Is scheduling BYU football good for AAC?

[Baywave1]

On one of CNS boards (MW maybe?), I saw several comments questioning the wisdom of MW schools being in a football scheduling consortium with BYU. In short belief was it would not help distinguish conference to be selected for competitive G5 BCS slot much less championship round of four.

Since AAC is entering some type of "arrangement" with BYU including post-season bowl bid, it piqued my interest. I think playing BYU is good unless you somehow schedule four AQ schools for your OOC games. I'm sure some of the negative comments came from baggage left from BYU and MW divorce.

In short I think in general the post-season selection committee would view a BYU game (and victory!) in a positive light.

Again it reinforces but what should Tulane's and AAC's OOC scheduling strategy be? Tulane's is obviously good for 2014 with three AQ games. Will it continue?

[long green]

I think BYU is souring on independence. Would they swallow their pride to the extent of going back to the MWC?

Until further notice, a win over BYU is a good win for any program in any league.

[PeteRasche]

Isn't the issue with having BYU in a conference the coordination with not having anything in any sport on a Sunday?

[WaveProf]

Isn't the issue with having BYU in a conference the coordination with not having anything in any sport on a Sunday?

That's only a BIG issue if you play sunday basketball games. CUSA played Saturday. Depends on the conference.

[GreenieBacker]

its no secret that Aresco is working very hard to bring BYU into the Conference in some capacity. I think he sees them as critical to his plan to position the AAC as a candidate into the Big Boys Club. I "think" BYU has burned their bridges with the MWC and they might be finding the path as an Independent to be not quite as wonderful as they originally thought.

Personally, I would like to see them join the AAC it further distances us from the other non-P5 Conferences and would really sweeten the appeal of the AAC to networks/Bowls

[WaveProf]

its no secret that Aresco is working very hard to bring BYU into the Conference in some capacity. I think he sees them as critical to his plan to position the AAC as a candidate into the Big Boys Club. I "think" BYU has burned their bridges with the MWC and they might be finding the path as an Independent to be not quite as wonderful as they originally thought.

Personally, I would like to see them join the AAC it further distances us from the other non-P5 Conferences and would really sweeten the appeal of the AAC to networks/Bowls

I agree with all of this. Only two concerns:

1) they'd probably be football only

2) who would we "pair" with them? San Diego State again? Army (they already said no once)? Marshall/Southern Miss? UMass? The options aren't great. It's the sum of the two additions that matter, not just BYU

Still, I mostly agree with you

[GreenieBacker]

the hard part comes in how we integrate them into the conference. We really don't reach way up there, but have the makings of a Western Division they could join: Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, SMU.........

[long green]

its no secret that Aresco is working very hard to bring BYU into the Conference in some capacity. I think he sees them as critical to his plan to position the AAC as a candidate into the Big Boys Club. I "think" BYU has burned their bridges with the MWC and they might be finding the path as an Independent to be not quite as wonderful as they originally thought.

Personally, I would like to see them join the AAC it further distances us from the other non-P5 Conferences and would really sweeten the appeal of the AAC to networks/Bowls

I agree with all of this. Only two concerns:

1) they'd probably be football only

2) who would we "pair" with them? San Diego State again? Army (they already said no once)? Marshall/Southern Miss? UMass? The options aren't great. It's the sum of the two additions that matter, not just BYU

Still, I mostly agree with you

1) if they say football only, we say thank you and enjoy your independence. Neither party holds all the cards but their hand will weaken quicker than ours.

2) I wouldn't say we have to add anyone. I'd rather have awkwardness with BYU only than a new addition you'd be stuck with.

I would add BYU only if they come in on my terms. They are a proven problem if they're given too much power. They do offer a lot but the price tag would make the decision for me.

[WaveProf]

LG--- they are going to WANT a deal like Boise. We shouldn't give it to them. But if we play hardball on that, we have to compromise somewhere. I'm pretty confident it would be football only that would be the compromise.

As for adding a 14th, I think Aresco has been pretty clear he is invested in even numbers

[GreenieBacker]

let them keep their network money. Seriously who cares? Even a school like Texas, in a P5 Conference, has its own network separate from the rest of the conference. The hard work, IMO, is how deeply can we integrate them into the AAC. Still, its a conversation worth having.

[long green]

LG--- they are going to WANT a deal like Boise. We shouldn't give it to them. But if we play hardball on that, we have to compromise somewhere. I'm pretty confident it would be football only that would be the compromise.

As for adding a 14th, I think Aresco has been pretty clear he is invested in even numbers

I'm sure he's said that but adding someone for the sake of balance is dangerous. You add someone when they show they will make your league better. Who's to say everyone stays in this league? Navy is about to learn the lesson Army learned in CUSA and it wouldn't surprise me if they left like Army did. That's not a prediction, it's stating a possibility. They will make fewer bowls as a member of the AAC. That is also not a prediction; it's a certainty.

BYU can want whatever they want. A Boise deal? I don't know that I'd put it like that if I were BYU*. That deal sure is looking awful for the MWC. Good. F them and Craig Thompson.


* and I'm sure they won't. At some point BYU needs to forget about appearances and pride. It's becoming a problem.

[WaveProf]

I'm sure he's said that but adding someone for the sake of balance is dangerous. You add someone when they show they will make your league better.

Agreed.

That is why that is a "concern" of mine when it comes to adding BYU.

I don't think we added Tulsa because they "make us better". We added them because they were the "best" choice we could find to get to 12. I don't want to be looking for the "best" choice we can find to get to 14 either.

[WaveProf]

BYU Coach Lobbies for B12
http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... ove-big-12

[GreenieBacker]

everyone not in the P5 wants to be in the P5. That's supposed to be news? The real question is, what P5 conference wants to take on BYU and all that baggage they bring.

[GSx]

I don't see a big value to Tulane scheduling Byu. Others might find value, though.
I see a huge value to them being in the conference...and possibly 3 or 4 others from the MWC.

[TUPF]

I don't see a big value to Tulane scheduling Byu. Others might find value, though.
I see a huge value to them being in the conference...and possibly 3 or 4 others from the MWC.

I just want to see the shocked faces of BYU fans in the FQ. And I mean the real LDS types, not the Jim McMahon sunglasses types.

[GreenieBacker]

if adding BYU makes the AAC stronger, we should try and add BYU. Aresco seems to think so and he appears to be trying very hard to get them to join.

[akhosrof]

A popular idea on the AAC board is to add BYU in all sports to even basketball at 12 members and add Army as a football only member. Army in the east for football and BYU in the west. I like it a lot.

[WaveProf]

Army has already been seriously courted and had no interest.

[long green]

I might try to add some nuance to that last post if I was you.

If Army has no interest in the AAC - and they well might - it's not just because it wouldn't put some extra $ in their program and increase exposure because it would do that. Army knows from its years in CUSA that it would not be able to compete in the AAC. I've stated this opinion already re: Navy and how they will do in the AAC but West Point needs no such education. They know. Another point about their lack of interest is that unlike BYU they have not even a wisp of a chance of getting into a P5 league.

[WaveProf]

LG I do think that what you are saying is what army is thinking. But as a former long time fan of military school football I personally disagree with the equation. Navy is better off in the AAC (although you are correct it will prove tough to be bowl eligible every year)

I think army should consider the AAC.... But they aren't going to so so be it. I'm not all that convinced it would be a good thing for the AAC anyway

[akhosrof]

On Army's previous interest in joining a conference: I don't see past interest as a predictor of future interest. Army has a new coach, and the landscape of college football is ever changing. Being independent is increasing more difficult. Army might not be interested today but a couple of good years under their new coach and they could be interested in a couple of years. Tying this into BYU, the timing could be perfect. BYU has some scheduling obligations in the short-term, and the money they get from ESPN is good. Maybe in a few years, BYU and Army are free to join the AAC, and the AAC is able to renegotiate a television contract. Long-term I think BYU would be a big get for the conference. National following, high ranked academics, a good market, and their athletics would immediately be among the top in the conference.

[WaveProf]

Evidence of why it will be difficult to get BYU....future scheduling. They already are pretty booked, and it would/will be expensive to cancel out of those games. Sure, they'd do it for the B12 (30 million plus a year helps make cancelation fees look cheap). A lot more difficult to do on our $$$$.

Below are the number of games already booked for each season. The number in parenthesis are the number of games booked against AAC teams (which would be easier, or free, to cancel)

2015: 12 (3)
2016: 8 (1)
2017: 8 (1)
2018: 7 (0)
2019: 5 (0)
2020: 6 (0)
2021: 3 (0)
2022: 3 (0)
2023: 3 (0)

And that isn't counting four games against Notre Dame and one against Tulane that have been booked but not assigned a specific year.

[GreenieBacker]

that never seemed to matter to LSU, just promise them that game in the future. Date to be determined

[BC Wave]

Bring in BYU and Colorado St

Put them in the west with SMU, Houston, TULSA, Memphis and Tulane.

CSU is a growing school near a major market.