The AAC Conference: How's It Doing?

[DobbsRover2]

The descriptive names about the AAC for WCBB (yes, we know that football rules everything) have ranged from "pathetic," "abominable," "horrible," "nightmare" and "worthless" here on the BY to maybe "it's developing" or "it has potential" at best. At the end of last season with the departure of Louisville and Rutgers, there was an oft expressed opinion that the AAC was now just UConn and 10 very ugly dwarves and that unless some nice P5 conference threw the Huskies a lifeline some time soon, the recruiting, schedule, and quality of play would suffer hugely.

And if you looked at the ratings of this year's eleven AAC teams at the end of last season, there was definitely some reason for doom and gloom outside of UConn. The only team that seemed to offer much hope was USF which finished rated #31 in Massey, but the Bulls didn't earn an NCAA Tournament bid and had to go to the NIT. Temple at #78 and SMU at #81 were still among the top quarter of the teams, but Temple had had a losing record and SMU had lost the AAC's top scorer to graduation. Maybe you could look at the 9/11ths empty glass and see it as 2/11ths full and with a bit of promise, but maybe you needed the liquid you'd drunk from the glass to be pretty strong stuff to see it that way.

So with the season halfway done, are we in pathos or potential?

On the bad side, five of the AAC teams have slid further back in the ratings this year, with SMU having a particularly hard time in a rebuilding year and is rated #222. Houston is even worse than last year's #192 at #251, shorthanded UCF has slipped from #178 to #212, Cinci has stumbled from #110 to #232, and Temple has fallen from #78 to #118. No progress there.

On the happier side, Tulsa has seen some upward movement from #175 to #154 and Memphis has improved from #130 to #117.

But the best news is at the top, and it is the top teams that make or break a conference. If a conference has all of its teams rated between #80 and #100, that's an exercise in futility. But with four teams rated in the top 75 and three projected for the NCAA Tournament at this point, the AAC has made huge progress from last April's predicted wallows in misery for UConn and her pathetic dwarves.

East Carolina has not only hugely upped its attendance but has also moved from #118 last year to #63 this year. Tulane has made the big leap from #99 to a #37 spot that sees it looking at a possible Tourney bid. USF has moved into the top 20 at #19 from last year's #31 and is solidly among the projected Tourney bid teams. And UConn is UConn, showing absolutely no improvement from last year's #1 rating.

Think I'll drink down that last 2/11ths and then make the glass all full again.

 

[hussybulldog]

GB and Dayton used to be the top dogs in Mid-Major., then it was Delaware .Now it is UConn/Chattanooga and Princeton!

 

[boontonbomber]

The descriptive names about the AAC for WCBB (yes, we know that football rules everything) have ranged from "pathetic," "abominable," "horrible," "nightmare" and "worthless" here on the BY to maybe "it's developing" or "it has potential" at best. At the end of last season with the departure of Louisville and Rutgers, there was an oft expressed opinion that the AAC was now just UConn and 10 very ugly dwarves and that unless some nice P5 conference threw the Huskies a lifeline some time soon, the recruiting, schedule, and quality of play would suffer hugely.

And if you looked at the ratings of this year's eleven AAC teams at the end of last season, there was definitely some reason for doom and gloom outside of UConn. The only team that seemed to offer much hope was USF which finished rated #31 in Massey, but the Bulls didn't earn an NCAA Tournament bid and had to go to the NIT. Temple at #78 and SMU at #81 were still among the top quarter of the teams, but Temple had had a losing record and SMU had lost the AAC's top scorer to graduation. Maybe you could look at the 9/11ths empty glass and see it as 2/11ths full and with a bit of promise, but maybe you needed the liquid you'd drunk from the glass to be pretty strong stuff to see it that way.

So with the season halfway done, are we in pathos or potential?

On the bad side, five of the AAC teams have slid further back in the ratings this year, with SMU having a particularly hard time in a rebuilding year and is rated #222. Houston is even worse than last year's #192 at #251, shorthanded UCF has slipped from #178 to #212, Cinci has stumbled from #110 to #232, and Temple has fallen from #78 to #118. No progress there.

On the happier side, Tulsa has seen some upward movement from #175 to #154 and Memphis has improved from #130 to #117.

But the best news is at the top, and it is the top teams that make or break a conference. If a conference has all of its teams rated between #80 and #100, that's an exercise in futility. But with four teams rated in the top 75 and three projected for the NCAA Tournament at this point, the AAC has made huge progress from last April's predicted wallows in misery for UConn and her pathetic dwarves.

East Carolina has not only hugely upped its attendance but has also moved from #118 last year to #63 this year. Tulane has made the big leap from #99 to a #37 spot that sees it looking at a possible Tourney bid. USF has moved into the top 20 at #19 from last year's #31 and is solidly among the projected Tourney bid teams. And UConn is UConn, showing absolutely no improvement from last year's #1 rating.

Think I'll drink down that last 2/11ths and then make the glass all full again.

USF is a decent team, but I can't get too excited about your third best team in the conference. A two point win over SMU and a one point win over UCF leave me underwhelmed.

 

[DobbsRover2]

USF is a decent team, but I can't get too excited about your third best team in the conference. A two point win over SMU and a one point win over UCF leave me underwhelmed.

Sure, the Green Wave aren't anyone's idea of a powerhouse and they are likely just inside the cut for the Tournament, but they are still better than more than half the teams of the SEC. And if you had said back last April that in mid January the AAC would have a third candidate for the Tournament in Tulane that was better than Vanderbilt, LSU and Arkansas, I think most BYers would have been astounded, and maybe happy except for those just want the AAC to die a slow painful death.

 

[DobbsRover2]

GB and Dayton used to be the top dogs in Mid-Major., then it was Delaware .Now it is UConn/Chattanooga and Princeton!

Lot of mid majors are working their way to the top, and Chattanooga is actually a ways back this year even with the victory over UTenn. This year along with USF and Tulane in the group with Princeton, it's Green Bay again along with Western KY, George Washington, Florida Gulf Coast, again Dayton and James Madison all scrapping from the top 10 to the top 40. They could begin to leave their mark in the Tourney, just like on the men's side.

 

[mr006]

"And UConn is UConn, showing absolutely no improvement from last year's #1 rating."

NO improvement from last year's rating? Not good... maybe we'd better work on our own team before looking at the rest of the league...

 

[housekeys]

Hmmm. Too bad the schedules aren't backwards, so that conference games occur first, followed by the cross-conference games. You would find that AAC teams, after playing UConn in conference, perform much better than how they do now. In a few years, that will occur anyway, as teams in the AAC get used to playing at the highest level. See UCF's coach William's take on it, in last nights presser.

 

[DobbsRover2]

"And UConn is UConn, showing absolutely no improvement from last year's #1 rating."

NO improvement from last year's rating? Not good... maybe we'd better work on our own team before looking at the rest of the league...

Well, you can see it it Geno's eyes that he's very frustrated about some things and he has said earlier that this year's team is not like the smooth running team from last year, but there's still time for the Huskies to improve and make a big leap upward. You gotta somehow have faith that they can be the best again.

The AAC teams on the whole will keep moving upward partly on game experience playing UConn and partly on the greater exposure that UConn gives the AAC teams. But there will definitely be times like this year that due to injuries, graduation loss, and other factors that some of the teams slide back. Happened in the BEast, and it will happen in the AAC.

 

[ed4ourgirls]

Complaining about the AAC is like complaining about the weather. There's nothing
that can be done about it, at least not in the short term. Unless our football team
becomes a yearly bowl participant, and one of the P5 conferences decides to give
us an invitation, we're just going to have to deal with it as best we can, and hope
some of the AAC teams show a marked improvement in the coming years.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Well, you can see it it Geno's eyes that he's very frustrated about some things and he has said earlier that this year's team is not like the smooth running team from last year, but there's still time for the Huskies to improve and make a big leap upward. You gotta somehow have faith that they can be the best again.

The AAC teams on the whole will keep moving upward partly on game experience playing UConn and partly on the greater exposure that UConn gives the AAC teams. But there will definitely be times like this year that due to injuries, graduation loss, and other factors that some of the teams slide back. Happened in the BEast, and it will happen in the AAC.

So, Dobbs, I hope you were at least someone tongue in cheek in your first paragraph???? Gottah say I love the up tempo stuff of this team. True, they are still getting comfortable and will rush an have their strokes/ set up go off, but it is still a kick after the measured, though precise operation the last year's team was. Some scoff when I liken the potential of this team to 2002. We'll see who has the last laugh. Mark my words...maniacal laughter tailing off...

 

[DobbsRover2]

So, Dobbs, I hope you were at least someone tongue in cheek in your first paragraph???? Gottah say I love the up tempo stuff of this team. True, they are still getting comfortable and will rush an have their strokes/ set up go off, but it is still a kick after the measured, though precise operation the last year's team was. Some scoff when I liken the potential of this team to 2002. We'll see who has the last laugh. Mark my words...maniacal laughter tailing off...

I hope you meant "somewhat tongue in cheek" and not "someone tongue in cheek" because I'm not really of the Hannibal Lecter type even if I often write that way.

When Geno stops showing some frustration with some players at some times, we'll know that the glory days are over. The last thing that any UConn player wants to face is going over to the sideline and having him give her that "What in bejeesus we're you thinking?" look.

 

[boontonbomber]

Mention has been made here about the AAC perhaps growing over time as the Big East did. More than one person sees this happening because Uconn is in the conference. What has not been mentioned in that discussion is the importance of the old Big East coaches to their growth. The old Big East coaches were some of the best in the country: Perretta, Stringer, Walz, McGraw, Bruno, Barnes Arrico, and Hillsman. Are there coaches of the same ability in the AAC , or who may rise to that level over the years? It remains to be seen, but I have not been overly impressed with what I've seen so far. The importance of the coaches to the growth of the conference, both in their ability to coach and to recruit, cannot be underestimated.

 

[boontonbomber]

Oops, I forgot to mention Mike Carey of West Virginia.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Mention has been made here about the AAC perhaps growing over time as the Big East did. More than one person sees this happening because Uconn is in the conference. What has not been mentioned in that discussion is the importance of the old Big East coaches to their growth. The old Big East coaches were some of the best in the country: Perretta, Stringer, Walz, McGraw, Bruno, Barnes Arrico, and Hillsman. Are there coaches of the same ability in the AAC , or who may rise to that level over the years? It remains to be seen, but I have not been overly impressed with what I've seen so far. The importance of the coaches to the growth of the conference, both in their ability to coach and to recruit, cannot be underestimated.

Careful there, you have a few AAC coaches that were under Geno's wing for a while.

It took awhile (at least 15 years) for the coaching wealth in the BEast to fully develop from the time in say 1991 when the conference had one high level team and a bunch of back burner teams. One thing you know is that as long as UConn is in the AAC, Geno will be very publicly pushing and daring the other coaches to improve their training methods and teams. Whether the other schools will reach into their resources to remove underachieving coaches and bring in top names as Rutgers and Louisville did in the BEast is unknown, but Fernandez, Stockton, and Macy are a decent start for the AAC, and hopefully all the teams will get at least some boost to recruiting playing with UConn.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Careful there, you have a few AAC coaches that were under Geno's wing for a while.

It took awhile (at least 15 years) for the coaching wealth in the BEast to fully develop from the time in say 1991 when the conference had one high level team and a bunch of back burner teams. One thing you know is that as long as UConn is in the AAC, Geno will be very publicly pushing and daring the other coaches to improve their training methods and teams. Whether the other schools will reach into their resources to remove underachieving coaches and bring in top names as Rutgers and Louisville did in the BEast is unknown, but Fernandez, Stockton, and Macy are a decent start for the AAC, and hopefully all the teams will get at least some boost to recruiting playing with UConn.

Just to the specific Rutgers mention, that isn't how it went down. TG was under-performing and needed some fresh air, but she really chose to leave; for the time, she was a fairly "big" name and is in the WHOF, though not the Springfield one. And Vivian pretty much came calling for the job, as she wanted to relocate from the mid-west to the east coast, and RU was a fairly major school.

I think in your original comments that you under-value some of the programs in the AAC and their history. They were not all the doormats of C-USA (or other conference); while Temple isn't the Temple of Staley it has been respectable, and USF has always been a decent and borderline NCAA team. Stockton and some of the other coaches have been successful, albeit at a mid-major level. Their recruiting issues are not going to be solved by the prominence of playing UConn, I have to say I think players are more interested in facilities and their own coach and potential NCAA / conference championship hopes than they are in playing UConn. And facilities is where the money pinch comes in, as well as the coach, of course. More so than a major program, when those schools change coaches it is more difficult to be sure your hire (likely young) is really promising. You might get the next Geno, you might get something a bit less notable.

 

[hjoerring]

DobbsRover2, I'd like to thank you for your level-headed account of our situation. While most of our games are quite hard to look at, we should do so regardless; if only to show respect to the team for showing up and playing at a high level. Continuous whinning about the aac is, in the end, a reflection of character. What the aac needs is an identity- as teams are put together without regard to distance and culture, etc. And the overall temporariness of it all. The Ucconn refrain is 'when will a P5 get us out of this nightmare...' It is not let us get to know THEM and build something together. Let us change our attitude towards THEM and just maybe others judging us will see us in a different light.

 

[DobbsRover2]

There is of course a need also for some of the AAC programs to step up and make their teams better, though they may not see it as a pressing need. Except for Providence and maybe Seton Hall, the BEast teams stepped up to respectability and in some years all were at least decent to complement the powerhouses at the top. The AAC as a conference has to earn some stripes before the media will for WCBB stop just looking at it as the conference where UConn is. Having Houston, SMU, UCF, and Cinci all rated in the #200s is not good, but I think only Houston at this point is a complete program basket case, and that SMU especially will make a pretty quick turnaround next year.

 

[DriveLH]

Remember, when Geno got to UConn, Providence and Seton Hall were at the top, and UConn at the bottom.

 

[housekeys]

DobbsRover2, I'd like to thank you for your level-headed account of our situation. While most of our games are quite hard to look at, we should do so regardless; if only to show respect to the team for showing up and playing at a high level. Continuous whinning about the aac is, in the end, a reflection of character. What the aac needs is an identity- as teams are put together without regard to distance and culture, etc. And the overall temporariness of it all. The Ucconn refrain is 'when will a P5 get us out of this nightmare...' It is not let us get to know THEM and build something together. Let us change our attitude towards THEM and just maybe others judging us will see us in a different light.

There is a distinction that needs to be made concerning UConn, its fans and their relationship and attitude to the AAC. Fans of our new conference mates may see us as rather snotty and stuck-up, since we want "out" of this conference. It is not personal. It is about money. UConn has no issue with a Tulsa or SMU per se. But apparently, the "business" of college sports does have an issue. If the payouts to the AAC where such that UConn can sustain its athletics, it would not be a problem and our attitude would be more welcoming. So that is the driving force for wanting "out", not that there is something wrong with our new conference mates. Clearly, at this point, we need to make the best of what we have.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Just to the specific Rutgers mention, that isn't how it went down. TG was under-performing and needed some fresh air, but she really chose to leave; for the time, she was a fairly "big" name and is in the WHOF, though not the Springfield one. And Vivian pretty much came calling for the job, as she wanted to relocate from the mid-west to the east coast, and RU was a fairly major school.

I think in your original comments that you under-value some of the programs in the AAC and their history. They were not all the doormats of C-USA (or other conference); while Temple isn't the Temple of Staley it has been respectable, and USF has always been a decent and borderline NCAA team. Stockton and some of the other coaches have been successful, albeit at a mid-major level. Their recruiting issues are not going to be solved by the prominence of playing UConn, I have to say I think players are more interested in facilities and their own coach and potential NCAA / conference championship hopes than they are in playing UConn. And facilities is where the money pinch comes in, as well as the coach, of course. More so than a major program, when those schools change coaches it is more difficult to be sure your hire (likely young) is really promising. You might get the next Geno, you might get something a bit less notable.

I guess you can't really say that Grentz was dumped as an underperformer during her last years at Rutgers, but let's just say things had slid back from the earlier better times when she could win national championships, and another first-round bow out in 1993-94 followed by a 17-13 record and no postseason in 1994-95 was not what Rutgers wanted. The point is, however Grentz left and even if there was a top coach slavering for the job, Rutgers did make the commitment to putting together a top WCBB program in the BEast, and they were helped by lots of past glories. Other teams like Providence and Seton Hall who had once been conference powers just settled back seemingly contentedly into low-grade mediocrity.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Can't say that I would agree with this. Sure, they beat a scuffling LSU in Baton Rouge early in the season when LSU lost a ton of it's top players from the season before and were struggling to find itself. LSU had already lost to Arkansas-Little Rock in it's season-opener and needed overtime to beat Jackson State in the game just prior to Tulane - teams that they typically wipe the court with. LSU is the only SEC team Tulane plays this season, not counting any post-season games.

Last season Tulane lost to LSU on their home court 63-35. But even so, Tulane has beaten ranked LSU teams before in recent years as part of the C-USA. They share the same state and at one time the programs used to share the same conference. A lot of kids who grew up together, playing BB against each other, face off every year in that series, and it's one where the saying "throw out the stats" can apply.

But typically Tulane loses as many games to SEC opponents - if not more than - as they win. Last season Tulane also lost to Ole Miss at home 89-66 (29 pts) and @ Auburn 62-52, and lost to Miss State 77-68 in the WNIT. Auburn went 7-9 in the conference last season, MSU went 5-11 and Ole Miss went 2-14 and 12-20 overall! They were among the worst teams in the SEC in 2013-14.

Now, the top half or 2/3rds of the SEC, Tulane would win a game here or there. They aren't a bad program after all, and there's a lot of prep BB talent in LA to go around. Tulane did go 11-5 in the C-USA, and 20-11 overall last year, so they weren't bad then. At this point in the season last season they were 14-5 (5-1) - pretty identical to this point this year.

But even against the bottom half of the SEC, Tulane typically loses more than wins. That doesn't make them better IMO...

Actually I was talking about this year, not past years when Tulane was part of CUSA and they were rated back around #100 among teams.

You might not have noticed but this year the Green Wave is doing a little better, and Sagarin has them ranked ahead of more than half the teams in the SEC. I know you love LSU's play this year because they beat a hurting KY team at home, but they're not very good and Sagarin rightly has them rated at #67 and Tulane #33.

Living in the past gets us nowhere unless we're counting up NC championships.

 

[PalPa]

Tulane did defeat NC State and Miami of the ACC. Miami went on to defeat Notre Dame, so I could say Tulane is better than ND.

 

[DobbsRover2]

And LSU lost to Santa Clara which lost to Cal Poly which lost to Pepperdine. Yes Pepperdine. Just really not good. LSU seems to be worse than Pepperdine.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I really, really think folks who make a lot of a single win and / or loss have no understanding of basketball.

And I know that doesn't apply to those of you who are using that argument specifically in this case to raise up Tulane and denigrate LSU.

As noted, Tulane is not a bad program. It doesn't have a history of great success against the SEC and there is no reason to think that one victory changes that.

LSU is a decent team that severely under-performed due to injuries and most importantly to a player suspension. Of course their rating on the various rating systems is bad - they lost a number of games they should have won - and probably would if they were replayed at this point in the season.

I'm quite sure that Tulane may be better than several SEC teams, but nothing I have read in this thread sells the point.

 

[DobbsRover2]

But LSU beat Mississippi State, who beat Arkansas, who beat Oklahoma, who beat Texas, who beat Stanford, who beat.....yes, UConn.


So I guess LSU is better than UConn....and since USC beat LSU, that explains why USC is ranked #1 and UConn is ranked #2. Yes, I see it now....

LSU is worse than Pepperdine, but better than UConn. What has the world of wcbb come to.....

Hey, you're finally getting the fun illogicity of the "Six Degrees of Separation" game we occasionally play here. That's something that UTenn fans always have trouble enjoying, so that appears to be a step of for a fan of that conference's teams.