VideoEagle

This! Don't forget a core group of the MWC has been saying over and over and over for a couple of decades they don't want conference mates in the Central Time Zone. As recently as 2016, AF, Colorado State, and one (maybe 2 or 3) others were very, VERY much opposed to adding schools in the Central time zone.

I doubt this is as bad as some suggest. First of all, losing SMU does hurt the AAC. There is no doubt the conference was stronger with them than without them. But realistically, they don't draw much of an audience. Despite huge advantages in donations and very strong transfer portal results, they still aren't that strong in either football or basketball. In the short term, I don't think being in the ACC is going to help their records in either sport. As for having an odd number of teams, the B1G did it for nearly 20 years as did the old SWC. Secondly, Wazzu and Oregon State really never made sense as members of the AAC without at least Cal. Yes, we could go to ESPN and get more money, but do either of those two generate enough increase in rights fees to make up for increased travel and other expenses? If Aresco is saying AAC is no longer interested, then I suspect the money was not enough. It might have been not enough money for Wazzu and OSU, but still not enough money.

I still find it amazing that Florida State is saying they can't possibly compete without more money while SMU says they don't need any money at all. SMU is forgoing for seven years till 2031 and giving a grant of rights until 2035. That means they will only have four years of actual revenue! It does appear the Stanford professor who claims to be an expert on media rights and told Stanford they were worth $50 million a year is off by about $40 million.

Remember, AF, Colorado State, and at least one other were very adamant they didn’t want to have a conference member in the Central or Eastern time zones. It’s not that they didn’t want to expand, they only wanted to expand in their time zones. Now there are some potential expansion targets in their time zones

Do they really or is I just internet rumor. Stanford did really want in the ACC. Yes, there are private schools in the ACC, but all of them have much higher profiles and fan basses than SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa. Does Stanford really want them or are they just willing to accept them until Stanford can get in the group they really want?

What makes you think it does NOT have Rohypnol in it?

I found this article from 2016 about the differences between Tier 1 and AAU membership. The article was written back when OU was making noises about wanting to be in the B1G, but was being told no chance because their academics weren't high enough. From what I've been able to gather from this and other sources, generating large amounts of peer reviewed research is one of two keys to getting into the AAU. The other is having a strong enough reputation for this research from the current members of the AAU, but generating the research is the more important of the two. https://collegead.com/understanding-academics-aau-carnegie-1-designations/

Our current annual games against SMU will soon be the only game between DFW area schools. TCU is going to "indefinitely pause" its series with SMU. Of course, once SMU gets buys their invite to the ACC, who knows! https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/tcu-horned-frogs/2023/08/16/tcu-pausing-football-series-against-rival-smu-after-2025-season-report-says/

Sometimes twice daily! He seems to have a lot of free time.

Comcast has made it VERY clear they are holding the schools that received the overpayments responsible, NOT the conference. And they keep saying ALL the schools that received overpayments.

Remember SMU is NOT an AAU member.

I saw this from Brett McMurphy this morning. USC now has an official beer. And it's a good one from Stone Brewing. I wish we had a local brewery that would sell an official beer (for a sponsorship fee, of course!). Now to see if I can actually post from X! https://twitter.com/Brett_McMurphy/status/1689040153837207552?s=20 EDIT: After trying about eight different ways of posting, I'll just post the link.

Mad at Rice for doing what? An internet rumor? What does "applied for membership" even mean? Did they ask, "Hey are you thinking of adding schools?" There was a rumor a number of schools "filled out the paperwork to apply" but what does that mean? It's not like there is a formal application to join a conference!

Back to the original theme of the thread - I saw on a Twitter (X) feed that "an AAC member" was going to announce a home and home with a "PAC-12" member, but that because of the craziness yesterday the announcement was going to be delayed.

Here's an interesting article from Forbes on ESPN launching its own streaming service as it moves away from cable. An interesting quote The requirement of having a cable subscription to get live sports is going to end as everything moves to streaming. With a cable bundle, you have no choices but with streaming you do. The problem is people can be very choosy in the streaming for which they pay. I don't see how ESPN will be able to continue paying every increasing fees for sports rights. Bally's has shown that the money can and will run out eventually. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradadgate/2023/06/01/espn-starting-a-streaming-service-is-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-cable/?sh=5497db9e56c7

And cultural and social! Don't forget that cultural fit was the major reason the PAC did not want BYU. The BYU code of conduct is in direct conflict with Cal's and they would not tolerate a school that differed.

Yes! Remember, the University Presidents liked the 16 member WAC until they were experiencing it for a few years. Fans (donors!) started asking the universities what could be done to improve fan experiences like making road games something they could do as car trips. Not wanting to go back to that is why the fans/donors at CSU, Wyoming, Air Force and UNLV continue to say the don't want any members in the Central time zone.

For the past 75 years, teams out west have dreamed of joining the Pac-6, 8, 10, 12 or whatever. It's hard to just change what you've wished for for decades.

Why should I care about the "Wll's" opinion?

Their.

While I don't like UTSA, they are NOT a satellite campus of UT Austin. They are a separate university with a common governing board. There are lots of examples of this including Kansas and Kansas State, and UC Berkley and UCLA.

I'm not saying we should just say yes, but to reject the city out of hand doesn't make any sense. I'm sure the NT administration will not do anything that foolish. And just a glance at the Denton Convention and Visitor's Bureau website shows there are two to three events/meetings/conventions a WEEK in Denton. A facility will increase that exponentially based on what's happened in Frisco. https://www.discoverdenton.com/?UTM_source=GMB_listing&UTM_medium=organic

Certainly, explore it! The City wants to partner with the school and that's exactly what has been needed for years. "Partner" doesn't mean doing it only in a way that best suits UNT only. If you don't want to be a partner, don't expect support!

I could be wrong, but I thought the reason for the NET ratings was to fix the problems with the old RPI ratings.

No, I didn't check the date! Oops!