Sunbelt Expansion... additions?

[The Rock]

Will it enhance the conference? Will it Enhance TV deals? Is it good for App?
Those are the main question when I consider re-alignment.

To me, the answer to all of these is NO for So. Miss.

Not a rich football tradition, not a good recent record, we don't need to add another weak opponent to the SB West, don't see there being any hype that would help us negotiate TV deals, and its another longer trip when App plays them.

Remember, any teams we add will cost App $$ from league payouts unless we get a new TV deal. What is in it for the SB???

Is it good individually for App? Not really. Is it good for the conference? Absolutely. And I'm not an insider but I don't think Belt leadership (which would include App representation) would allow additions to be if the positives outweighed the negatives (which includes financial incentives).

I'm sorry but I'm failing to see how some of you are still convinced they don't have rich football tradition-Southern miss founded their football program in 1912; App didn't start theirs until 1928.

How is this good for the conference? Adding this school will literally cost the rest if he conference money?
Duke football was founded in 1888. Does that mean they have a rich football history?

Yes as do the ivy league schools; I think any school that has been sponsoring football 80+ years and is still actively playing football can say they have rich football history.

So simply fielding a team for a long time, regardless of how poor the on field product is equals rich football tradition for you... that is quite the take
Who doesn't appreciate Texas State's (founded 1904) rich football traditions

[Ramblinredwolf]

Will it enhance the conference? Will it Enhance TV deals? Is it good for App?
Those are the main question when I consider re-alignment.

To me, the answer to all of these is NO for So. Miss.

Not a rich football tradition, not a good recent record, we don't need to add another weak opponent to the SB West, don't see there being any hype that would help us negotiate TV deals, and its another longer trip when App plays them.

Remember, any teams we add will cost App $$ from league payouts unless we get a new TV deal. What is in it for the SB???

Is it good individually for App? Not really. Is it good for the conference? Absolutely. And I'm not an insider but I don't think Belt leadership (which would include App representation) would allow additions to be if the positives outweighed the negatives (which includes financial incentives).

I'm sorry but I'm failing to see how some of you are still convinced they don't have rich football tradition-Southern miss founded their football program in 1912; App didn't start theirs until 1928.

How is this good for the conference? Adding this school will literally cost the rest if he conference money?
Duke football was founded in 1888. Does that mean they have a rich football history?

Yes as do the ivy league schools; I think any school that has been sponsoring football 80+ years and is still actively playing football can say they have rich football history.

So simply fielding a team for a long time, regardless of how poor the on field product is equals rich football tradition for you... that is quite the take
Who doesn't appreciate Texas State's (founded 1904) rich football traditions

Again what is your definition of "Rich" and "poor on the field product?" Clearly yours is way different than mine.

Also Texas State actually has decent success in football (Two National Championships at the D II level, 14 Conference titles and couple of appearances in Div II and FCS playoffs). Nothing too exciting but I think rich in itself.

[The Rock]

Is it good individually for App? Not really. Is it good for the conference? Absolutely. And I'm not an insider but I don't think Belt leadership (which would include App representation) would allow additions to be if the positives outweighed the negatives (which includes financial incentives).

I'm sorry but I'm failing to see how some of you are still convinced they don't have rich football tradition-Southern miss founded their football program in 1912; App didn't start theirs until 1928.

How is this good for the conference? Adding this school will literally cost the rest if he conference money?
Duke football was founded in 1888. Does that mean they have a rich football history?

Yes as do the ivy league schools; I think any school that has been sponsoring football 80+ years and is still actively playing football can say they have rich football history.

tell me you don't know anything about football tradition without saying you don't know anything about football tradition...
So simply fielding a team for a long time, regardless of how poor the on field product is equals rich football tradition for you... that is quite the take
Who doesn't appreciate Texas State's (founded 1904) rich football traditions

Again what is your definition of "Rich" and "poor on the field product?" Clearly yours is way different than mine.

Also Texas State actually has decent success in football (Two National Championships at the D II level, 14 Conference titles and couple of appearances in Div II and FCS playoffs). Nothing too exciting but I think rich in itself.

tell me you don't know anything about football tradition without saying you don't know anything about football tradition...

[Ramblinredwolf]

How is this good for the conference? Adding this school will literally cost the rest if he conference money?
Duke football was founded in 1888. Does that mean they have a rich football history?

Yes as do the ivy league schools; I think any school that has been sponsoring football 80+ years and is still actively playing football can say they have rich football history.

tell me you don't know anything about football tradition without saying you don't know anything about football tradition...
So simply fielding a team for a long time, regardless of how poor the on field product is equals rich football tradition for you... that is quite the take
Who doesn't appreciate Texas State's (founded 1904) rich football traditions

Again what is your definition of "Rich" and "poor on the field product?" Clearly yours is way different than mine.

Also Texas State actually has decent success in football (Two National Championships at the D II level, 14 Conference titles and couple of appearances in Div II and FCS playoffs). Nothing too exciting but I think rich in itself.

tell me you don't know anything about football tradition without saying you don't know anything about football tradition...

Southern miss has tradition. They have won big games along with championships and bowls. They have a solid fan base. They have rich football history. They've been playing football longer than many of the schools in the belt, including App and also have called their stadium the Rock for longer than App. But even then, apparently they have no tradition or history. Great logic.

And really whether you like it or not, it's a pretty foregone conclusion they're probably coming into the league (along with somebody else hopefully Marshall).

[moonshine]

Pete Thamel reporting that CSU and AFA declined the AAC

Aresco seems to be coming up short. Rumors abound on the next targets as well as possible defections. The MWC could get proactive and try to poach SMU and Tulsa plus to 2 b-ball adds in the Zags and Shockers. Most believe Memphis and Boise to be on the Big12's shortlist after Texas and OU leave while Navy will just return to independence. If those scenarios play out, the AAC would be down to ECU, Temple, Tulane and USF. Who will the AAC target next? UAB - UNCC - ODU - FAU - Marshall - UTSA

At this point, assuming this is how things shake out, I hope App remains in the SBC and continues to help build this conference up. The AAC will be a spread out hodgepodge. The SBC needs to secure an eastern member to pair with USM.

[Ramblinredwolf]

Pete Thamel reporting that CSU and AFA declined the AAC

Aresco seems to be coming up short. Rumors abound on the next targets as well as possible defections. The MWC could get proactive and try to poach SMU and Tulsa plus to 2 b-ball adds in the Zags and Shockers. Most believe Memphis and Boise to be on the Big12's shortlist after Texas and OU leave while Navy will just return to independence. If those scenarios play out, the AAC would be down to ECU, Temple, Tulane and USF. Who will the AAC target next? UAB - UNCC - ODU - FAU - Marshall - UTSA

At this point, assuming this is how things shake out, I hope App remains in the SBC and continues to help build this conference up. The AAC will be a spread out hodgepodge. The SBC needs to secure an eastern member to pair with USM.

Agree. I think SBC is very prime to compete with AAC and MW, regardless if we add on or not.

I think we all can agree if Ga State left we wouldn't be upset.

[moonshine]

Agree. I think SBC is very prime to compete with AAC and MW, regardless if we add on or not.

I think we all can agree if Ga State left we wouldn't be upset.

Yep, I've been fine staying at 10 unless we could somehow add USM and Marshall while UTA and UALR find new homes. I like 10 because in off years, we split the pie with less mouths. IMO, I'd make an exception for USM and Marsha as I feel they add value and fit the SBC culture.

I have started to come around to expanding to 14 with the right additions and assuming the Mouse ensures the dollars make sense. I've been against allowing previous SBC members back but I personally would defer to the long standing members to bring back someone WKU who seems to not have burnt bridges on the way out. I have no desire for the F_U's and from what I've read, the old SBC members have no use for UNT. Getting TxSt a travel partner, like UTSA, would help everyone with travel expenses while providing the Bobcats a nearby rival.

[citroknight]

Looking rough for the AAC. Felt it was a little bit of wishful thinking to raid the MWC. Though I thought there was *some* chance for the 2 Colorado schools if they felt that Boise would be gone eventually so they would get ahead of the game and find an eastward home sooner rather than later.

But in a way this isn't too different than what the Big 12 went through. Go through your desired options first even if not realistic. They tried persuading Texas and Oklahoma to stay, a merger/scheduling agreement with the PAC 12, and probably reached out as individual schools to other P5s. Only after striking out on all did they go with the realistic option of adding the best G5 teams that they could.

[MAD Doctor]

The rejections by the MWC have put the P6 myth to bed. Aresco is in danger of becoming a Banakowski 2.0 and ruin what’s left of the AAC by adding “big market” teams who can’t draw flies.
We’ll see how it shakes out, but as of now, the AAC is losing any leftover prestige it used to have by the minute.

[citroknight]

The rejections by the MWC have put the P6 myth to bed. Aresco is in danger of becoming a Banakowski 2.0 and ruin what’s left of the AAC by adding “big market” teams who can’t draw flies.
We’ll see how it shakes out, but as of now, the AAC is losing any leftover prestige it used to have by the minute.

Biased since I'm a UCF fan, but I think there was some truth to P6. At full strength the AAC was the tweener league. But yeah once it loses the top 3, that advantage is way gone. Memphis is still great and SMU is on the rise but it hurts going from 4 teams of Memphis level football to just 1.