Cincinnati, Central Florida, Houston making a mistake leaving the AAC?
- Thread starter FCB 2013 treble
- Start date
I get what you’re saying. Clemsux and the ACC is the blueprint. I do think that the AAC conference is a little underrated. For that reason I think going to the Big 12 and proving their worth might make it easier to make the top 12.
But truthfully no one knows at this point. It’s one of those things we will have to look back on in 5-10 years. These programs will benefit from more exposure and money. But if none of them are even sniffing the top 25 then conference affiliation won’t matter and they would have been better off staying where they were.
Yes, that is my point. In a couple of seasons from now you will likely see Memphis, Appalachian State, Western Kentucky, Boise State in the college playoffs before you see Central Florida, Cincinnati or Houston.
Maybe. Without Texas and Oklahoma the Big 12 is diluted of the loaded teams—I’d say TCU, Baylor and Kansas State would be the class of the league.
I could see any of those teams challenging for the conference. The bigger paychecks and the opportunity to recruit higher caliber kids will likely boost their program. Houston was beating some of these schools themselves just a few years ago.
We shall see though.
That's assuming that these teams would be in the top 12 at the end of the season. As of today none of them are even in the Top 25.
Could it happen in the future, perhaps, but if they crack the Top 12, then good for them.
If the 12 team playoffs started this season Tulane would be in the playoffs, however they are not a top 12 team ( I am assuming you mean CFP rankings). Regardless of rankings a team from either AAC or Conference USA or MAC or MWC or Sunbelt will be going to the playoffs in the future.
I think most in the Big 12 would tell you Oklahoma State is the best in conference after Texas and OU leave. Both in the past and going forward.
Tulane is ranked #16 in the CFP, so they would not be going this year.
And no, there is not a " regardless of rankings ", it is a set format.
The 12-team format will feature, in order, the top four conference champions, followed by some combination of the top six at-large bids and two highest-ranked remaining conference champions. Teams will be ordered based on the College Football Playoff rankings.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nca...e-to-know-cfp-format/gmkdzivaikrn4xba7c6p0ksl
No they did not make a mistake in leaving. The AAC has been as good as several P5 conferences for the last decade. The only difference was the absence of one powerhouse type team. They never got the respect they deserved. The P5 thing was a sham. It should have been the P6. The gap between the AAC and the other G5 teams was huge. I dont blame them at all for leaving. It became pretty clear that no matter how many teams they got ranked, the perception wasnt going to change. Whoever came up with the P5 nonsense made the conference irrelevant and the media made sure to keep them that way... unjustly so.
Last edited:
No doubt about it that the AAC can be competitive. Under Al Golden and Matt Rhule Temple had some great moments. Willie Taggart had some good teams at South Florida. Scott Frost and Josh Heupel gave Central Florida a lot of exposure. Tom Herman took Houston to the top of the league and beat Florida State and Oklahoma. Fuente and Norvell gave Memphis something to be proud about, but these coaches move on to better things.
The point of my thread is Cincinnati and Central Florida has demonstrated in the last four to six seasons that they can be on regular basis be one of the favorites to win the AAC. When these two teams move on to the Big !2 they will play teams equal to them and some will be better than them and it will be tougher to make the playoffs in the Big 12 than it would be in the AAC.
I pasted a few things below from your article attachment.
"That guarantees at least one "Group of 5" team will make the Playoff each year and, while it's unlikely, allows the possibility of more than one G5 team making the Playoff in lieu of a "Power 5" team." So I interpret this as a team in the group of five could go to the playoffs and not be ranked in the top 12.
| 1 | Georgia | SEC champion |
| 2 | Michigan | Big Ten champion |
| 3 | TCU | Big 12 champion |
| 4 | USC | Pac-12 champion |
| 5 | Ohio State | At-large (Big Ten) |
| 6 | Alabama | At-large (SEC) |
| 7 | Tennessee | At-large (SEC) |
| 8 | Penn State | At-large (Big Ten) |
| 9 | Clemson | ACC champion |
| 10 | Kansas State | At-large (Big 12) |
| 11 | Utah | At-large (Pac-12) |
| 12 | Tulane | AAC champion |
Initially for sure. Hard to say how much of a recruiting boost they get simply by joining B12 tho. Could be significant. It wouldnt surprise me if it is.
In my opinion the immediate impact would be increased attendance for sporting events for the new members. Big 12 will now be one team tougher in basketball with Houston. Bringham Young now can technically be a football team in the playoffs that can be awarded a bye.
The Big12 footprint will be massive. It will be interesting to see how it all develops.
Maybe but I hesitate to put them at the top. I’ve never seen a school that pushed for the top so much and fell on their face year in and year out.
Great point. Over the last few years-yes. But you should not group Texas and Oklahoma together. Oklahoma has done a lot more than Texas. Texas has been a brutal underachiever. Venables won’t be at Oklahoma if he has another year like this one.
I believe a move to the Big 12 represents an upgrade and will enhance ranking opportunities.
Maybe they're just moving for the conference money, and not concerned with any playoff bid or think their chances are just as good in the Big 12.
Can't just look at one year. They have had nine top 20 final rankings in the last 15 years. Including as high as 3rd and were 7th only last season in 2021.
