snoop,

you're right. every team plays 8 MAC games this coming year. the hitch WAS that not every team played a round-robin in its division (e.g., Miami/Akron, BG/Temple). now, that is less of an issue since all MAC games will count equally. (although you could still make the argument that it's not a true division champion since the team didn't play everyone in the division...which i think is valid).

under the circumstances with the unbalanced schedule and all, i think this is probably the best solution short of just abandoning the divisions. no way that is going to happen; there is too much money and attention put on that championship game to do away with the divisions, in my opinion.

bobcat_backer Wrote:snoop,

you're right. every team plays 8 MAC games this coming year. the hitch WAS that not every team played a round-robin in its division (e.g., Miami/Akron, BG/Temple). now, that is less of an issue since all MAC games will count equally. (although you could still make the argument that it's not a true division champion since the team didn't play everyone in the division...which i think is valid).

I think the reason MAC East teams probably don't all play each other is because the MAC usually tries to schedule its crossover games to balance the SOS of each team in conference. I think it seems more fair for everyone to play five division games and three crossover games.

Technically, you could say you never know who the best team or top teams are when every MAC team doesn't play the 12 other MAC teams.

No its really just about math. There are 7 teams in the East and 6 in the West. That means that all MAC West teams need 3 crossover games from a pool of 7 teams. The odd number makes it impossible for all of the East teams to play their full 6 division rivals, so some have more than others.

The west needs 18 cross over games
The east would only need 14 if they were to play a full divisional round robin.
Something had to give.

HuskiemobileMan Wrote:

onlinepole Wrote:The problem with counting every conference game is that not all teams play the same number of conference games. Just another reason why a 14th team should have been added when Temple was added. Whether you count or don't count crossover divisional games it's a screwed up system.

Exactly, thats why a 3 way tiebreaker is going to be almost impossible to determine. Rock, Paper, Scissors anyone?

Actually it would be a beer drinking contest.......

Liam9903 Wrote:The west needs 18 cross over games
The east would only need 14 if they were to play a full divisional round robin.
Something had to give.

Right on, otherwise MAC West teams would have to fill those empty slots with more OOC games. Doesn't seem fair that MAC East teams would get to beat up on each other and MAC West teams would have to play more BCS opponents on the road, which are almost always a guaranteed loss.

epasnoopy Wrote:

Liam9903 Wrote:The west needs 18 cross over games
The east would only need 14 if they were to play a full divisional round robin.
Something had to give.

Right on, otherwise MAC West teams would have to fill those empty slots with more OOC games. Doesn't seem fair that MAC East teams would get to beat up on each other and MAC West teams would have to play more BCS opponents on the road, which are almost always a guaranteed loss.

Why would they have to play BCS teams on the road? Why not play FCS teams at home and get an extra win towards bowl eligibility? What's better: "exposure" and a paycheck from some team that views you team as a warmup game, or a better shot at going to a bowl game?

I guess it depends. Why does it have to be one of those options? WMU just signed a home and home w/ Idaho who is in the WAC. I think we are better served playing more games like that and less tune up style games.

uakronkid Wrote:

epasnoopy Wrote:

Liam9903 Wrote:The west needs 18 cross over games
The east would only need 14 if they were to play a full divisional round robin.
Something had to give.

Right on, otherwise MAC West teams would have to fill those empty slots with more OOC games. Doesn't seem fair that MAC East teams would get to beat up on each other and MAC West teams would have to play more BCS opponents on the road, which are almost always a guaranteed loss.

Why would they have to play BCS teams on the road? Why not play FCS teams at home and get an extra win towards bowl eligibility? What's better: "exposure" and a paycheck from some team that views you team as a warmup game, or a better shot at going to a bowl game?

NIU already has a home game vs. a 1-AA team. You want us to add another just so all MAC East teams can play each other?

All MAC teams, East and West, are playing 8 conference games this year.

westernwilly Wrote:

rocketfootball Wrote:

zibby Wrote:No farking way. UB has to play CMU and WMU, probably the two best teams in the West. This is bullshiat.

Nah, Toledo and Ball State are going to be better than CMU and WMU.

Oh! thank you. That was a good one. I have not laughed that hard in a very long time.
Once again, thank you and keep the jokes coming RF.

I'm glad you got a good laugh out of it. I know I have been practicing my own laugh for this fall.

epasnoopy Wrote:

uakronkid Wrote:

epasnoopy Wrote:

Liam9903 Wrote:The west needs 18 cross over games
The east would only need 14 if they were to play a full divisional round robin.
Something had to give.

Right on, otherwise MAC West teams would have to fill those empty slots with more OOC games. Doesn't seem fair that MAC East teams would get to beat up on each other and MAC West teams would have to play more BCS opponents on the road, which are almost always a guaranteed loss.

Why would they have to play BCS teams on the road? Why not play FCS teams at home and get an extra win towards bowl eligibility? What's better: "exposure" and a paycheck from some team that views you team as a warmup game, or a better shot at going to a bowl game?

NIU already has a home game vs. a 1-AA team. You want us to add another just so all MAC East teams can play each other?

Of course not. I was wondering why it would have to be a BCS team on the road. Why not a team from the MWC or CUSA? You can get a home game, and a much better chance of winning.

I just found it interesting that you thought that.

zibby Wrote:No farking way. UB has to play CMU and WMU, probably the two best teams in the West. This is bullshiat.

I was one of the few who thought last years was the fairest way to do things. I really don't have much of a problem either way, though.

uakronkid Wrote:

epasnoopy Wrote:NIU already has a home game vs. a 1-AA team. You want us to add another just so all MAC East teams can play each other?

Of course not. I was wondering why it would have to be a BCS team on the road. Why not a team from the MWC or CUSA? You can get a home game, and a much better chance of winning.

I just found it interesting that you thought that.

I'm not even sure when the last time is we played a team from CUSA or the MWC that was a regular season game. I don't think those in charge at NIU care to play those schools.

I agree with trying to play those schools instead of us grasping for the almighty $ and playing on the road vs. BCS goliaths, but those in charge don't see it that way.

rocketfootball Wrote:

westernwilly Wrote:

rocketfootball Wrote:

zibby Wrote:No farking way. UB has to play CMU and WMU, probably the two best teams in the West. This is bullshiat.

Nah, Toledo and Ball State are going to be better than CMU and WMU.

Oh! thank you. That was a good one. I have not laughed that hard in a very long time.
Once again, thank you and keep the jokes coming RF.

I'm glad you got a good laugh out of it. I know I have been practicing my own laugh for this fall.

I think you've got at least one more year to practice that laugh...at least.

Liam9903 Wrote:I think you've got at least one more year to practice that laugh...at least.

I really believe that if Toledo is going to get back to the top of the MAC in the next two years it would need to be this fall, not 2009.

We return an awful lot from one of the top offenses in the MAC last season (when QB Aaron Opelt was not hurt we had the best offensive numbers and scoring numbers on offense). We get back a few seniors on defense this fall that missed all of last year with injuries, as well as a few others. Both of our starting DE's are back this year after missing all of last year. Our starting FS is back this year after missing all of last year. One of the starting DB's is back this year after missing all of last year. And one of our starting LB's is back this year after missing all of last year.

Finally, two-time Ohio Division I Player of the Year RB Morgan Williams did very well academically last semester and is on pace to do well again this semester. If he passes all of his classes this semester he will be academically eligible to play this fall. A MAC school has never had a running back with the kind of accolades that this kid had coming out of high school. Putting him in the mix at running back along with DaJuane Collins and Gordon Warner gives us three outstanding running backs. Add to that senior wide receiver Nick Moore and junior wide receiver Stephen Williams and we could very well have an offense that could outscore whatever our defense gives up in every MAC game.

And if that isn't good enough this fall, I don't think that 2009 will be the year for Toledo. There will be too many key players graduating after the 2008 season.

rocketfootball Wrote:

Liam9903 Wrote:I think you've got at least one more year to practice that laugh...at least.

I really believe that if Toledo is going to get back to the top of the MAC in the next two years it would need to be this fall, not 2009.

We return an awful lot from one of the top offenses in the MAC last season (when QB Aaron Opelt was not hurt we had the best offensive numbers and scoring numbers on offense). We get back a few seniors on defense this fall that missed all of last year with injuries, as well as a few others. Both of our starting DE's are back this year after missing all of last year. Our starting FS is back this year after missing all of last year. One of the starting DB's is back this year after missing all of last year. And one of our starting LB's is back this year after missing all of last year.

Finally, two-time Ohio Division I Player of the Year RB Morgan Williams did very well academically last semester and is on pace to do well again this semester. If he passes all of his classes this semester he will be academically eligible to play this fall. A MAC school has never had a running back with the kind of accolades that this kid had coming out of high school. Putting him in the mix at running back along with DaJuane Collins and Gordon Warner gives us three outstanding running backs. Add to that senior wide receiver Nick Moore and junior wide receiver Stephen Williams and we could very well have an offense that could outscore whatever our defense gives up in every MAC game.

And if that isn't good enough this fall, I don't think that 2009 will be the year for Toledo. There will be too many key players graduating after the 2008 season.

I agree on '08,but in '09 the Rockets will basically lose Forestal,Herbert,Moore,Allen and Williamson.The Jrs,Sophs,and Freshmen will all step up.I think Stephen Williams will tear up the MAC this year.And of course the Rockets are loaded at RB:
DaJuane Collins,Gordon Warner,Adonis Thomas,Jason Washington,Johnnie Bush,Cameron Mobley,Morgan Williams,Darius Reeves,Leroy Houston.Stutz has really brought on some very good assistants.We should see a few new wrinkles in the Rocket Offense with the new OC.

I think the NCAA understands the MAC's issues. The ban on schools moving up to FBS ties the hands of the MAC. Unless the NCAA forces Notre Dame, Army and Navy to join the MAC in football. The MAC has no other options unless they drop a school they need for the basketball schedule.

We also lose starting OL Patrick Dawson, starting TE John Allen, significant backup DT Al Martin, and long snapper Jeremy Mack.

With no true long snapper behind Mack, that one could hurt the most.

Losing Nick Moore could mean that Stephen Williams will be double and triple teamed a lot as a senior in 2009 if no one else steps up. I'm worried that we become more one dimensional as a running team only in 2009 without a 2nd wide receiver and no tight end that has proved anything. That could all change if people prove themselves in 2008 though.

Defensively I am worried about the defensive line in 2009. We will lose Sean Williamson and Al Martin, and we still don't know how well Douglas Westbrook will return from his injury this fall. In the secondary we will lose Herbert, and I still fear that Church could go pro after 2008 if he has a huge season.

What scares me the most about 2009 is depth. I see 2007 kind of depth as a possibility and that is not a good thing.

rocketfootball Wrote:We also lose starting OL Patrick Dawson, starting TE John Allen, significant backup DT Al Martin, and long snapper Jeremy Mack.

With no true long snapper behind Mack, that one could hurt the most.

Losing Nick Moore could mean that Stephen Williams will be double and triple teamed a lot as a senior in 2009 if no one else steps up. I'm worried that we become more one dimensional as a running team only in 2009 without a 2nd wide receiver and no tight end that has proved anything. That could all change if people prove themselves in 2008 though.

Defensively I am worried about the defensive line in 2009. We will lose Sean Williamson and Al Martin, and we still don't know how well Douglas Westbrook will return from his injury this fall. In the secondary we will lose Herbert, and I still fear that Church could go pro after 2008 if he has a huge season.

What scares me the most about 2009 is depth. I see 2007 kind of depth as a possibility and that is not a good thing.

I would be more worried about depth along the OL in '09.

Boca Rocket Wrote:

rocketfootball Wrote:We also lose starting OL Patrick Dawson, starting TE John Allen, significant backup DT Al Martin, and long snapper Jeremy Mack.

With no true long snapper behind Mack, that one could hurt the most.

Losing Nick Moore could mean that Stephen Williams will be double and triple teamed a lot as a senior in 2009 if no one else steps up. I'm worried that we become more one dimensional as a running team only in 2009 without a 2nd wide receiver and no tight end that has proved anything. That could all change if people prove themselves in 2008 though.

Defensively I am worried about the defensive line in 2009. We will lose Sean Williamson and Al Martin, and we still don't know how well Douglas Westbrook will return from his injury this fall. In the secondary we will lose Herbert, and I still fear that Church could go pro after 2008 if he has a huge season.

What scares me the most about 2009 is depth. I see 2007 kind of depth as a possibility and that is not a good thing.

I would be more worried about depth along the OL in '09.

I agree, John Allen isn't going to be a big loss either, ever since his freshman year, he hasn't been able to catch anything even a cold.