Apis Bull

1 hour ago, MikePhillips said:

UCF has not only exceeded us, but they've lapped us

They've built their own OCS, they've built a following, and the last time we actually were better than them, George W Bush was in office

They went from 0 wins... literally zero wins... to a culture, an on campus stadium, and we've been left stagnant and idling

We did nothing with our successes in the late 2000's.. nothing

With the exception of maybe a new athletic building, we are playing in the same rented stadium we've been playing in since 1999.

They've lapped us... and until we get our own IPF and OCS, they'll continue with the lead

And yet, they're in the same exact conference as we are and had attendance issues when they were no longer undefeated.

I'm not sure that we should be posting on how to get around pay-walls.  @Brad ?

2 hours ago, smazza said:

our ceo switched us to gmail for our law firm and doesnt seem as good as outlook

what do the geeksters on the board say

I believe that you can set up outlook to work with gmail accounts.

1 hour ago, usf97 said:

If AF was ever added to the conference, I have a hard time seeing where Navy would agree to a scenario where they would be in the opposite side of the conference due to the Conference Championship Game. They are only going to want to potentially play each other one time per season. 

You think Navy and AF would be cool with potentially playing each other twice before the Army Navy game? 

I could see Memphis and Tulane moved over to the East before Navy (if AF was involved). 

If the AAC went to 14, you could have 6 division games, 3 cross division games with 1 being a permanent crossover game.  Then moving Navy to the east would work fine.

1 hour ago, T-Man said:

I really think if Boise leaves the MW, the AAC needs to strike quickly, add a few teams go to a 16 conference that looks like this:

 

AAC East

USF, ucf, Cincy, Temp, ECU, NAVY, APP State, and Army

AAC West

Memphis, SMU, Tulane, Houston, Tulsa, BSU, Colorado St,and AF

 

Play 7 games in your division, 2 cross over games, and then you have 3 OOC games.

 

Personally, I think 16 is too much.

20 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Thing is it's like he's rescinding offers if kids still want to visit elsewhere before committing. Probably just tells them that the offer will still stand as long as we have an opening.

That's my take on it also. 

I just don't see it happening. 

55 minutes ago, ForestBull said:

My contention wasn't even about Holtz. Carnes probably was the problem. It was the comment about CJS. 

He has from the beginning said he would have this policy. 

I don't remember anywhere where CJS said that he would pull scholarships. He said that he doesn't want to accept commitments unless the player was sure. I guess we'll just have to see how it works out. 

Just now, brybull1970 said:

We'd need to find a way to get more western partners (SDSU is a must) without exceeding 14.

From a quality standpoint, I agree. I just think that they're too much of an outlier geographically. 

5 minutes ago, Gatorbull325 said:

Actually I read the comment wrong, you mean take a commitment if he is not sure....I mean mot kids will lie and say they are sure, so it's hard to really have that rule. Plus this aint Clemson, we can't be as picky as they are. 

It's not about being picky.  It's just trying to make sure that you minimize suprises close to signing day. 

39 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

You're not kicking anyone out. You are leaving them behind (see Dayton when the Great Midwest disbanded and joined select members of the Metro to form C-USA) - this would be a new conference that would be formed.  And they SHOULD do this if the distance between this group of schools and the P5 is smaller than this group of schools and the rest of the G5, which it most certainly would.

This should have already been done, and if Boise State balks and wants preferential treatment you leave them behind on the sinking ship that would be what's left of the MWC, and they will change their tune.

Leadership takes balls and Aresco walks around like a neutered dog.

That is effectively kicking them out. Of you call it, "leaving" then we're on the hook for exit fees. I think adding Boise State, AFA, and BYU (CSU) still accomplishes what you want. 

3 hours ago, brybull1970 said:

As the article points out nothing would happen until 2026 when the new TV deal runs out, but I suspect 2025 is when we see the Big 12 begin to unravel. I'll say it again, but Aresco's number #1 priority in making the AAC part of the P6 a reality is to kill the Mountain West Conference..

And you do that by having the primary 9 teams in the AAC break away (like the Great Midwest in 1995 leaving Dayton behind to form C-USA with members of the Metro) and leave Tulane and Tulsa behind, and join 5 teams from the MWC to form a new conference. This would effectively kill the MWC and make this new conference closer to the P5 than the rest of the G5 - that's how you make the P6 happen.

Eastern Division

• Cincinnati
• East Carolina
• Memphis
• Navy (football only)
• South Florida
• Temple
• UCF

Western Division

• Air Force
• Boisie State
• Colorado State
• Houston
• San Diego State
• SMU
• Utah State

 

Football Scheduling

• 6 games against your division (3 home and 3 away)
• 2 games against the opposite division (1 home and 1 away)
• Championship game at the highest ranked team

Basketball Scheduling (Wichita State remains)

• 13 games against all conference opponents
• 5 games against geographically close opponents

 

2 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Once it becomes clear that the Big12 is staying as is, your idea is the only logical option. Would love to see it work.

This won't happen.  We're not going to leave the AAC for this and we're certainly not going to kick teams out. 

3 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

BYU is a non starter. 

Why do you say this?  And, if so, replace them with CSU. 

Move Memphis and Navy to the East.  Add Boise State, BYU, and Air Force to the West.  Play 9 conference games (6 in division, 3 cross division).  Done!

3 hours ago, Skingraft said:

He's wirery. 

42 minutes ago, Triple B said:

I could have sworn that sometime awhile back April 2020 was given as a groundbreaking date. 

That's what was reported.

CJS's offense relies on getting the ball playmakers in space.

16 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Although not sure I like the wording of “randomly deciding” pertaining to that situation, I agree with there being a difference. It’d be interesting to sit in on some visits and hear how, and when, that’s presented by the staff. 

The thing is, CJS is telling players to not commit unless they are sure.  He's not going to pull offers.  His stance is, if you're still looking around, you're not committed.  I don't see anything wrong with that.

30 minutes ago, ForestBull said:

There is a difference between sticking to an implemented policy and randomly deciding to pull an offer.

It wasn't random.  I'm confident that xCSH knew that Carnes was going to flip and that he was just using USF as a backup plan.

24 minutes ago, chapelbull said:

Good call Inspector Clouseau .... 

I am very observant. 

To be fair, there are people that don't pay attention to those things though.

The wink emoji and the lips zipped emoji lead me to believe that we're about to hear something good.