Whatever happend to the MAC wanting a neutral site for the MACC? Are we keeping the East-West rotating format for the next few years?

The MAC tried to bid it out but this conference is so overwhelmingly popular in Ohio that Chryst felt it would be unfair to grant it to only one city. Either that or no one wanted to book up a stadium for the literally dozens of MAC fans that follow their teams to away games. Take your pick.



<!--EDIT|MAKO|Dec 2 2002, 01:48 AM-->

I like it better this way anyways. Even though every other year its in Hickington.....but its nice as a Toledo fan to have the MACC site close when the East hosts....Glass Bowl, Doyt, or even at Waldo....

I think adding UCF also "sealed the coffin" with regards to the idea of a neutral site MACC........can't imagine too many Knight fans would venture up to Canton (or wherever) for the game, so I doubt Chyrst will take a chance on that scenario.

Personally, other than that small detail I still like the concept of playing the game at HOF Stadium. For all the derision (from a few Herd fans here) that the HOF Stadium is too small I'd remind you all that that last two MACC's would have filled that stadium to capacity very nicely. Now, would we have as big a crowd at a neutral site......well, that's debatable but you are hoping with year round promotion and planning that you find 5-8K local fans, which is about all you'd need (in addition to fans of the participating schools) to get a SO crowd of 23K at that venue.

MAKO Wrote:The MAC tried to bid it out but this conference is so overwhelmingly popular in Ohio that Chryst felt it would be unfair to grant it to only one city.

I

I know for a fact that Paul Brown Stadium bid on the game -- due in part to how well the basketball tourney has done in Cleveland -- and I believe at least Columbus and Canton bid as well. But because the sites and the MAC couldn't work out the details, they went to the rotating format.

To wit:
<a href='http://www.cincypost.com/sports/1999/furman110599.html' target='_blank'>http://www.cincypost.com/sports/1999/furman110599.html</a>
<a href='http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/08/22/loc_mac_checks_out.html' target='_blank'>http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/08/2...checks_out.html</a>
<a href='http://www.cincypost.com/2001/may/01/mac050101.html' target='_blank'>http://www.cincypost.com/2001/may/01/mac050101.html</a>

I certainly hope that Chryst and his folks are revisiting the neutral site issue again. Campus sites blow in terms of being able to set any events ahead of time and I still don't think any school should get home-field advantage in a championship game...all factors should be equal for both teams. Besides, by giving the neutral site time to promote the game and the incentive to market the game to the local community, chances are better that you will have a better crowd overall.

There you go again, trying to introduce facts into one of these discussions. Don't you ever learn? :eek:

I don't think anyone could argue a single point of that post, RedSteve. We definitely need a year of marketing to get the big crowd. The MACC game does not conflict with Big Ten games and you would think at least Ohioans would want to see one last college football game live before the long cold winter and spring and summer of no football. And to boot, last year we had two teams in or very near the top 25, depending on the poll. Not many non-BCS conferences can say that in any given year. A neutral site with that kind of publicity should be an easy sell. The MACC could be an annual festival instead of a thrown together party. The only possible wrench in the works is the Orlando one. I do not see them getting out in big numbers for a game in Canton. Columbus maybe due to airport and flight costs. Cincinnati wouldn't be bad but might give Oxford college a homefield adv. Canton the same with Akron, Kent. Columbus would be perfect. 2-3 hours for most teams and equidistance for the spread out MAC teams other than UCF. I would like that but it won't happen. No one in the MAC wants to roll the dice. If you don't take a chance you can't win.

Chryst isn't exactly risk adverse. Look at the loot he's handed over to ESPN et al to get our boys on television.

Muther, like you I like the central location of Columbus, and the Crew Stadium is very nice. The problem is that it's......well, Columbush, and a certain team in red and silver gets all the "ink" and attention there.

To me Canton has always been the best overall site due to the fact that you could tie in the HOF (and a visit), plus they would help promote the game. The problem with Canton is that they host all the big HS Playoffs, and their volunteers and local community are probably not "up" for hosting the MACC in the same timeframe. That's too bad because I think the national telecast of this game would be nice for Canton, and as stated elsewhere here even a crowd of 18K would fill the place pretty well......sure beats looking at 14K (H-ton) or 7K (Toledo) empty seats like the last two MACC's. And my purpose in pointing that out is not to slam either of those teams, as it's pretty difficult to market and successfully hold this kind of game on 2 week's notice.

Lastly, with the UT-Herd rivalry as fierce as it is, I am thinking that with good weather the game will draw pretty well this year.......Herd fans obviously would have a better "handle" on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if they get a crowd in the high 20's this time around.

The Michigan schools, UT and BG have the advantage of being close to the Motor City Bowl. Akron and Kent have the advantage of being close to the MAC Basketball tourney. Put it in Cincy where it would be close for Marshall and OU and Miami. This spreads out the publicity for our big events throughout the primary MAC area. With good marketing you should be able to draw 25-35,000 at Paul Brown Stadium, depending on who is playing. If left at PB for a period of years, I think the event could become bigtime, like the MAC bball tournament has in Cleveland. Playing in Cincy on a Saturday afternoon would be easily accessible for half the teams in the MAC. At least 6 teams are within a 3-hour drive, including UT and Marshall, the two teams which are usually playing.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:Chryst isn't exactly risk adverse. Look at the loot he's handed over to ESPN et al to get our boys on television.

Your boys have been on TV? Mine haven't. Anyone? Not you, MUther. Anyone else? Bueller?

I agree it was unfortunate that ESPN picked Marshall-Ball State last weekend.

I suppose the MAC could try to address the problem during its next set of negotiations with Disney. Still, the MAC doesn't exactly seem in a position to bully ESPN into choosing this game or that one.

Cincy wouldn't be all that bad for Orlando Tech. Comair has plenty of direct flights between Cincy and Orlando every day. The one that I envision having the biggest problem is the Buffalo team (although i think it'll be a cold day in hell before they go to a MACC).

And as an alum of Miami, i don't think playing at PBS would be a home field advantage. Hell, we don't get fans at our regular games. Having the MACC at Hillbilly U was more of an advantage than at a site 40 miles from oxford.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:I agree it was unfortunate that ESPN picked Marshall-Ball State last weekend.

I suppose the MAC could try to address the problem during its next set of negotiations with Disney. Still, the MAC doesn't exactly seem in a position to bully ESPN into choosing this game or that one.

Actually, the MAC does tell ESPN what games to feature. That's part of why we pay them to show our games.

Well, Chryst has been quoted as saying precisely the opposite. I've posted a link.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Just the word of a couple of folks who are privvy to how it works. They've never steered me wrong yet. Including giving me the exact wording of a certain report long before it was released. I believe them. Also, I believe that even Shoemaker posted that it was the MAC's call on one of the green koolaid boards.

If we can't find a neutral site, I don't have a problem with continuing the game the way it is now.

The ONLY change I would like to make is this:

Instead of going to the East or West champion, I think that you should have a predetermined east or west site to hold the game.

For example, let's say that the championship game is going to played at Toledo next year, then at Marshall in 2004.

That way the site has a year to prepare for the game and to promote it.

It also leaves open the chance of it being a neutral site, while also not giving the advantage to either the east or west because the game will rotate.

Just an idea.

Unfortunately, my offer to host the MACC is off the table since my mother has moved, and she no longer has access to the Trinity United Methodist Church kitchen to host the post-game meal.

Even without the meal, it beats the system we have now.