SAMgO

July 19th, 2017 at 8:49 AM ^

They can say whatever they want, but designing a logo for a fake "Power 6" concept doesn't help their case at all. They should really be trying to brand themselves as in somewhat of a tier of their own, clear from the rest of the G5 but without this embarrassing plea to be seen as an equal of the Big 12.

lhglrkwg

July 19th, 2017 at 9:01 AM ^

Making cool logos doesn't change the fact that it's a watered down Big East. Their biggest names are Houston, Navy, Cincinnati, UConn, UCF?, USF? They're a half step up from the MWC and a good bit behind the Big 12 in prestige. I agree with the above- they should be trying to differentiate themselves from the Group of 5. Not trying to convince everyone that they are in the same class as the P5 conferences

mGrowOld

July 19th, 2017 at 9:08 AM ^

Why do we care that somebody on the outside looking in would like to be included at the grown-up table of football conferences?   Hell, I give them credit for trying and if Michigan was one of the schools in that conference I'd be happy my conference leadership was at least making an attempt to get us considered a "power conference" instead of sitting by doing nothing.

I wish Delany pushed as hard for the B1G instead of rolling over for the ESPN/SEC uber alles when issues are discussed.

Mr. Yost

July 19th, 2017 at 10:05 AM ^

Relax, it came from within the conference was the point.

I realize no one at the conference level forced it on anyone. I do blame Delany for forcing this Rutgers rivalry on us though. We already have MSU and OSU. Minnesota is a trophy game. PSU has always been somewhat of a rival. Now Rutgers?! That's just too much.

NittanyFan

July 19th, 2017 at 10:43 AM ^

Part of this is admittedly because I'm a fan of an AAC school (Cincinnati) ........ but it annoys me when people "talk down" as regards the conference.  

Yes --- some of the athletic programs in the AAC don't have their stuff fully together (Connecticut football, ECU basketball) or don't really care about athletics at all (Tulane - never should have been invited in the first place).  

But most of them are ambitious and are striving to better themselves.  That's more than I can say for one of the B1G's recent additions.  The AAC schools are already a credible part of the FBS world and I can't really knock that they want a better future for themselves.

Don

July 19th, 2017 at 9:37 AM ^

"We currently lack the financial resources of many of the other P6 universities, but we'll get there," Aresco said. "We have the will and we have the ability."

Sorry pal, but the reason you don't have the financial resources is because none of your schools are the major educational institutions in their respective states. UCF, Cinci, East Carolina, Houston, and Temple will NEVER have the resources that Florida, Ohio State, North Carolina, Texas, and PSU have.

The only possible exception to this is UConn, but even then many would say Yale is the preeminent institution in CT. And besides, it's CT, one of the least relevant states in the entire country when it comes to collegiate athletics.

MotownGoBlue

July 19th, 2017 at 10:08 AM ^

I'd rank Alaska, Rhode Island, Delaware, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Idaho all behind CT. Could even make a case for Utah, Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota as being near or lower than Connecticut in terms of college athletics (at least for the major sports). More like lower middle tier, imo.

UConn men's (4) and women's (11) hoops programs both have a few recent national championships.

NittanyFan

July 19th, 2017 at 10:08 AM ^

--- they rank right near Oklahoma, Oregon, Iowa and Utah in terms of the state's population.  All of those states, of course, have public universities which have done well on the football field.

One of Connecticut's biggest problems is that they're in a part of the country where "going to the big public state school" is looked down upon.  Looked down upon A LOT.  It's viewed as "better" to attend some private school.  

UMass-Amherst has the same structural barrier in terms of elevating their athletics.

Perkis-Size Me

July 19th, 2017 at 10:49 AM ^

Well you've got to give them credit for trying rather than sitting around with their thumbs up their asses hoping something will just happen for them. 

That being said, I don't think there's much hope for the conference itself. It just does not have the resources or the support that the actual Power 5 conferences have. Individual schools within the conference will just need to impress enough in the future to warrant an individual invite. Maybe Cincinatti could one day do it with the Big XII or the Big 10 (would happily trade Rutgers for them), maybe USF could possibly do it with the ACC or if the SEC turns into an 18 megateam conference. 

The Blue Barracuda

July 19th, 2017 at 1:21 PM ^

While they are hardly on the same level as the other Power 5 conferences, it's actually a godo marketing move. People are commenting and discussing it, which is better of the normal of just toiling in obscurity and going unnoticed for an entire summer.

Evil Empire

July 19th, 2017 at 4:08 PM ^

For those of you younger than, um, people 30 years older than I am, this refers to a Bob & Ray radio sketch.  Their guest was running for president, and when they introduced him as Mr. G.L. Hummerbeck, he corrected them.  He had legally changed his name to The Right Honorable G.L. Hummerbeck. 

He ran on the "Free Silver" platform, since nobody had yet taken up William Jennings Bryan's cause in the current campaign.  He was seeking the nomination from both the Democractic and Republican parties, to increase his chances of winning.  Also, he was living at home with his mother to save money on laundry.

The AAC should just select "Power 6 Conference" as its official name, and refuse to respond to any other name.  Problem solved.