Page 1 of 1

Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:30 am
by Water Pony
AAC should be a strong league for Men and Women Soccer. With which non-revenue sports can AAC create a national brand. Losing Louisville will hurt Swimming.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:17 pm
by Water Pony
Eight AAC schools will have Men's Soccer (without departing Louisville and Rutger.) Tulane, ECU and Houston do not currently have Men's programs.

Women will field 10 programs after UoL and Rutgers with only Tulane without a women's team.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:43 pm
by DanFreibergerForHeisman
Water Pony wrote:Women will field 10 programs after UoL and Rutgers with only Tulane without a women's team.

Yeah - Tulane doesn't have anything worthwhile. Such a joke conference add.

The core non-revenue sports should all be pretty good in the AAC. I am looking forward to it.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:31 am
by EastStang
Because CUSA probably won't have men's soccer (losing Tulsa, UCF, SMU). I suspect that Kentucky and South Carolina will join us for soccer along possibly with Marshall and Florida International.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:51 am
by Water Pony
It appears that alll American Athletic Conference schools will have Women's Volleyball. Any national ranked teams?

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 9:40 am
by DanFreibergerForHeisman
Water Pony wrote:It appears that alll American Athletic Conference schools will have Women's Volleyball. Any national ranked teams?

In the final 2012 rankings, just, uh, Louisville at 17...

http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/volleyball-women/d1

The highest other team in the RPI rankings was Tulsa at 49.

SMU was a dismal 206 in RPI last season. This program really needs to step it up.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:05 am
by Water Pony
DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:
Water Pony wrote:It appears that alll American Athletic Conference schools will have Women's Volleyball. Any national ranked teams?

In the final 2012 rankings, just, uh, Louisville at 17...

http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/volleyball-women/d1

The highest other team in the RPI rankings was Tulsa at 49.

SMU was a dismal 206 in RPI last season. This program really needs to step it up.


Agreed. I see little information on this program, which should be much more competitive.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 10:32 am
by PoconoPony
Water Pony wrote:
DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:
Water Pony wrote:It appears that alll American Athletic Conference schools will have Women's Volleyball. Any national ranked teams?

In the final 2012 rankings, just, uh, Louisville at 17...

http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/volleyball-women/d1

The highest other team in the RPI rankings was Tulsa at 49.

SMU was a dismal 206 in RPI last season. This program really needs to step it up.


Agreed. I see little information on this program, which should be much more competitive.


Top 25 in everything.

Re: Non-revenue sports in the AAC

PostPosted: Thu Apr 11, 2013 11:43 am
by DanFreibergerForHeisman
Water Pony wrote:Agreed. I see little information on this program, which should be much more competitive.

Last season was pretty bad - well below expectations.

Caroline Young had a huge year though, and she will just be a junior this fall, so maybe things are starting to turn around.

On the bright side, the American doesn't look that strong in volleyball so we do have the chance to competitive in the new conference right away if things get better.