Army Can Host AAC Championship

[kfan12]

A lot of prognostications here. Will be interesting to pull some of these up in a few years and see how they turned out.

Would be really good if some of the folks on this board could come up with something positive to say about the team they support once in a while. Instead of fretting about how bad the team might be x years from now, how about appreciating a 10-1 Army team that has the potential to finish the season at 13-1?

[Army Frog Fan]

Some thoughts on the previous couple of posts:

wpgrad: I'm not seeing any qualitative difference in Army's schedule in the AAC vs. the past 20+ years.

The formula before joining the AAC was: AF/Navy, 1 FCS (sometimes 2! yuck!), 1 P4 stretch game, and 7-8 Group of 5 opponents

The formula in the AAC is now: AF/Navy, 1 FCS (only 1! yay!), 1 P4 stretch game and 8 Group of 5 teams (albeit all in the AAC)

How is our scheduling before joining the conference qualitatively more exciting/better than what we have now?

To your question about Buddie's comments before joining the conference about having schedules filled out through 2032 or whatever...I think actions speak louder than words. My guess is those comments were helpful in posturing Army for the negotiations about joining the AAC. No reason to communicate being desperate, so I think Buddie was holding the cards close to the vest and not giving anything away. We were already seeing cancellations of deals with other teams for future schedules, so I think the handwriting was on the wall that it was only getting harder and Army was going to be squeezed completely out of the relevancy picture as an independent in the CFP world. Notre Dame is the only team that has the credentials to pull that off anymore. Look at the press/coverage Army's gotten this year being in the AAC...wouldn't have happened if we were independent.

To 3yards&dust: the main thing that NOBODY wants to see is losing Army football. Army in the ACC is just not realistic. Army would be at/near the bottom of that conference nearly every single year. Even this year when Army has had an amazing run, I think 7-4 or 8-3 is probably more realistic where Army might have hoped to finish in the ACC this year rather than the 10-1 we are all enjoying right now. Who wants to be the Vanderbilt of the ACC? In a good Army season, we can pull off upsets against mid-level ACC teams like Duke, WF, BC, Syracuse...if we catch those teams while they are average to weak. It would take a great Army season and some good breaks to be competitive against Miami, Clemson, Va Tech, etc. Joining a tougher conference would not translate to improved Army football...the same challenges Army has in recruiting and retention would remain, we'd just be playing even harder competition week-in and week-out. I think the AAC is a pretty good match overall for Army...a chance to be competitive against all the teams in the conference when Army fields a good team, and right now the AAC has a better reputation in the Group of 5 than the Sun Belt, MAC and Conference USA and is on par with the Mountain West.

Agree. People act like Army has had some awesome schedule the last 7-10 years. They have been playing a bunch of teams they are playing this year. I mean are schools like Troy, Umass, Georgia State, Western Kentucky and Ball State that much more exciting? Because those are the schools army has been playing. They have also played regularly against schools like UTSA, Rice, and UNT, all of which were on this years schedule. Heck, Army has played UTSA 4 of the last 5 seasons.

[wpgrad]

Some thoughts on the previous couple of posts:

wpgrad: I'm not seeing any qualitative difference in Army's schedule in the AAC vs. the past 20+ years.

The formula before joining the AAC was: AF/Navy, 1 FCS (sometimes 2! yuck!), 1 P4 stretch game, and 7-8 Group of 5 opponents

The formula in the AAC is now: AF/Navy, 1 FCS (only 1! yay!), 1 P4 stretch game and 8 Group of 5 teams (albeit all in the AAC)

How is our scheduling before joining the conference qualitatively more exciting/better than what we have now?

To your question about Buddie's comments before joining the conference about having schedules filled out through 2032 or whatever...I think actions speak louder than words. My guess is those comments were helpful in posturing Army for the negotiations about joining the AAC. No reason to communicate being desperate, so I think Buddie was holding the cards close to the vest and not giving anything away. We were already seeing cancellations of deals with other teams for future schedules, so I think the handwriting was on the wall that it was only getting harder and Army was going to be squeezed completely out of the relevancy picture as an independent in the CFP world. Notre Dame is the only team that has the credentials to pull that off anymore. Look at the press/coverage Army's gotten this year being in the AAC...wouldn't have happened if we were independent.

To 3yards&dust: the main thing that NOBODY wants to see is losing Army football. Army in the ACC is just not realistic. Army would be at/near the bottom of that conference nearly every single year. Even this year when Army has had an amazing run, I think 7-4 or 8-3 is probably more realistic where Army might have hoped to finish in the ACC this year rather than the 10-1 we are all enjoying right now. Who wants to be the Vanderbilt of the ACC? In a good Army season, we can pull off upsets against mid-level ACC teams like Duke, WF, BC, Syracuse...if we catch those teams while they are average to weak. It would take a great Army season and some good breaks to be competitive against Miami, Clemson, Va Tech, etc. Joining a tougher conference would not translate to improved Army football...the same challenges Army has in recruiting and retention would remain, we'd just be playing even harder competition week-in and week-out. I think the AAC is a pretty good match overall for Army...a chance to be competitive against all the teams in the conference when Army fields a good team, and right now the AAC has a better reputation in the Group of 5 than the Sun Belt, MAC and Conference USA and is on par with the Mountain West.

Agree. People act like Army has had some awesome schedule the last 7-10 years. They have been playing a bunch of teams they are playing this year. I mean are schools like Troy, Umass, Georgia State, Western Kentucky and Ball State that much more exciting? Because those are the schools army has been playing. They have also played regularly against schools like UTSA, Rice, and UNT, all of which were on this years schedule. Heck, Army has played UTSA 4 of the last 5 seasons.

The point isn't that the teams were better. The point is that by playing a national schedule, we are able to recruit nationally. As it stands now, we won't play a game in the mountain or pacific time zone EVER if AF is played at bigger stadiums. We don't play in Georgia, a main rercruiting hub. etc etc

It doesn't matter because we are in the AAC now but this "the sky is falling and no one is going to schedule us" has been going around for 2 decades and in that time ONCE we had a game cancelled at a bad time. Once. Joining the AAC was solving a problem that didn't exist

[USMA94]

With respect to recruiting 18 year-old high school football players, I think that being 10-1 and playing in the AAC Championship Game with the AAC Coach of the Year and the AAC Offensive Player of the Year and four AAC First Team All Stars compares pretty well to playing in a bunch of different states.

[wpgrad]

With respect to recruiting 18 year-old high school football players, I think that being 10-1 and playing in the AAC Championship Game with the AAC Coach of the Year and the AAC Offensive Player of the Year and four AAC First Team All Stars compares pretty well to playing in a bunch of different states.

I think you GROSSLY overestimate how much the average college football fans cares about the AAC conference and how much your average 18yr old knows about west point.

[PrideandDream]

Interesting discussion here. My thoughts:

1. Hard to be a "Champion" without a Championship to play in

2. A conference Championship is worth more than a singular win even if it is Navy (my opinion but we play Navy every year. WE may never play in another Conf Championship).

3. The Navy game will be a regular conference game at some point once TV contracts are renegotiated so this is temporary.

4. You can't just "Join a Conference" like the ACC. You have to be invited.

5. The decision to join the Conference is multi factorial but the big driver is the conference revenue sharing. Vanderbilt doesn't stay in the SEC just to get their asses kicked decade after decade. They could have easily petitioned the ACC to try to join and would fit better academically. Only one reason they don't leave and that's dollars. We joined the AAC for many reasons but revenue sharing and the leverage of a conference in the long run were key reasons.

6. We don't need to recruit football nationally. The Corps yes. But football we need exposure to the Southeast. GA would certainly be nice but overall this is a good list of states across the Southeast to include Texas, FL,TN, the Carolinas, and PA. Not bad and probably not a better mix of states and schools.

7. We play Navy every year. That won't change. Just like they play us every year. A conference championship will be a more rare occasion. And ideally pits the best vs the best. This year maybe not so but in the long run probably gets it more right than not.

8. I'm not in love with the AAC. I would expect the quality of opponents to ebb and flow over time. These are a lot of mid major schools that will have good years and bad over time. But any other conference that isn't a P4 will face the same. This move is about collective leverage in the long run.

9. College football is going to drastically change over the next decade. My opinion is that once the House v NCAA suit is settled and players are being paid by Athletic departments that they will effectively become employees and not student athletes. Note the NCAA already eliminated the National Letter of Intent and now has a "contract" that is signed. If they are deemed paid employees then they will unionize. The attorneys will ensure that happens. Once there's a player's union there will be a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Governing body. Which won't be the NCAA but more likely some combination of the SEC and Big 10 and Big 12 and ACC if I had to guess. And then it's just a question of what the rest looks like. But make no mistake the chaos and the change is far far far from over. You likely will end up with some kind of relegation with leagues like soccer. And they will mover from HS to G5 to P4 to NFL and maybe back down depending on money and talent and any number of other factors.

10. College football is a game of development. You never see a HS player go straight to the NFL. This will have to be our niche moving forward. Our best bet is to build tough, physical and competitive teams that also maintain a national presence. No school is born with an elite team. Even the best are being developed. That's easy to see this year in particular. But football will remain important to all of these schools and to Army. The exposure and branding received through Athletics and particularly football is priceless. And in that sense it is better to have partner to negotiate term with than to be on your. own.

PD

[USMA94]

“I think you GROSSLY overestimate how much the average college football fans cares about the AAC conference and how much your average 18yr old knows about west point.”

We aren’t recruiting average college football fans and we aren’t recruiting average 18 yr olds. We are recruiting 18 year-old high school football players and if they don’t know what the AAC is, they must not be getting recruited by anyone.

[RABBLE]

I totally agree that joining the American Conference was a terrible idea. If we were going to join a conference it should have been the ACC, with Duke, Wake, UNC, UVA. All much better institutions academically and better brand name opponents. No one wants to watch Army play Southwestern Texas State at El Paso kind of matchups. I happen to think the AAC has some pretty good football teams but if we lose it looks awful and we get no credit for wins against no-name schools. Look at the rankings. If we were in the ACC I think this team would still be contending for a conference title and if we did a playoff spot would be possible. Bad idea to take one of the best brand names in college football and throw it into a league full of commuter schools.

+The AD and company did it for the money. By the time the mediocrity begins again these present guys will be gone feasting on the glory of this one year and to more lucrative positions. The coaches also.
I have been down this road before. Nothing changes . I accepted this reality a long time ago. It makes me real sad, guys. I can't take it much anymore. You just live with the reality of it all and accept the things you can not change.

[jgish92]

"3. The Navy game will be a regular conference game at some point once TV contracts are renegotiated so this is temporary."

I disagree with this bullet point. Army and Navy cannot afford to have this game become a regular conference game. If it does, it would have to move from it's standalone date to be played earlier in the season. At that point, the TV money and sponsorship money for the game gets cut in half, as does the prestige. The conference would also want to package it with its TV deal and that money gets shared amongst all conference schools. I can't find the dollar value of CBS broadcast rights, but I'm sure each team gets in the ballpark of 8 million each for that game as it is now. We can't afford to let that happen. I also think, from an admittedly biased (and probably naïve) point of view, that AMERICA likes it the way it is now. The ratings certainly suggest that.

[WrekDivr]

"3. The Navy game will be a regular conference game at some point once TV contracts are renegotiated so this is temporary."

I disagree with this bullet point. Army and Navy cannot afford to have this game become a regular conference game. If it does, it would have to move from it's standalone date to be played earlier in the season. At that point, the TV money and sponsorship money for the game gets cut in half, as does the prestige. The conference would also want to package it with its TV deal and that money gets shared amongst all conference schools. I can't find the dollar value of CBS broadcast rights, but I'm sure each team gets in the ballpark of 8 million each for that game as it is now. We can't afford to let that happen. I also think, from an admittedly biased (and probably naïve) point of view, that AMERICA likes it the way it is now. The ratings certainly suggest that.

You make some solid points, but there are several other factors that will weigh in. For example, the CFP start is moving closer to the Army Navy game. It will be tough to hold this date as exclusive to A/N. I would not be surprised to see Army Navy move to rivalry weekend at some point.