AAC Conference

Some people think we should join them and try to make it a P6. Two teams are undefeated. UC just got their first loss. Here is their Sagrain ratings.



28 Central Florida A = 80.18 7 0

53 Cincinnati A = 74.17 6 1

55 Temple A = 73.24 5 3

67 South Florida A = 69.20 7 0

132 East Carolina A = 54.45 2 5

165 Connecticut A = 47.17 1 6



54 Houston A = 74.07 6 1

62 Memphis A = 71.11 4 4

96 Tulane A = 62.83 2 5

107 SMU A = 59.86 3 4

108 Navy A = 59.67 2 5

110 Tulsa A = 59.41 1 6

Is the AAC interested in expanding beyond 12 teams? I was just hearing the fantasy stuff like "get Boise State to join BYU and go with the AAC"--not that any conference expansion was being considered let alone if adding BYU and Boise State makes the AAC P6.

Even if BYU and Boise State joined, I don't think the AAC would be recognized as a power conference.



As I said before, if anything, the goal by the powers that be is to have even less chairs at the table so as to increase the money for the elite schools.



I would not be surprised in the least if, at some point, we see a change to four 16-team power conferences.

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if at some point anyone not in a P5 conference is relegated to a different tier almost like an FCS school and can no longer qualify at all for the playoffs.

byufan4ever wrote:

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if at some point anyone not in a P5 conference is relegated to a different tier almost like an FCS school and can no longer qualify at all for the playoffs.

At which point Bill Hancock (the same schmuck who ran the BCS), as well as everyone else involved in the so called "College Football Playoff" (i.e

presidents, commissioners, and athletic directors) should be indicted on racketeering, conspiracy, and restraint of trade charges. Heck, they already should have.

KingCoug wrote:

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if at some point anyone not in a P5 conference is relegated to a different tier almost like an FCS school and can no longer qualify at all for the playoffs.

At which point Bill Hancock (the same schmuck who ran the BCS), as well as everyone else involved in the so called "College Football Playoff" (i.e

presidents, commissioners, and athletic directors) should be indicted on racketeering, conspiracy, and restraint of trade charges. Heck, they already should have.

It somewhat amazes me that the non-p5 schools have just gone along with everything the p5 have wanted this whole time.

Jarhead wrote:

byufan4ever wrote:

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if at some point anyone not in a P5 conference is relegated to a different tier almost like an FCS school and can no longer qualify at all for the playoffs.

At which point Bill Hancock (the same schmuck who ran the BCS), as well as everyone else involved in the so called "College Football Playoff" (i.e

presidents, commissioners, and athletic directors) should be indicted on racketeering, conspiracy, and restraint of trade charges. Heck, they already should have.

It somewhat amazes me that the non-p5 schools have just gone along with everything the p5 have wanted this whole time.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/PerfumedAbleAustrianpinscher-size_restricted.gif" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Would AAC make BYU better at recruiting? Would it make our coaches better? I don't see how it does either.

jvquarterback wrote:

Would AAC make BYU better at recruiting? Would it make our coaches better? I don't see how it does either.

The only thing the AAC would give is a conference championship. To some, that's significant. To me, an AAC championship = MWC championship.

snoscythe wrote:

KingCoug wrote:

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if at some point anyone not in a P5 conference is relegated to a different tier almost like an FCS school and can no longer qualify at all for the playoffs.

At which point Bill Hancock (the same schmuck who ran the BCS), as well as everyone else involved in the so called "College Football Playoff" (i.e

presidents, commissioners, and athletic directors) should be indicted on racketeering, conspiracy, and restraint of trade charges. Heck, they already should have.

It somewhat amazes me that the non-p5 schools have just gone along with everything the p5 have wanted this whole time.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/PerfumedAbleAustrianpinscher-size_restricted.gif" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

That GIF sums it up perfectly.



The irony is, if you look at the CFP website link below, there are plenty of people from the G5 conferences helping administer a corrupt system that effectively keeps out the very conferences and schools they're supposed to represent.



https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/2016/10/11/_131504729614425311.aspx





The 4 team playoff was barely a step in the right direction.



A complete overhaul of the college football system, where there are eight geographically based/16-team conferences that lead into a playoff of the 8 conference champions, would be best.



But at the very least, the playoff should be expanded to 8 teams. The 5 power conferences each get an automatic bid with their conference champion but that's it. Enough of them getting in multiple teams. The remaining 4 spots should go to G5 and independent teams.

Jarhead wrote:

byufan4ever wrote:

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if at some point anyone not in a P5 conference is relegated to a different tier almost like an FCS school and can no longer qualify at all for the playoffs.

At which point Bill Hancock (the same schmuck who ran the BCS), as well as everyone else involved in the so called "College Football Playoff" (i.e

presidents, commissioners, and athletic directors) should be indicted on racketeering, conspiracy, and restraint of trade charges. Heck, they already should have.

It somewhat amazes me that the non-p5 schools have just gone along with everything the p5 have wanted this whole time.

They did it for money, pure and simple.



The last year of the BCS, they divided $27M. Last season, CFP gave them $89M. And they no longer have to fight their way into a big bowl; they have a guaranteed berth in a NY6 bowl.

As one who wrote a few weeks ago that BYU should join the AAC--keeping in mind that they may not want us--let me reiterate my reasons:





1. I've been a proponent of independence because of the ESPN contract, the perceived "better than G5" status, better exposure, and BYUTV, but



2. the benefits of independence are lost when BYU loses not one or two games a season but three or more, which is what BYU has done every year since becoming independent.



3. Another factor is that we are a religious-centered institution with standards, both academic and moral, that will not appeal to the vast majority of athletes needed to win at the highest level. Since we are not winning at the highest level, more and more athletes willing to live those standards are going to schools who don't require those standards, whether academic or moral or both.



4. Are we better than many P5 schools? Sure, but so are many G5 schools. Life isn't fair.



5. Can we win the occassional game against P5 schools? Wisconsin gives the obvious answer. But lose the past two games as BYU has and the season has ended for many fans.



6. It doesn't matter whether the coach has been Bronco or Kalani, the losses have come and the emotional investment has ended well before the season has ended.



7. The AAC has a decent ESPN contract with a championship worth playing for even after losses. In addition, the AAC has a better chance than the MWC of becoming a power conference.



8. In my opinion, if the AAC would accept us and if BYUTV could still broadcast or rebroadcast games as it presently does, then the AAC is the best option for BYU football. Not only that but AAC basketball is a lot better than WCC basketball.



To summarize, the present situation quickly creates apathy among fans, the exposure argument is lost, the Church is not willing to spend the money to have BYU become a P5-like team, and basketball is a whole lot better in the AAC.

jadesroom wrote:

As one who wrote a few weeks ago that BYU should join the AAC--keeping in mind that they may not want us--let me reiterate my reasons:





1. I've been a proponent of independence because of the ESPN contract, the perceived "better than G5" status, better exposure, and BYUTV, but



2. the benefits of independence are lost when BYU loses not one or two games a season but three or more, which is what BYU has done every year since becoming independent.



3. Another factor is that we are a religious-centered institution with standards, both academic and moral, that will not appeal to the vast majority of athletes needed to win at the highest level. Since we are not winning at the highest level, more and more athletes willing to live those standards are going to schools who don't require those standards, whether academic or moral or both.



4. Are we better than many P5 schools? Sure, but so are many G5 schools. Life isn't fair.



5. Can we win the occassional game against P5 schools? Wisconsin gives the obvious answer. But lose the past two games as BYU has and the season has ended for many fans.



6. It doesn't matter whether the coach has been Bronco or Kalani, the losses have come and the emotional investment has ended well before the season has ended.



7. The AAC has a decent ESPN contract with a championship worth playing for even after losses. In addition, the AAC has a better chance than the MWC of becoming a power conference.



8. In my opinion, if the AAC would accept us and if BYUTV could still broadcast or rebroadcast games as it presently does, then the AAC is the best option for BYU football. Not only that but AAC basketball is a lot better than WCC basketball.



To summarize, the present situation quickly creates apathy among fans, the exposure argument is lost, the Church is not willing to spend the money to have BYU become a P5-like team, and basketball is a whole lot better in the AAC.

All reasons to schedule more appropriately as an independent. We don't need to go to the AAC. And looking at the AAC, it's like this hodge podge of misfits, undesireables, and ne'er do wells. Not to mention there's a better chance of me buying a Taylor Swift album than the AAC becoming a power conference.



Considering the unique nature of BYU, I'd rather stay independent and annually schedule our in-state rivals, regional teams opponents like Hawaii and Boise State, the academies, other independent teams, and one open P5 opponent (making it 3 of those along with Utah and Notre Dame). But that's me.

I fail to see how having our season end by the 4th game for most fans equates to being a good reason for staying independent. Nor do I see how restrictions that keep us from playing at the highest level--restrictions that I endorse--but still scheduling opponents based on a fairy-tale belief that recruiting restrictions don't matter is a good reason for staying independent.



As far as the schedule: Play Utah....loss. Play Utah State....loss. Play BSU....loss. I'm not familiar with future schedules to know when we'll play an academy but it seems like several years since we played one. Other than Notre Dame, is there an appealing independent opponent?

jadesroom wrote:

I fail to see how having our season end by the 4th game for most fans equates to being a good reason for staying independent. Nor do I see how restrictions that keep us from playing at the highest level--restrictions that I endorse--but still scheduling opponents based on a fairy-tale belief that recruiting restrictions don't matter is a good reason for staying independent.



As far as the schedule: Play Utah....loss. Play Utah State....loss. Play BSU....loss. I'm not familiar with future schedules to know when we'll play an academy but it seems like several years since we played one. Other than Notre Dame, is there an appealing independent opponent?

It's because Holmoe hasn't been scheduling correctly. And they'll only get harder the next couple years.



Scheduling other independent teams is more about solidarity than anything.



I just don't put much stock in a AAC championship.

I would be okay with the AAC, if:

• college football instituted the ability to host conference championship semifinals, with conference scheduling deregulation


• the AAC owned and promoted the Las Vegas Bowl to quasi (or actual) NY7 status


• all sports invitation with additional western members


• BYU was able to pick its new western members for AAC divisional realignment


• BYU was still able to play Utah, Boise St., and Utah St. every year in football and Gonzaga, Utah, and Utah St. every year in basketball.

I would propose three 6-team divisions, basically adding a new western division (an re-designating a "central" division). Ideally, I would want to include Boise St., Utah St., Hawaii, SDSU, and UNLV in our football division, for the rivalries and geography for fans and recruiting.



Conference championship semifinals includes three division winners and one wild card, hosted at the home fields of the top two division winners. Conference championship title game in the new NFL stadium in Las Vegas? Conference champion gets automatic bid to the Las Vegas NY7 bowl game, played around New Year's.



BYU gets Boise St., Utah St., Hawaii, SDSU, and UNLV on the schedule every year, and then rotates three games through the other 12 schools - playing everyone in the conference once in 4 years. This allows BYU to play conference games against familiar foes and rivals, but also to travel to all corners of the country. I would suggest that BYU still try to play 3 or 4 P5 opponents per year, may be even up to 5 when we play at Hawaii. Using the Hawaii exemption, the AAC could dominate Week 0 and the kickoff of the college football season with a bunch of fun games.



Similar structure for Olympic sports, especially basketball, except you play home-away with everyone in your division and then rotate through the rest of the conference, limiting cross-division travel to only two 2-game road trips. The conference tournament could rotate among (1) Las Vegas; (2) New Orleans/Dallas/Memphis; and (3) Philly/New York.



BYU's basketball division would include Gonzaga, Utah St., Boise St., SDSU, and UNLV. Again, great games on the home and road schedule and then play the occasional Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Wichita St., Temple, Houston, SMU, etc. That would be a huge upgrade for basketball.

jadesroom wrote:

Other than Notre Dame, is there an appealing independent opponent?

Liberty AKA the next Boise. Next year when we play them they'll be 8-1, possibly undefeated with a home game against Syracuse and an away game at Rutgers. They're putting a lot of money into the program (like BYU should) and they're scheduling a bunch of wins. Hopefully they'll stay independent.



Joining the AAC or MWC fixes nothing. We need better coaching (which costs money) and better recruiting and a schedule that allow for a better than 0% chance of finishing 10-2. BYU should spend every penny in athletics on football and at this point that means football coaching. If there's a $5M surplus any year they should go spend it on better coaches.



As far as scheduling I think yearly games with SDSU, UNLV, Hawaii, USU, BSU, Liberty, Utah, Arizona, Cal, and 3 rotating schools (FCS, one marquee P5, and a Texas school). I could see BYU doing well against that schedule once every 10 years or so with good coaching.

jvquarterback wrote:

Other than Notre Dame, is there an appealing independent opponent?

Liberty AKA the next Boise. Next year when we play them they'll be 8-1, possibly undefeated with a home game against Syracuse and an away game at Rutgers. They're putting a lot of money into the program (like BYU should) and they're scheduling a bunch of wins. Hopefully they'll stay independent.



Joining the AAC or MWC fixes nothing. We need better coaching (which costs money) and better recruiting and a schedule that allow for a better than 0% chance of finishing 10-2. BYU should spend every penny in athletics on football and at this point that means football coaching. If there's a $5M surplus any year they should go spend it on better coaches.



As far as scheduling I think yearly games with SDSU, UNLV, Hawaii, USU, BSU, Liberty, Utah, Arizona, Cal, and 3 rotating schools (FCS, one marquee P5, and a Texas school). I could see BYU doing well against that schedule once every 10 years or so with good coaching.

Other than some of the teams we would play yearly, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you said.



You seem to understand what many fans (and Tom Holmoe) don't.



More money and resources for football, i.e. the program that really matters.



Better coaching.



Better recruiting.



Strategic scheduling.



I've been beating that drum for a while now.

The AAC fixes the fact that we are a Hyundai with a Ferrari mentality. We're not spending the money to compete at the highest level and our recruiting pool inhibits us from competing at the highest level. Part of the appeal of going independent was the opportunity to play the type of schedule that we'll face next year. That's why TH scheduled those games. But now we know that given the financial and recruiting limitations we can't compete except on very rare occasions. The ACC may be the type of conference that BYU aspires to join; the AAC is the type of conference where BYU actually belongs. Better coaching, better recruiting, and better scheduling ain't gonna happen.

jadesroom wrote:

The AAC fixes the fact that we are a Hyundai with a Ferrari mentality. We're not spending the money to compete at the highest level and our recruiting pool inhibits us from competing at the highest level. Part of the appeal of going independent was the opportunity to play the type of schedule that we'll face next year. That's why TH scheduled those games. But now we know that given the financial and recruiting limitations we can't compete except on very rare occasions. The ACC may be the type of conference that BYU aspires to join; the AAC is the type of conference where BYU actually belongs. Better coaching, better recruiting, and better scheduling ain't gonna happen.

Just out of curiosity, if we joined the AAC and had the usual 9 conference games, who would you schedule for the 3 non-conference games?

jadesroom wrote:

The AAC fixes the fact that we are a Hyundai with a Ferrari mentality. We're not spending the money to compete at the highest level and our recruiting pool inhibits us from competing at the highest level. Part of the appeal of going independent was the opportunity to play the type of schedule that we'll face next year. That's why TH scheduled those games. But now we know that given the financial and recruiting limitations we can't compete except on very rare occasions. The ACC may be the type of conference that BYU aspires to join; the AAC is the type of conference where BYU actually belongs. Better coaching, better recruiting, and better scheduling ain't gonna happen.

I don't think it takes joining the AAC to figure that out. And there's no reason to share revenue with Tulsa, Tulane, or Temple to get it. BYU will recruit better at 10-2 with a weaker schedule than 6-6 with a killer schedule. My suggestion for yearly scheduling has more to do with playing where we recruit than anything else.



BYU needs to pay above market to compete given the HC issues. Which is opposite how things are everywhere else at BYU where they can pay below market rates. If we need to keep a member of the Church as head coach great, pay the OC, DC and position coaches above market to get the best. Pay them more than the head coach if you have to.



I'd like it if they could pay the players though.