Who will Replace SMU in the AAC?

[Clinetort]

I'm pulling for UTEP.  Thoughts?

[Wag Tag]

Do they have to be replaced? We are the back up for DFW.  Is there school that is well funded and in the vicinity of an airport you can fly direct to? 

[NorthTexan95]

I thought they added extra teams because they new others would eventually leave.  It might be better to have a higher percentage of any TV deal. 

[El Paso Eagle]

1 minute ago, Clinetort said:

I'm pulling for UTEP.  Thoughts?

As much as I would personally like it, no. If UTEP ever gets an opportunity in the MWC they would take it. If they keep the footprint of being near larger markets, I would say maybe Georgia State (Atlanta), or Texas State (30 miles to Austin). Not sure how much either is planning on investing in their programs. If market size is not as important I would say Louisiana-Lafayette, App State, or Costal Carolina.

[Stix]

6 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

If market size is not as important I would say Louisiana-Lafayette, App State, or Costal Carolina.

So, not La Tech?

[UNTcrazy727]

They’ll say what’s up to Air Force and Colorado State. Doubt the AAC has much interest in anyone else. 

[NT80]

6 minutes ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

They’ll say what’s up to Air Force and Colorado State. Doubt the AAC has much interest in anyone else. 

The AAC has targeted the MWC before and will again.  The MWC will lose SDSU to the PAC and if others backfill for more PAC defections then the MWC will be ripe for front-range schools like AFA, Colo St, UNM to be invited with the Denver and Albuquerque markets.

[Aquila_Viridis]

A giant turd?

[ForneyGreen]

4 hours ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

They’ll say what’s up to Air Force and Colorado State. Doubt the AAC has much interest in anyone else. 

Agreed - without SMU, the AAC would still have 12 football members (if the SMU thing really happens at some point).  Our new conference was definitely prepared.

If Air Force or Colorado State petitioned to join, I'm sure they would get serious consideration.  Otherwise, the new AAC will be just fine and doesn't need to reach to grab another school just as a back fill.

[NTSU52]

13 hours ago, Stix said:

So, not La Tech?

Oh hell no. I am so glad we a will no longer be sharing a conference with them. Some of the trashiest fans anywhere.

[MeanGreenGlory]

Colorado State and Air Force are the only two I’d consider at this point. They’re both established schools, have fantastic campuses, would get us into new markets that are growing rapidly, and pull from the MWC which would further establish the AAC as the top G5. 
 

Additionally, having another academy in the conference would bring some perks. 
 

The only downside is sending the team to play at elevation once/twice a year. That can be a challenging adjustment if you don’t have appropriate time to acclimate. 

[RBP79]

AF or CSU.....

 

[MeanGreen_MBA]

1 hour ago, NTSU52 said:

Oh hell no. I am so glad we a will no longer be sharing a conference with them. Some of the trashiest fans anywhere.

I have not had that experience.  A little redneck, maybe, but usually very friendly. La Tech puts good teams out to play, and it is an easy 3 hour drive. 
 

I would welcome La Tech. 

[El Paso Eagle]

Air Force and Army. Get all three academies in the same league

[UNTLifer]

Louisiana, LA Tech or Air Force

[UNT78]

Colorado State is awesome, great campus, very good facilities and 1 hour from Denver; I think they go to the Pac-12 before SMU does! 

[DeepGreen]

No to Louisiana!  No to Louisiana Tech!

[SMU2006]

Texas State makes a lot of sense.

[El Paso Eagle]

5 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

Texas State makes a lot of sense.

Based on the footprint for the last expansions, they do. However, not sure about their facilities and how much they have/are investing.

[GrayEagle]

12 hours ago, ForneyGreen said:

Agreed - without SMU, the AAC would still have 12 football members (if the SMU thing really happens at some point).  Our new conference was definitely prepared.

If Air Force or Colorado State petitioned to join, I'm sure they would get serious consideration.  Otherwise, the new AAC will be just fine and doesn't need to reach to grab another school just as a back fill.

We would still have 13 football-playing members if SMU left.  The AAC is in large media areas so I doubt that would include La Tech, Louisiana, Southern Miss, or Western Kentucky.  They would also require a stadium of at least 30,000 or the promise to build one within one or two years of admittance (Charlotte).  If they pick one from old CUSA, Marshall would be the most bang for the buck.  Smaller market but they are better-known nationally.  The other two that are in large markets are Texas State and Middle Tennessee.  I have no idea if they would be considered since they are in markets dominated by the SEC.

It's possible that we could try former member Army.  They have national appeal and technically they are in the New York market.  I don't really like to play two service academies in the same year but that wouldn't be every year of course.  So, my choices to replace SMU would be Army, Marshall or Texas State.

[Texas Stranger]

If either Army or Air Force wanted to come football-only have them share a slot with Denver, like Navy and Wichita St are doing.  I remember them being damn good at every sport they played.

[outoftown]

Overall standing pat should really be an option to consider. The AAC can afford to play it slow. Where would anyone else go to? There really aren't any good options unless the PAC12 somehow tries to go further east (which seems unlikely, UTSA seems like the only potential option in my mind and that still seems very unlikely and being a case of things have gone terribly wrong for the Pac12). The ACC can't expand until their GOR is up, and none of the remaining schools do anything for the Big12.

13 teams is a bit annoying for scheduling, but other than that there really is no downside, especially since the conference already doesn't have divisions. It may also not actually be that easy to pry away sun belt schools, as they created a league with reasonable cohesion now. The AAC in any case must make sure that any joining school invests properly in its athletics or really contributes otherwise. That eliminates LaTech and UTEP and FIU off the bat, as they have simply failed to invest. So getting airforce or army would make sense, because of navy, or CSU because they invest, but geographics would be tricky. Also, none of those adds will happen in an instant, all those schools have reason to consider staying pat themselves. I can also understand the folks who say GSU as it may be a cultural fit that would likely invest properly. But they may feel safer in the belt, which is geographically better set up for them. You could get Liberty, but would have to wonder if academics minded presidents want to be associated with that brand.

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by outoftown

[NT80]

9 hours ago, outoftown said:

Overall standing pat should really be an option to consider. The AAC can afford to play it slow. Where would anyone else go to? There really aren't any good options unless the PAC12 somehow tries to go further east (which seems unlikely, UTSA seems like the only potential option in my mind and that still seems very unlikely and being a case of things have gone terribly wrong for the Pac12). The ACC can't expand until their GOR is up, and none of the remaining schools do anything for the Big12.

13 teams is a bit annoying for scheduling, but other than that there really is no downside, especially since the conference already doesn't have divisions. It may also not actually be that easy to pry away sun belt schools, as they created a league with reasonable cohesion now. The AAC in any case must make sure that any joining school invests properly in its athletics or really contributes otherwise. That eliminates LaTech and UTEP and FIU off the bat, as they have simply failed to invest. So getting airforce or army would make sense, because of navy, or CSU because they invest, but geographics would be tricky. Also, none of those adds will happen in an instant, all those schools have reason to consider staying pat themselves. I can also understand the folks who say GSU as it may be a cultural fit that would likely invest properly. But they may feel safer in the belt, which is geographically better set up for them. You could get Liberty, but would have to wonder if academics minded presidents want to be associated with that brand.

 

There is obviously some smoke signals out West.  These indicate the next major movement involves the PAC in some form.  Probably total implosion from Big12 and Big10 sniping, then a rebuild from MWC moveups.  The MWC likewise would be the next garage sale and the AAC must be ready to pounce and expand.

[Jonnyeagle]

On 2/8/2023 at 6:49 PM, Clinetort said:

I'm pulling for UTEP.  Thoughts?

I was pulling for them too.

[wardly]

I don't see an urgency to add another team. If SMU moves to PAC 12, that still leaves Texas with 3 programs in major markets. Texas State, UTEP, and LA. Tech bring nothing to the table. However Georgia State adds Atlanta , which fits nicely with UAB,FAU,ECU, and Charlotte.