(02-23-2012 08:09 PM)epasnoopy Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2012 03:42 PM)templefootballfan Wrote: [ -> ]1st thing that would be looked at is TV contract
the rest is dollar & cents
(02-23-2012 03:48 PM)TUJim Wrote: [ -> ]Which according to most of the comments on this board shouldn't be too much since we didn't bring much in to the conference as far as TV
Probably right, from what i understand the MAC tv contract with ESPN is still chump change ($2 million per year?) and i don't think it went up much with the addition of Temple. It probably only went up so far as to keep everyone's share even or add a little to it from the previous contract with 12 members.
The MAC deal went from 600k before Temple to 1.4 million per year however the new contract included a lot of additional exposure.
(02-23-2012 08:13 PM)epasnoopy Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, i think UMass will want to stay. UMass joined knowing Temple could potentially leave and that most of the MAC members they would be playing are not on the East coast.
UMass has nowhere else to go since most conferences aren't willing to do football-only memberships. Only reason BE is doing it is because they are struggling to survive.
The Alliance/Merger will have Hawaii as a football-only member in the West Division. It would therefore make quite a bit of sense for them to grab UMass as a football-only member in the East Division. Doing that solves problems for them, the MAC, and UMass. The Minutemen can play MAC football in 2012 and then jump to the Alliance/Merger in 2013. Everybody wins.
(02-29-2012 08:50 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2012 08:13 PM)epasnoopy Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, i think UMass will want to stay. UMass joined knowing Temple could potentially leave and that most of the MAC members they would be playing are not on the East coast.
UMass has nowhere else to go since most conferences aren't willing to do football-only memberships. Only reason BE is doing it is because they are struggling to survive.
The Alliance/Merger will have Hawaii as a football-only member in the West Division. It would therefore make quite a bit of sense for them to grab UMass as a football-only member in the East Division. Doing that solves problems for them, the MAC, and UMass. The Minutemen can play MAC football in 2012 and then jump to the Alliance/Merger in 2013. Everybody wins.
Where does the MAC win in that? We don't like it when school's use the MAC as a stepping stone. Although it wasn't planned for temple to leave with this short of notice, now there is 0 to gain from having them..... Umass in it's first year is realistically a 3 win caliber team, and they make the divisions uneven. I see a big win there
Am I missing pro's to having umass? It was a good idea WITH Temple.
(02-29-2012 09:25 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote: [ -> ]Where does the MAC win in that? We don't like it when school's use the MAC as a stepping stone. Although it wasn't planned for temple to leave with this short of notice, now there is 0 to gain from having them ..... Umass in it's first year is realistically a 3 win caliber team, and they make the divisions uneven. I see a big win there . Am I missing pro's to having umass? It was a good idea WITH Temple.
The MAC wins by getting rid of Temple now, and UMass after just one year, in order to return to its core membership of 12 teams.
The MAC also wins because the concept of football-only members will probably die a merciful death, and never rear its head again.
(02-29-2012 09:50 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2012 09:25 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote: [ -> ]Where does the MAC win in that? We don't like it when school's use the MAC as a stepping stone. Although it wasn't planned for temple to leave with this short of notice, now there is 0 to gain from having them ..... Umass in it's first year is realistically a 3 win caliber team, and they make the divisions uneven. I see a big win there . Am I missing pro's to having umass? It was a good idea WITH Temple.
The MAC wins by getting rid of Temple now, and UMass after just one year, in order to return to its core membership of 12 teams.
The MAC also wins because the concept of football-only members will probably die a merciful death, and never rear its head again.
The MAC has to keep UMass for at least a two-year term.
Link
Don't count on the MAC presidents being intelligent enough not to invite new members for football-only.
(02-29-2012 11:08 AM)huskiebob Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2012 09:50 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2012 09:25 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote: [ -> ]Where does the MAC win in that? We don't like it when school's use the MAC as a stepping stone. Although it wasn't planned for temple to leave with this short of notice, now there is 0 to gain from having them ..... Umass in it's first year is realistically a 3 win caliber team, and they make the divisions uneven. I see a big win there . Am I missing pro's to having umass? It was a good idea WITH Temple.
The MAC wins by getting rid of Temple now, and UMass after just one year, in order to return to its core membership of 12 teams.
The MAC also wins because the concept of football-only members will probably die a merciful death, and never rear its head again.
The MAC has to keep UMass for at least a two-year term. Link
Don't count on the MAC presidents being intelligent enough not to invite new members for football-only.
I sure hope you're wrong. I just assumed they would have come to the same conclusions that we have, but who knows?
The MAC doesn't "have" to keep UMass for two years if both sides come to a mutual agreement that everyone will benefit from the Minutemen shuffling to the Alliance/Merger in 2013.
I have no idea if they will do this, but I doubt the two-year contract will be an impediment to a potential change, if everyone decides to go down such a road. No more football-onlies.
(02-29-2012 03:00 PM)Lolly Popp Wrote: [ -> ]The MAC doesn't "have" to keep UMass for two years if both sides come to a mutual agreement that everyone will benefit from the Minutemen shuffling to the Alliance/Merger in 2013.
True, but you said "The MAC wins by getting rid of UMass." What if they don't want to leave before the two years are up? What makes you think the Alliance even wants them?
(02-29-2012 04:24 PM)huskiebob Wrote: [ -> ]True, but you said "The MAC wins by getting rid of UMass." What if they don't want to leave before the two years are up? What makes you think the Alliance even wants them?
I don't know if the Alliance/Merger wants UMass ... and I don't know if UMass wants to join the Alliance/Merger ... or if MAC administrators care about getting rid of UMass the way many fans would like.
I do know that the Alliance/Merger has Hawaii as a football-only member on the West Side, so grabbing a football-only member on the East Side makes sense, and UMass could fill that role very nicely.
![[Image: imgres.jpg]](http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r291/rasmith2357/imgres.jpg)
