Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Steinbrecher's comments
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Louis Kitton Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,000
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 27
I Root For: High Fashion
Location: Paris Online
Post: #61
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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 11:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lolly Popp Offline
Magically Delicious
*

Posts: 2,425
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Football
Location: Endzone
Post: #62
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofToledoFans Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,638
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Toledo and G5
Location:
Post: #63
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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 there01-wingedeagle Am I missing pro's to having umass? It was a good idea WITH Temple.
(This post was last modified: 02-29-2012 09:26 AM by UofToledoFans.)
02-29-2012 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lolly Popp Offline
Magically Delicious
*

Posts: 2,425
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Football
Location: Endzone
Post: #64
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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 01-wingedeagle. 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
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
huskiebob Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,528
Joined: Nov 2004
Reputation: 44
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location: The Space Coast

Donators
Post: #65
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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 01-wingedeagle. 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
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #66
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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 01-wingedeagle. 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?
02-29-2012 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
huskiebob Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,528
Joined: Nov 2004
Reputation: 44
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location: The Space Coast

Donators
Post: #67
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(02-29-2012 12:24 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  
(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 01-wingedeagle. 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?

Could be worse though. At least none of the MAC schools have a clown like this as their president:

[Image: imgres.jpg]

03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao
02-29-2012 01:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lolly Popp Offline
Magically Delicious
*

Posts: 2,425
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Football
Location: Endzone
Post: #68
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
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
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
huskiebob Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,528
Joined: Nov 2004
Reputation: 44
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location: The Space Coast

Donators
Post: #69
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lolly Popp Offline
Magically Delicious
*

Posts: 2,425
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Football
Location: Endzone
Post: #70
RE: Steinbrecher's comments
(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.
02-29-2012 07:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.