Could we get in a scheduling agreement with another low major conference? It seems like that would be more beneficial than scheduling more DIIIs.
Here's the thing though: they DO have scheduling agreements with other conferences...it's just not some "official alliance" but, AE and NEC/MAAC schools play each other enough each year. It all sounds nice in practice, but when you realize that neither side would go for it because teams don't want to be locked into games they have to play by mandate that could cost them the chance to get a payday elsewhere, or not go to a nice vacation tourney, etc. Any AE or NEC/MAAC type school can schedule each other any time they want. For various reasons, some more valid than others, they choose not to.
And there's really just not much of a benefit in some AE/NEC/MAAC challenge/arrangement, because what if it gets lopsided in either direction? Going to be a lot of sore egos if that's the case, and if you know anything about the college sports industry, bruised egos are avoided at all costs by coaches and administrators.
The simple solution for the AE is to add a 10th team, at minimum to get an 18-game conference schedule. You'll still get those non-D1 games (they're just a reality), but you'll probably get less of them per team. But, we all know the AE isn't going to add for the sake of adding. It certainly is not putting the three teams Jeff suggested on its priority list unless it loses a current member to another conference, and even then, Merrimack is in a comfortable situation, we all know the stance on CCSU and LIU, woof.