and know nothings about football.  It'll be fun to watch your teams get their asses beat in the bowls again this fall.  Nobody sits around fearful of South Florida and Tulane, guy.

 

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Jack Bauer said:

Head to head results affect perception.  Nobody besides you and @pesik is running around and chest pounding about recruiting and potential.  You guys are neophytes and know nothings about football.  It'll be fun to watch your teams get their asses beat in the bowls again this fall.  Nobody sits around fearful of South Florida and Tulane, guy.

 

literally zero people outside of this forum knows the Head to head..i didnt even know it till fanhood posted it 2 weeks ago... its 6-5 with most of the games being tulsa and navy...thats a tiny sample size of less than 3 games a year....literally no one cares about that

also now that im thinking about it, head to head doesnt affect perception at all.. i cant tell you any of the p5 records versus any of the other p5...and you know nothing about football.. you are a goal post mover...manipulator...who picks and chooses which facts he thinks counts

and ps the main bleacher report and Sports illustrated just released conference rankings and they both say the aac is by far the best g5, that their p6 dream arent there but it should keep pushing 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2726033-ranking-best-college-football-conferences-entering-2017-season

"while the 12-team league is the best Group of Five conference by far, its depth still doesn't stack up to Power Five leagues."

my opinion isnt some delusional opinion, its the opinion of the most college football fans...you are the one with the minority opinion, who might not know about football.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pesik said:

literally zero people outside of this forum knows the Head to head..i didnt even know it till fanhood posted it 2 weeks ago... its 6-5 with most of the games being tulsa and navy...thats a tiny sample size of less than 3 games a year....literally no one cares about that

also now that im thinking about it, head to head doesnt affect perception at all.. i cant tell you any of the p5 records versus any of the other p5...and you know nothing about football.. you are a goal post mover...manipulator...who picks and chooses which facts he thinks counts

and ps the main bleacher report and Sports illustrated just released conference rankings and they both say the aac is by far the best g5, that their p6 dream arent there but it should keep pushing 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2726033-ranking-best-college-football-conferences-entering-2017-season

"while the 12-team league is the best Group of Five conference by far, its depth still doesn't stack up to Power Five leagues."

my opinion isnt some delusional opinion, its the opinion of the most college football fans...you are the one with the minority opinion, who might not know about football.. 

You should pay attention to how your league does in bowls.  It would help you with your delusional tendencies.

You don't have a blue blood to anchor your league and get a big contract (I have some news you may find shocking, Houston, SMU, and Tulane are not blue bloods).  There's no USC coming to rescue the P6 AAC.

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, there is clearly a decent set of arguments that compare the American and the Mountain West.  @pesik is right about the perception and that's reflected from reporters  who are mostly based on the east coast.  On the West coast we call this 'east coast bias' and it's caused by the fact that West coast residents will watch east coast sports, but east coast residents don't tend to watch west coast sports.  Sports is a very subjective kind of journalism so if you want to sell papers/get clicks then you want to have lists that include the schools with high attendance and tv ratings, even if the on the field results aren't there.

The argument in favor of the Mountain West used to heavily rely on Boise's overall success (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2017/07/18/top-10-group-of-five-teams-boise-state-tcu-utah/486033001/) because they had a real run of dominance for a while, but now the argument in favor of the Mountain West being the better of the two conferences relies on that it has better divisions.  Both the Mountain West Mountain and the American West divisions are the better divisions in the respective conferences but the fact that the Mountain qualified five teams for bowl games while the  tougher conference in the American qualified four, so the MW's tougher division is stronger than the American's.  

San Diego State proved that they have a better running game than Houston has a defense because the Aztecs just wore Houston's defense down.  The Aztecs have been on the cusp of being a ranked team for the past couple seasons and are at least as good as the American East's best team.  However, the MW West includes both Fresno and Hawaii who have a history of success while only UCF and USF can make any claims to having good programs.  Again, the MW wins by having 3 of 6 teams with typically competitive teams while the American East only has two - UCF and USF.

There are good arguments for both but the American's are all some version of perception / fan interest while the MW is about results on the field.  To each their own.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jack Bauer said:

You should pay attention to how your league does in bowls.  It would help you with your delusional tendencies.

You don't have a blue blood to anchor your league and get a big contract (I have some news you may find shocking, Houston, SMU, and Tulane are not blue bloods).  There's no USC coming to rescue the P6 AAC.

have you looked at the bowl matchuups...we play conference champs versus our middling team..aac #5 vs c-usa champ, aac #6 vs mwc champ...aac vs the sunbelt champ..the fact that this is the entire basis of your debate is weak, having  a bad record versus that is meaningless. congrats your champs arre better than our middle teams 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pesik said:

have you looked at the bowl matchuups...we play conference champs versus our middling team..aac #5 vs c-usa champ, aac #6 vs mwc champ...aac vs the sunbelt champ..they fact that this is the ntire basis of your debate is weak, having  a bad record versus that is meaningless, congrts your champs arre better than our middle teams 

Stupid, pathetic jackass of an argument. The MWC could schedule minimum payout bowls against lower division champs too.  Crow on, cock head, crow on. 

"If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, are you still a moron?"

"Give me a Sandwich and a Douchebag and there's nothing I can't do!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

Look, there is clearly a decent set of arguments that compare the American and the Mountain West.  @pesik is right about the perception and that's reflected from reporters  who are mostly based on the east coast.  On the West coast we call this 'east coast bias' and it's caused by the fact that West coast residents will watch east coast sports, but east coast residents don't tend to watch west coast sports.  Sports is a very subjective kind of journalism so if you want to sell papers/get clicks then you want to have lists that include the schools with high attendance and tv ratings, even if the on the field results aren't there.

The argument in favor of the Mountain West used to heavily rely on Boise's overall success (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2017/07/18/top-10-group-of-five-teams-boise-state-tcu-utah/486033001/) because they had a real run of dominance for a while, but now the argument in favor of the Mountain West being the better of the two conferences relies on that it has better divisions.  Both the Mountain West Mountain and the American West divisions are the better divisions in the respective conferences but the fact that the Mountain qualified five teams for bowl games while the  tougher conference in the American qualified four, so the MW's tougher division is stronger than the American's.  

San Diego State proved that they have a better running game than Houston has a defense because the Aztecs just wore Houston's defense down.  The Aztecs have been on the cusp of being a ranked team for the past couple seasons and are at least as good as the American East's best team.  However, the MW West includes both Fresno and Hawaii who have a history of success while only UCF and USF can make any claims to having good programs.  Again, the MW wins by having 3 of 6 teams with typically competitive teams while the American East only has two - UCF and USF.

There are good arguments for both but the American's are all some version of perception / fan interest while the MW is about results on the field.  To each their own.

qualifying for bowls is bad logic...that just means the other division is extremely weak...90% of computer polls and human polls say the aac west is way better than the mountain...the pac 12 has less bowl teams in both division than the mw mountain, is the mountain better than every pac 12 division?

also i dont get why you keep making definite arguments on the uh/sdsu game like houstons wasnt without its coach, herman left and took most of his staff (to recruit) before our bowl game, grad assistants coached the game

literally throughout the game the announcers kept saying this game is a "test", can you win a game of pure talent alone or does coaching matter, rocky with the deep coaching tenure and houston all talent and no coaches ..rewatch the game

also you realize cincy averages 9 wins a season the last 10 years, including 5 top 25, one of which was top 10..temple has had top success the last 2 years, even ecu has had 6 8+win seasons the last 10 years, i dont get how ucf and usf are the only east teams that have had success 

bias isnt in computers, perception isnt in computers, here is a composite over 130 computers saying the AAC is better on field results, and not only better but with a big gap

http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Chad Sexington said:

Stupid, pathetic jackass of an argument. The MWC could schedule minimum payout bowls against lower division champs too.  Crow on, cock head, crow on. 

no you cant, if you could youd be playing the mac champ in idaho potato bowl, but you are just playing a middling mac team, youd be playing the c-usa champ in the new mexico bowl instead of a middling c-usa team.....do you really think mwc prefered to have 6-6 utsa vs 8-4 new mexico in a bowl????  

you dont even have enough bowls..your commish said so himself....you have 5 bowls for 12 teams ..and is trying to talk the aac into letting you into the frisco...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

Look, there is clearly a decent set of arguments that compare the American and the Mountain West.  @pesik is right about the perception and that's reflected from reporters  who are mostly based on the east coast.  On the West coast we call this 'east coast bias' and it's caused by the fact that West coast residents will watch east coast sports, but east coast residents don't tend to watch west coast sports.  Sports is a very subjective kind of journalism so if you want to sell papers/get clicks then you want to have lists that include the schools with high attendance and tv ratings, even if the on the field results aren't there.

The argument in favor of the Mountain West used to heavily rely on Boise's overall success (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2017/07/18/top-10-group-of-five-teams-boise-state-tcu-utah/486033001/) because they had a real run of dominance for a while, but now the argument in favor of the Mountain West being the better of the two conferences relies on that it has better divisions.  Both the Mountain West Mountain and the American West divisions are the better divisions in the respective conferences but the fact that the Mountain qualified five teams for bowl games while the  tougher conference in the American qualified four, so the MW's tougher division is stronger than the American's.  

San Diego State proved that they have a better running game than Houston has a defense because the Aztecs just wore Houston's defense down.  The Aztecs have been on the cusp of being a ranked team for the past couple seasons and are at least as good as the American East's best team.  However, the MW West includes both Fresno and Hawaii who have a history of success while only UCF and USF can make any claims to having good programs.  Again, the MW wins by having 3 of 6 teams with typically competitive teams while the American East only has two - UCF and USF.

There are good arguments for both but the American's are all some version of perception / fan interest while the MW is about results on the field.  To each their own.

But that was to be expected because, as said a number of times prior to the game on the FoneyFrog/pesik homieboard, Houston came into the game with the nation's #3 defense against the rush.

Oh wait . . .

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A coaching change could be a good reason for poor offense but Major Applewhite was the offensive coordinator before he coached his first game as houston cougar head coach with weeks of preparation.  SDSU lining up and running in between the tackles is entirely predictable and only going to work it you have the talent.  I guess a coach can rally his side, but that is very situational and can only matter on a couple key plays.   Houston's execution just wasn't there; the second half was unwatchable except for Aztec fans who wanted to see a beheading.

My understanding of Massey is that it's like Sagarin - on the field is a portion but they integrate ratings and past season's games are included in the ratings until five or six games are played.  Keep in mind that Fresno State only beat an FCS team last season, which was historically bad, and the American is marginally ahead in most RPI based metrics I've looked at despite having no similar program.

Keep in mind that MW schools play Pac 12 schools more than any other conference http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/mountainwest/index.shtml  the MW has played the Pac 12 141 times in college football history and second most is the WAC which no longer plays football.  Contrast that with the American mostly playing ACC teams, followed by independents (Army, UMass, Navy prior to membership and of course ND & BYU) .  http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/americanathletic/index.shtml  

The Mountain West, as a conference, has an above 500 winning percentage over every other FBS "Group of 5" school and Independents.  The American v MW match up was tied until SDSU demolished Houston so that's why the head to head match up is so important.

College football's top 25 ratings is an Associate Press poll because for years college football was a sports writer dependent medium.  Very good writers wrote long descriptions of games for Sunday editions of newspapers. Tons of papers were sold with descriptions of games that people could not attend.  At one point, boxing, horse racing and college football were the most popular sports in America by.   Now only football has maintained its popularity but who gets to vote for the top college football teams and why is basically so the media can hype its games for the coming week.

I enjoy watching well played football and I just don't see much on the field from the American, and the results back it up. Tulsa and Houston both looked impressive week one last year but they couldn't beat Navy and Air Force = Navy 

The MW could do a challenge series but it would probably be more lucrative to go to a nine game conference schedule rather than split the money with the American if the media contracts aren't with the same companies and I think the MW is going to be with Disney, Fox or both while the American is going to be with NBC or CBS Sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

A coaching change could be a good reason for poor offense but Major Applewhite was the offensive coordinator before he coached his first game as houston cougar head coach with weeks of preparation.  SDSU lining up and running in between the tackles is entirely predictable and only going to work it you have the talent.  I guess a coach can rally his side, but that is very situational and can only matter only a couple key plays.   Houston's execution just wasn't there; the second half was unwatchable except for Aztec fans who wanted to see a beheading.

My understanding of Massey is that it's like Sagarin - on the field is a portion but they integrate ratings and past season's games are included in the ratings until five or six games are played.  Keep in mind that Fresno State only beat an FCS team last season, which was historically bad, and the American is marginally ahead in most RPI based metrics I've looked at despite having no similar program.

Keep in mind that MW schools play Pac 12 schools more than any other conference http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/mountainwest/index.shtml  the MW has played the Pac 12 141 times in college football history and second most is the WAC which no longer plays football.  Contrast that with the American mostly playing ACC teams, followed by independents (Army, UMass, Navy prior to membership and of course ND & BYU) .  http://www.mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/americanathletic/index.shtml  

The Mountain West, as a conference, has an above 500 winning percentage over very other FBS "Group of 5" school and Independents.  The American v MW match up was tied until SDSU demolished Houston so that's why the head to head match up is so important.

College football's top 25 ratings is an Associate Press poll because for years college football was a sports writer dependent medium.  Very good writers wrote long descriptions of games for Sunday editions of newspapers. Tons of papers were sold with descriptions of games that people could not attend.  At one point, boxing, horse racing and college football were the most popular sports in America by.   Now only football has maintained its popularity but who gets to vote for the top college football teams and why is basically so the media can hype its games for the coming week.

I enjoy watching well played football and I just don't see much on the field from the American, and the results back it up. Tulsa and Houston both looked impressive week one last year but they couldn't beat Navy and Air Force = Navy 

The MW could do a challenge series but it would probably be more lucrative to go to a nine game conference schedule rather than split the money with the American if the media contracts aren't with the same companies and I think the MW is going to be with Disney, Fox or both while the American is going to be with NBC or CBS Sports.

1) that isnt Massey's rankings...its every single computer than ranks college football, over a 130 computers, it's a composite..the first line was massey but the next 129 lines are other computers, the last line in the average....the conference average is at the bottom

http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

2) applewhite didnt even know he would be coaching that game till 2 weeks prior, we had an interim who wasnt applewhite, but when we hired applewhite, the interim was downgraded..and again he wasnt doing it singlehandedly..we lost MOST coaches, our o-line coach for the game was 24year old..and secondly applewhite called plays for every game except sdsu from the booth..sdsu was his first game on the field in YEARS

3) sdsu's offense is predictable.. for alittle over 2 quarters they only had 1 run of any worth...sdsu didnt score a touchdown till 3 mins left in the 3rd quarter after UH's 3rd team turnovers...sdsu only scored 20 in the first 3 quarters including a pick 6...the only reason sdsu started scoring like crazy late in the game was becuase the  team got demoralized because the offense keep turning the ball over and the team quit...if houstons offense had stepped up sdsu wouldnt have score more than 14 all game...the offense let them down

as for why sdsu shut us down on offense, ill give sdsu defense credit it came prepared and blitzed every play and we couldt stop it...the play calling was also basic and obvious but with grad assistant coaches i doubt they were ever going to get creative

4) the only network that has shown interest in the mwc is cbssports, thompson already confirmed cbs wants to exend their deal..and aresco already said espn wants to extend, the issue is getting the price we want...i have no clue where you keep getting your theories of who signs where 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 http://noconow.co/2tN5RfE  At 2:00 Thompson says that the MW has been approached by their current media partners (CBS and ESPN) to extend but they have told them to "keep their powder dry".  He thinks they'll sign with ESPN and Google but he acknowledges that the landscape for over the top is changing rapidly.  I would guess that the Disney acquisition of BAMtech would increase the likelihood of the MW being exclusive to ESPN based on The Hairs comments in the linked video.  Thompson also really wants to do another rights deal after the current Pac 12 deal expires.

I haven't seen reports anywhere that ESPN has offered to extend its contract with the American.  Everything I've seen is still "Power 6" pre negotiating PR and not something indicating interest from the other side. Aresco seems to need another person looking to pay them big money because Disney doesn't appear to be interested in an extension like they are with the MW.

Please provide a link.  The discussion is good and I'd like to see the latest straight out of Aresco's mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

 http://noconow.co/2tN5RfE  At 2:00 Thompson says that the MW has been approached by their current media partners (CBS and ESPN) to extend but they have told them to "keep their powder dry".  He thinks they'll sign with ESPN and Google but he acknowledges that the landscape for over the top is changing rapidly.  I would guess that the Disney acquisition of BAMtech would increase the likelihood of the MW being exclusive to ESPN based on The Hairs comments in the linked video.  Thompson also really wants to do another rights deal after the current Pac 12 deal expires.

I haven't seen reports anywhere that ESPN has offered to extend its contract with the American.  Everything I've seen is still "Power 6" pre negotiating PR and not something indicating interest from the other side. Aresco seems to need another person looking to pay them big money because Disney doesn't appear to be interested in an extension like they are with the MW.

Please provide a link.  The discussion is good and I'd like to see the latest straight out of Aresco's mouth.

yes extend their deal aka keep the deal exactly as is, where espn just wants boise games ..while cbs sports wants the majority...and he never said he thinks he the mwc will sign with espn and google, he actually said he has no clue who they will sign with or who is interested, "who knows it could be espn and google" (it was a random example)..thompson didnt even state any other networks just an extension from current partners or digital..also noting the boise sweetheart deal requires the mwc to sell boises rights to espn (and that deal is eternal), which might be the reason he said espn

and aresco has said numerous times that our deal will almost certainly be redone with espn as long as the money is right, that even if espn doesnt offer enough money espn will still get a package of some sort..that since the origin of the league, dating back to the big east..this league has always partnered with espn, and aresco and espn in the presser said they want that to last. this is in almost every aresco interview, he has never wavered from saying as long as the money i right we are re-signing with espn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aresco and the American can't say that there is an offer for even the amount that the American is making now.  It's ridiculous to think that you are in demand when another conference on the same time line as you has an offer while you do not.  Both the American and the MW expire in 2019 and who doesn't want to talk?  The MW.  Who can't talk to the press about interest from a TV network yet?  The American

The current deal gives CBS primary rights with with the Boise negotiated bonus deal when any game is sublicensed for broadcast or on ESPN/ESPN2 + Boise's separate home game agreement and that was negotiated under less than ideal circumstances.

Thompson explained that while that the MW may have fewer households in its region it can play games that no other conference except the Pac 12 can and the conference would be willing to do so if the price is right.

The MW is a different TV product than the American because it's relatively unique among college football conferences because of Window 4.  An offer is made that the MW didn't have interest in.

Based on how Aresco conducts himself, if there was an actual offer there would be press releases and bluster if an offer was made to the American for their rights - even if the same deal was on the table.

Obviously you want to start from where you are now, but CUSA found out that wasn't the case.  The MW isn't CUSA but the American has no evidence that any network thinks your media rights are going to get recognized with a "power 6" tv contract.


     
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

Aresco and the American can't say that there is an offer for even the amount that the American is making now.  It's ridiculous to think that you are in demand when another conference on the same time line as you has an offer while you do not.  Both the American and the MW expire in 2019 and who doesn't want to talk?  The MW.  Who can't talk to the press about interest from a TV network yet?  The American

The current deal gives CBS primary rights with with the Boise negotiated bonus deal when any game is sublicensed for broadcast or on ESPN/ESPN2 + Boise's separate home game agreement and that was negotiated under less than ideal circumstances.

Thompson explained that while that the MW may have fewer households in its region it can play games that no other conference except the Pac 12 can and the conference would be willing to do so if the price is right.

The MW is a different TV product than the American because it's relatively unique among college football conferences because of Window 4.  An offer is made that the MW didn't have interest in.

Based on how Aresco conducts himself, if there was an actual offer there would be press releases and bluster if an offer was made to the American for their rights - even if the same deal was on the table.

Obviously you want to start from where you are now, but CUSA found out that wasn't the case.  The MW isn't CUSA but the American has no evidence that any network thinks your media rights are going to get recognized with a "power 6" tv contract.


     

The American will get $3 million to $4 million. The MW will get $2 million to $3 million. In the end, the difference will be minor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...