The AAC does not need another middle of the range program at this point in time. The conference currently has plenty of teams that bounce between being middle of the range and good (UConn/Memphis/Temple/etc.). It's true that Wichita State may help some in the RPI department, but, if it isn't dominating the AAC but not winning the AAC tourney, it isn't going to affect the NCAA tourney bids for the AAC, and that's ultimately the whole point of this exercise. Speaking of RPI, it needs to be considered that in some seasons, Wichita State may not have been invited to the NCAA tourney in some years if it hadn't won its conference tourney. If it joins the AAC and wins the conference tourney, it will be taking a spot in the NCAA tournament that would otherwise go to an existing AAC team (except for scenarios like this year when a top 25 AAC team wins the AAC tourney).mbawavefan12 wrote:Not true IMO.Aberzombie1892 wrote:If Wichita State doesn't dominate its OOC schedule, the AAC (without winning the conference tourney) and become an NCAA tourney staple, it will have a net negative effect for the conference since the NCAA tourney is the only real value Wichita state brings and splitting money further without adding a significant amount of new money won't be good.
1) they put 10k butts in the seats and only a few less when not winning. Thus they pay their coach top line money. So even if the current coach left they will still have the money to hire a great replacement and can sell a great situation
2) they only need to make the tourney every 2-3 years as that will pay for their allotment from the AAC.
3) most importantly they will at a min be a middle of the range AAC school thus helping to solidify the leagues RPI even on off years. They will never be a bottom feeder like Tulane, USF, ECU which kills the league and the top team's RPI's. They r in one of the most fertile recruiting areas as well and have built up the program for the long term. Hell they might be top 15 coming into next year with a potential all american.
If Wichita just takes a NCAA spot that would otherwise go to another AAC team by winning the conference tourney, what's the point of adding it, and, if Wichita cannot dominate the conference in order to get an at large bid and it ends up being a "middle of the range" AAC program, what's the point in adding it? The whole point of adding it is the NCAA tourney.
Removing Tulane bias and acknowledging that it wouldn't be perfect: BYU, Army, Navy, Air Force, SDSU, Boise State, Houston, Cincinnati, USF, and UConn, and Memphis for the first 11 and then argue it out among the remaining schools (UNLV/Colorado State/Tulane/etc.). Looking at the first 11, there's been some darn good football played over the last 5 years - of that group, only maybe 3 programs have not produced at least 1 10 win season in the last 5 seasons and the ones that did not produce a season of that caliber still have had a 8+ win season or been ranked (aside from UConn). In addition, each of those programs could reach a point where they could consistently field a decent football team due to offense/defensive schemes, religious loyalty, brand recognition, and access to recruits. As a note, for a truly "national" conference that will attempt to slot itself above the other conferences, geographical bias needs to be avoided in the sense that you don't want multiple teams in the same state since they will frequently be competing with each other for the same recruits.golfnut69 wrote: Please list the schools you would have merge, taking into consideration TV Markets, W/L's, Academics, University Leadership and Potential