Ye Olde Green Wave Forum

The DEFINITIVE Tulane discussion forum
It is currently Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:25 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:04 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 22209
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:07 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 20079
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.
Maybe, maybe not. But as has been amply stated here, it’s all about the Benjamins; 100% the broadcast contracts.

_________________
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:27 am 
Offline
Regent's Circle

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:48 am
Posts: 7264
If the BYU guy is right and the Cougs tag along with BSU into the AAC then I guess the AAC moves to 14 for football (with ESPN assistance.) 80%+ of G5 teams would apply to be the last school in. Although likely, it’s not a lock that another MWC team would be picked.

It would be bizarre and unseemly but it would almost certainly make the AAC a de facto P6 (no one else likely to get NY6 Access Bowl slot) while it awaits rule changes to become de jure P6.

A boost for our self-esteem if nothing else.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:02 am 
Offline
Coach Level
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:29 pm
Posts: 2168
Location: Broadmoor
There's one report out there that Boise has been in contact with the Big Sky and West Coast conferences about moving their Olympic sports to one of those conferences.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:06 am 
Offline
Regent's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:49 am
Posts: 6582
Location: Gretna, LA
Any additions will be dictated by ESPN, largely. If they offer significantly more money to add particular teams, they'll be added. If not, they won't. It's just that simple. They're the ones who will set the value on BYU, BSU, and/or another team to get to 14.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:07 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 20079
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD
GretnaGrn wrote:
Any additions will be dictated by ESPN, largely. If they offer significantly more money to add particular teams, they'll be added. If not, they won't. It's just that simple. They're the ones who will set the value on BYU, BSU, and/or another team to get to 14.
See above. :-D

_________________
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:37 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 2:57 pm
Posts: 10142
Location: Metairie
WP, I was envisioning (pardon me for not spelling it out - it was late) there would be two divisions with two pods each. Play your pod three for games plus six games from the other teams. Each year or every two years different pods would be paired to make the two divisions but every year teams would play its same three pod members to attain a better geographic fit.

I know it’s a bit convoluted but it’s a way to get the best of the MWC and keep some geographic order.

I totally agree a two division championship game is the only option.

_________________
[i]


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:59 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 22209
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
Gotcha BC. That makes a LOT more sense. Thanks for clarifying.

I'd be "OK"ish with that, but I prefer divisions to be round robin. I'd prefer, if we had to go 16 (I'd prefer 14), to go two divisions of 8, with 9 conference games.

But

~I think to get to 16 we'd have to take some teams that would water down the conference (and I do agree with Pete's point, just not his assessment that adding 3 would do that). I'm not sure Army adds enough, plus they've been clear they don't want in, plus I'm not sure how the Army-Navy game would work). Colorado State isn't all that exciting. I'd be willing to DISCUSS them for the 3rd spot after Boise and BYU (though I'd prefer SDSU or AF), but I certainly wouldn't want to add Colorado State AND SDUS or AF.

~ I think we need to stay at 8 conference games so that teams can still play enough P5 teams to continue to keep the conference visible and relevant. Everyone is going to play a FCS team, so with 9 conference games, that is, at most, 2 "free" option games a year. That's not enough.

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:04 pm 
Offline
Cornerstone
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:34 am
Posts: 26129
Location: New Orleans
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.

_________________
The gap between the top of the big leagues and their bottom is now bigger than the gap between their bottom and us - P.R. told me to do this


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:09 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 22209
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:21 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 23157
Location: Cincinnati, OH
TUPF wrote:
GretnaGrn wrote:
Any additions will be dictated by ESPN, largely. If they offer significantly more money to add particular teams, they'll be added. If not, they won't. It's just that simple. They're the ones who will set the value on BYU, BSU, and/or another team to get to 14.
See above. :-D
Yeah. What I said. 8) It's simple. If ESPN thinks they add value, they will join. If not, they won't. BSU really has no sway in it.

Regardless, if it's going to happen, this is the time for it, when the MWC has just renegotiated and BSU doesn't like it and we have not started our new contract yet. So if there's any value in it, the move will happen between now and August (actually much earlier for logistics' sake).

I am much more concerned about losing a UCF or Houston (or maybe Cincy or Memphis) to a P5 than I am anxious to add BSU or BYU. Frankly, I'd rather "keep them in our back pocket" as the best possible alternatives if we need to plug holes after defections, than add them and then need to go desperately diving to even lesser schools after any defections.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:10 pm 
Offline
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 8:43 pm
Posts: 3450
Location: Baton Rouge
WaveProf wrote:
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.



Boise's problems are circumstantial. Boise joined the MWC from the WAC which was torpedoed by the MWC members. There has been no cohesion among those schools out there. When Boise joined the MWC poked them by making a rule they couldn't wear all blue on the blue turf. The MWC has always been a marriage of geographic convenience and not one of similar vision. Given those environs Boise was simply looking out for itself.

BYU on the other hand has always fancied themselves a different class than the other schools out there. They would likely do the same in the AAC. I want no part of them(and I don't have any qualms with their religious stuff). Take USAFA, BSU, and CSU and call it a day. New Mexico wouldn't be bad either they have a large market and honestly I don't care that they suck, we did too at one time. Their potential is far greater. An out of the box add would be Liberty. They are a regional fit, are private and not held back by state schools with political crap, their endowment is the same as Tulane's and they are MOTIVATED.

All that said I think the cap should be at 14 teams.

_________________
Quote:The Good - TULANE
The Bad - LSU
THe Ugly - USM


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:40 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:13 pm
Posts: 22059
Location: Chicago
Poseidon wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.



Boise's problems are circumstantial. Boise joined the MWC from the WAC which was torpedoed by the MWC members. There has been no cohesion among those schools out there. When Boise joined the MWC poked them by making a rule they couldn't wear all blue on the blue turf. The MWC has always been a marriage of geographic convenience and not one of similar vision. Given those environs Boise was simply looking out for itself.

BYU on the other hand has always fancied themselves a different class than the other schools out there. They would likely do the same in the AAC. I want no part of them(and I don't have any qualms with their religious stuff). Take USAFA, BSU, and CSU and call it a day. New Mexico wouldn't be bad either they have a large market and honestly I don't care that they suck, we did too at one time. Their potential is far greater. An out of the box add would be Liberty. They are a regional fit, are private and not held back by state schools with political crap, their endowment is the same as Tulane's and they are MOTIVATED.

All that said I think the cap should be at 14 teams.


Add Liberty and BYU... that'd be fun

_________________
Using big words is not a personal attack


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:08 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 20079
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD
windywave wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.



Boise's problems are circumstantial. Boise joined the MWC from the WAC which was torpedoed by the MWC members. There has been no cohesion among those schools out there. When Boise joined the MWC poked them by making a rule they couldn't wear all blue on the blue turf. The MWC has always been a marriage of geographic convenience and not one of similar vision. Given those environs Boise was simply looking out for itself.

BYU on the other hand has always fancied themselves a different class than the other schools out there. They would likely do the same in the AAC. I want no part of them(and I don't have any qualms with their religious stuff). Take USAFA, BSU, and CSU and call it a day. New Mexico wouldn't be bad either they have a large market and honestly I don't care that they suck, we did too at one time. Their potential is far greater. An out of the box add would be Liberty. They are a regional fit, are private and not held back by state schools with political crap, their endowment is the same as Tulane's and they are MOTIVATED.

All that said I think the cap should be at 14 teams.


Add Liberty and BYU... that'd be fun
Since we are throwing stuff against the wall, add UNLV. Can you just imagine the Liberty and BYU folks on The Strip? I’d pay to see it.

_________________
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:11 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:13 pm
Posts: 22059
Location: Chicago
TUPF wrote:
windywave wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.



Boise's problems are circumstantial. Boise joined the MWC from the WAC which was torpedoed by the MWC members. There has been no cohesion among those schools out there. When Boise joined the MWC poked them by making a rule they couldn't wear all blue on the blue turf. The MWC has always been a marriage of geographic convenience and not one of similar vision. Given those environs Boise was simply looking out for itself.

BYU on the other hand has always fancied themselves a different class than the other schools out there. They would likely do the same in the AAC. I want no part of them(and I don't have any qualms with their religious stuff). Take USAFA, BSU, and CSU and call it a day. New Mexico wouldn't be bad either they have a large market and honestly I don't care that they suck, we did too at one time. Their potential is far greater. An out of the box add would be Liberty. They are a regional fit, are private and not held back by state schools with political crap, their endowment is the same as Tulane's and they are MOTIVATED.

All that said I think the cap should be at 14 teams.


Add Liberty and BYU... that'd be fun
Since we are throwing stuff against the wall, add UNLV. Can you just imagine the Liberty and BYU folks on The Strip? I’d pay to see it.


Um bourbon?

_________________
Using big words is not a personal attack


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:20 pm 
Offline
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 5:13 pm
Posts: 4182
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
TUPF wrote:
windywave wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.



Boise's problems are circumstantial. Boise joined the MWC from the WAC which was torpedoed by the MWC members. There has been no cohesion among those schools out there. When Boise joined the MWC poked them by making a rule they couldn't wear all blue on the blue turf. The MWC has always been a marriage of geographic convenience and not one of similar vision. Given those environs Boise was simply looking out for itself.

BYU on the other hand has always fancied themselves a different class than the other schools out there. They would likely do the same in the AAC. I want no part of them(and I don't have any qualms with their religious stuff). Take USAFA, BSU, and CSU and call it a day. New Mexico wouldn't be bad either they have a large market and honestly I don't care that they suck, we did too at one time. Their potential is far greater. An out of the box add would be Liberty. They are a regional fit, are private and not held back by state schools with political crap, their endowment is the same as Tulane's and they are MOTIVATED.

All that said I think the cap should be at 14 teams.


Add Liberty and BYU... that'd be fun
Since we are throwing stuff against the wall, add UNLV. Can you just imagine the Liberty and BYU folks on The Strip? I’d pay to see it.

Fans aside, you think Liberty wants to see Hugh Freeze that close to the Strip?

_________________
AnY iMaGeS yOu PoRtRaY wIlL bE rEpReSeNtAtIvE oF tHe TeAm YoU sUpPoRt


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:22 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 20079
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD
windywave wrote:
TUPF wrote:
windywave wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
long green wrote:
WaveProf wrote:
Adding Boise, BYU, and AF or SDSU strengthens the brand.


Adding Boise as a 12th member does strengthen the brand but all the warnings are legit. They have a track record as a bad conference mate and they would have to account for that history in any agreement. Further additions as suggested above do not strengthen the brand, they create an inevitable second conference. The point of this move if it happens is to destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival, not create a big new voting bloc.


I'm more concerned about both Boise and BYU's histories of being difficult partners more than I would be a 3-school (out of 14) voting block. Now if we were talking about adding 5 teams (a la BC's idea) I'd be right on board with you. I think adding 3 instead of 1 helps mitigate travel (not just for Boise, but for the Tulanes of the world) and, instead of "helping destroy the viability of the MWC as a rival", it drives a huge a-- dagger through the heart of that viability. It's a death blow.



Boise's problems are circumstantial. Boise joined the MWC from the WAC which was torpedoed by the MWC members. There has been no cohesion among those schools out there. When Boise joined the MWC poked them by making a rule they couldn't wear all blue on the blue turf. The MWC has always been a marriage of geographic convenience and not one of similar vision. Given those environs Boise was simply looking out for itself.

BYU on the other hand has always fancied themselves a different class than the other schools out there. They would likely do the same in the AAC. I want no part of them(and I don't have any qualms with their religious stuff). Take USAFA, BSU, and CSU and call it a day. New Mexico wouldn't be bad either they have a large market and honestly I don't care that they suck, we did too at one time. Their potential is far greater. An out of the box add would be Liberty. They are a regional fit, are private and not held back by state schools with political crap, their endowment is the same as Tulane's and they are MOTIVATED.

All that said I think the cap should be at 14 teams.


Add Liberty and BYU... that'd be fun
Since we are throwing stuff against the wall, add UNLV. Can you just imagine the Liberty and BYU folks on The Strip? I’d pay to see it.


Um bourbon?
That too! :lol: Make sure multiple bachelorette parties are emptying their guts on the curb.

_________________
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:38 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 23157
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Hey, we already saw what happens when Tulane plays BYU in a town where there's a main party street full of bars and restaurants. Basically Tulane owns the street and they all depend on Tulane to make a profit.

(for the younger folks, think Beale Street 1998)


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2020 8:04 pm 
Offline
President's Circle

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:18 pm
Posts: 4991
While football is the sport that drives everything, BYU is a nightmare in every other sport. Immediately the baseball and basketball championship games have to be moved to Saturday. All baseball series with BYU will have a Saturday doubleheader. The conference already has so many headaches with scheduling because of rain. There would be so many cancelled games and 7 inning games.

They just are not good enough in football to warrant all the other headaches.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 12:07 am 
Offline
Coach Level

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 1:22 pm
Posts: 1878
NJwave wrote:
While football is the sport that drives everything, BYU is a nightmare in every other sport. Immediately the baseball and basketball championship games have to be moved to Saturday. All baseball series with BYU will have a Saturday doubleheader. The conference already has so many headaches with scheduling because of rain. There would be so many cancelled games and 7 inning games.

They just are not good enough in football to warrant all the other headaches.


Exactly.

_________________
Here we come!


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 10:26 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm
Posts: 10965
PeteRasche wrote:
Please stop watering down the conference. If the teams being added do not give a clear and significant benefit to the football brand, we should not do it. BYU and BSU do not. Maybe a decade ago they would have.
Conservatively, Boise and BYU would be 2 of the top 5 in the AAC as far as football "brands".


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 11:17 am 
Offline
Breaker Level

Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 10:13 pm
Posts: 332
Location: Cincinnati, OH
With enough teams, would it be possible to have a conference semi-final as well as a final? You could have 4 - five team pods, you play each team in your pod once and then one team in each of the other pods (7 conference games). The 8th conference game pits the top 4 teams in a playoff, but also 2 vs. 2 & 2 vs. 2, 3 vs. 3 & 3 vs. 3, etc. avoiding rematches if possible.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 12:06 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 22209
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
Johnny4 wrote:
With enough teams, would it be possible to have a conference semi-final as well as a final?

No.

The NCAA currently doesn't allow it.

If the NCAA were to change the rule, they wouldn't do so at the behest of a G5.

There isn't a week in the schedule to play the extra game before bowl announcements.

If we somehow got around all of that, it'd still be a bad idea because we'd be making our best team play TWO extra tough games.

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 1:27 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 23157
Location: Cincinnati, OH
ml wave wrote:
PeteRasche wrote:
Please stop watering down the conference. If the teams being added do not give a clear and significant benefit to the football brand, we should not do it. BYU and BSU do not. Maybe a decade ago they would have.
Conservatively, Boise and BYU would be 2 of the top 5 in the AAC as far as football "brands".
In all our minds, yes... because we're old. I'd be curious to hear the take of an 18-25 year old.

And arguably more because the media has worked so hard to make sure that the current teams in the AAC don't have a "brand". In other words, not a high bar. Adding "meh" to "meh and less".


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 3:07 pm 
Offline
Regent's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:49 am
Posts: 6582
Location: Gretna, LA
PeteRasche wrote:
ml wave wrote:
PeteRasche wrote:
Please stop watering down the conference. If the teams being added do not give a clear and significant benefit to the football brand, we should not do it. BYU and BSU do not. Maybe a decade ago they would have.
Conservatively, Boise and BYU would be 2 of the top 5 in the AAC as far as football "brands".
In all our minds, yes... because we're old. I'd be curious to hear the take of an 18-25 year old.

And arguably more because the media has worked so hard to make sure that the current teams in the AAC don't have a "brand". In other words, not a high bar. Adding "meh" to "meh and less".

Doesn't really matter what the 18-25 year old thinks, IMHO, because ESPN suits, who are more in our age bracket, will effectively be the ones to decide. And ESPN is definitely not in touch with da yutes.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group