Steve1981
Heisman
Posts: 5,374
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 258
I Root For: UMass
Location: North Quabbin Region
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
^ That is a true statement, 32,848 fans did come to Gillette to see FCS football. The venue had lot to due with it and the Kraft Family have been very supportive. Please remember as others said, it takes time for perspectives to change. The UMass fans perspective comes from Basketball and the A10 is a strong basketball conference. We are actually in four conferences, A10 - Basketball, Hockey East - Hockey, CAA - Lacrosse and Football, and the ECAC, not sure of the sport/s.
(This post was last modified: 11-30-2010 09:11 PM by Steve1981.)
|
|
11-30-2010 09:11 PM |
|
epasnoopy
Diehard Huskie
Posts: 25,856
Joined: May 2005
Reputation: 104
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Stadium
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 07:00 PM)uakronkid Wrote: Football-only is fine for the present. We already have that with Temple, so what's wrong with having another school with that arrangement? At least we get balanced divisions then. it expands the footprint and helps the leagues perception as more than an Ohio/Michigan bus league.
What's wrong with that is you split what little TV revenue and ESPN exposure we have with yet another member. We will also only have three bowl tie-ins for 14 teams. There is no conference larger than us in 1-A football with so few bowls. This conference already has enough mouths to feed.
|
|
11-30-2010 09:11 PM |
|
RecoveringHillbilly
1st String
Posts: 1,472
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Buffalo, WVU
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 08:06 PM)uakronkid Wrote: Big benefit to UMass comes from getting more recognition as being the main campus of the University of Massachusetts, instead of being UMass-Amherst. Kind of like Buffalo simply being called Buffalo by most of the country instead of "SUNY at Buffalo", which makes them sound like a branch campus of some other university.
Anyone using 'SUNY at Buffalo' or 'SUNY-Buffalo' is in error, ignorant, or willfully using it derogatorily anyway. It's not an accepted name in SUNY or UB communications. The only legal name within SUNY is State University of New York at Buffalo, while the only official short-forms are UB, Buffalo, or University at Buffalo, THE State University of New York, (Yes, UB has pulled the same self-created attempt at separation from the state higher-ed system that THE Ohio State U. and THE Penn State U have done).
Official 'U of X at X' names aren't so negative when you consider U. of Massachusetts, Amherst, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and University of California, Los Angeles. Gaining a rep as being big-time helps establish whatever identity you want to be known by.
|
|
11-30-2010 09:15 PM |
|
Steve1981
Heisman
Posts: 5,374
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 258
I Root For: UMass
Location: North Quabbin Region
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
How is non conference TV revenue allocated. Pretty sure a game or two at Gillette would be attractive. Heck a few conference games at Gillette would be nice.
(This post was last modified: 11-30-2010 09:32 PM by Steve1981.)
|
|
11-30-2010 09:16 PM |
|
RecoveringHillbilly
1st String
Posts: 1,472
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Buffalo, WVU
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 09:11 PM)epasnoopy Wrote: (11-30-2010 07:00 PM)uakronkid Wrote: Football-only is fine for the present. We already have that with Temple, so what's wrong with having another school with that arrangement? At least we get balanced divisions then. it expands the footprint and helps the leagues perception as more than an Ohio/Michigan bus league.
What's wrong with that is you split what little TV revenue and ESPN exposure we have with yet another member. We will also only have three bowl tie-ins for 14 teams. There is no conference larger than us in 1-A football with so few bowls. This conference already has enough mouths to feed.
The bowl situation is always fluid. There are always cities looking to support a new bowl. Orlando wanted a 3rd bowl and LA wanted one for 2010 but they were each denied. Toronto would have kept going if the BE didn't bolt. FBS teams would increase to 124 with the additions of South Alabama, UTSA, Texas St, and now possibly UMass. We could see an additional bowl or 2 created, and MAC affiliations gained if some current WAC bowls dump that league.
|
|
11-30-2010 09:34 PM |
|
RecoveringHillbilly
1st String
Posts: 1,472
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Buffalo, WVU
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 09:16 PM)Steve1981 Wrote: How is non conference TV revenue allocated. Pretty sure a game or two at Gillette would be attractive. Heck a few conference games at Gillette would be nice.
I'd LOVE a football weekend at Foxboro of Buffalo @ UMass followed by the Bills @ Pats that Sunday. That might be a clever marketing event.
|
|
11-30-2010 09:39 PM |
|
HuskieTap22
All American
Posts: 3,214
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 40
I Root For: NIU / DePaul
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 09:16 PM)Steve1981 Wrote: How is non conference TV revenue allocated. Pretty sure a game or two at Gillette would be attractive. Heck a few conference games at Gillette would be nice.
Does anyone know if the MAC Regional TV package (Saturday national GOTW) we have with ESPN currently broadcasts in markets in the Northeast? If not I would think adding UMass will now get the games on out there as well. Also, I would think the MAC would be on the lookout for a fourth bowl. Keep in mind the WAC might not even have enough teams to remain FBS and the Big East is expanding. I would say it is just a matter of time before a fourth and possible fifth bowl affiliation come into the picture.
|
|
11-30-2010 10:03 PM |
|
uakronkid
Heisman
Posts: 5,824
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 48
I Root For: Akron
Location: Akron
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
If the WAC folds, we would be in a god position to pick up one of their bowls. We continuously have the most eligible teams beyond our alloted number.
This whole UMass business seems to me part of a plan for something greater. I'm not just talking about 16 football teams, but 16 basketball teams as well. bringing up Umass and two other teams gives us great leverage to force them to bring in all sports along with Temple. Keep these football-only contracts on a renewing basis, and once you have four teams simply threaten not to renew any of them unless they join for all sports. Temple wouldn't make the move on their own, and neither would UMass, but as a group it doesn't seem as bad. If even one decides to do it, it changes things for the others, especially if they all come from the same basketball conference. Maybe this is the MAC's plan. Maybe I'm giving the MAC too much credit here.
|
|
11-30-2010 10:15 PM |
|
HuskieTap22
All American
Posts: 3,214
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 40
I Root For: NIU / DePaul
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 10:15 PM)uakronkid Wrote: If the WAC folds, we would be in a god position to pick up one of their bowls. We continuously have the most eligible teams beyond our alloted number.
This whole UMass business seems to me part of a plan for something greater. I'm not just talking about 16 football teams, but 16 basketball teams as well. bringing up Umass and two other teams gives us great leverage to force them to bring in all sports along with Temple. Keep these football-only contracts on a renewing basis, and once you have four teams simply threaten not to renew any of them unless they join for all sports. Temple wouldn't make the move on their own, and neither would UMass, but as a group it doesn't seem as bad. If even one decides to do it, it changes things for the others, especially if they all come from the same basketball conference. Maybe this is the MAC's plan. Maybe I'm giving the MAC too much credit here.
No I think you are on to something. The MAC doesn't have the mass of a BCS conference to just gobble up any team it wants unders its terms. However, over time the seats at the BCS table will continue to fill and then conferences like the MAC will have more leverage. Especially for East coast schools there are only so many options.
|
|
11-30-2010 10:40 PM |
|
RecoveringHillbilly
1st String
Posts: 1,472
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Buffalo, WVU
Location: Niagara Falls, ON
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
I don't bye that the MAC would do anything to force full membership.
What has every episode of FBS movement and speculated movement, and FCS move-ups, been about? Football. We've learned that even Kansas' basketball panache meant jack when the Big 12 was threatened to be torn apart. They were worried about being left out of a power conference throughout, and ended up giving up cash to stay associated with Longhorn football.
It's all about football, and the MAC has a perfect 12 for all-sports today. That's not to say the other sports aren't important for MAC presidents, or that we would not invite 2 if they were open to joining, but there can't be some master plan for an 'all-or-nothing, leave the A-10. Or else'. The effect on losing positive football relationships with potentially valuable associate members would not be prudent.
|
|
11-30-2010 11:11 PM |
|
emu steve
Legend
Posts: 39,475
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 83
I Root For: EMU / MAC
Location: DMV - D.C. area
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
The article really seemed keen on a UMass vs. BC rivalry.
Maybe a UMass vs. Army rivalry might develop over time too?
UMass could keep their rivalry with UNH.
Would a UMass vs. UConn rivalry develop?
|
|
11-30-2010 11:15 PM |
|
emu steve
Legend
Posts: 39,475
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 83
I Root For: EMU / MAC
Location: DMV - D.C. area
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
The article really seemed keen on a UMass vs. BC rivalry.
Maybe a UMass vs. Army rivalry might develop over time too?
UMass could keep their rivalry with UNH.
Would a UMass vs. UConn rivalry develop?
|
|
11-30-2010 11:15 PM |
|
CMUprof
1st String
Posts: 1,463
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 13
I Root For: CMU
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 08:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: (11-30-2010 07:16 PM)CMUprof Wrote: (11-30-2010 07:11 PM)perimeterpost Wrote: One word of advice to UMASS fans-
If you think the MAC is just a brief pit stop until you get that magical call from the Big East or some other BCS conference you might want to reset your expectations. Just ask Temple fans.
That's why so many of us don't like adding FB without BBall. It makes you less "committed" to the MAC. The MAC becomes a marriage of convenience and you end up telling yourself (and everyone else if you're a Temple fan) that you're too good for the MAC, and its just a matter of time until you move on to bigger and better things. Granted, its not ALL Temple fans, there's a few logical ones out there too. But my advice would be to embrace being in the MAC.
FB-only benefits UMass more than it does the MAC, but welcome either way. I like UMass, they have a good band.
My guess is that Buffalo has their sights set on bigger and better things too. And they have actually won the MAC once!
Lets be clear.. Their is not a school in the MAC that would turn down the Big10/12 the ACC or the Big East... But that;s different than parking one sport in the mac and talking down to the conference.
Would I like UB to be in the BE! He!! yes but I don't we are somehow better than the rest of the MAC. We have never won the MAC title in BB and only FB once. Until we can win in many sports and all the time in the MAC there is not a lot of 'bragging' to do..
My observation was more along the lines of the institutional profile of UB and that they have more in common with conferences other than the MAC. UCF never won in the MAC but they were clearly positioning themselves to move the whole time.
(This post was last modified: 12-01-2010 09:11 AM by CMUprof.)
|
|
11-30-2010 11:45 PM |
|
globetrotter
Water Engineer
Posts: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 0
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
I love the idea of adding temple, Umass and Army full time. Not sure who team 16 would be but this is always fascinating to me.
|
|
12-01-2010 08:59 AM |
|
UofToledoFans
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13,672
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Toledo and G5
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
Replace EMU. Give em a few years but if they cant win 3 games or get more than 8,000 in the stands they dont deserve it. Its been hard to watch EMU football for 10 years. Bring in Umass, then realign divisions maybe a north and south. Or just move BG/Miami to the west and you got a conferance with one more team with a better name, and one less Michigan directional school. Not trying to smash EMU.
|
|
12-01-2010 09:07 AM |
|
EMUallday
Bench Warmer
Posts: 130
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 4
I Root For: EMU
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(12-01-2010 09:07 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote: Replace EMU. Give em a few years but if they cant win 3 games or get more than 8,000 in the stands they dont deserve it. Its been hard to watch EMU football for 10 years. Bring in Umass, then realign divisions maybe a north and south. Or just move BG/Miami to the west and you got a conferance with one more team with a better name, and one less Michigan directional school. Not trying to smash EMU.
We should take out Toledo because they are always getting in trouble with the ncaa for cheating and players gambling on there own games.
Any who, I don't understand why alot of people think UMASS is gonna come in and be good right away. Look around college football and find 1-AA teams that come to D1A and were good from the get go. UMASS will get destroyed its first few years in the MAC. IMHO
|
|
12-01-2010 09:45 AM |
|
bullsnotbills
Bench Warmer
Posts: 210
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2
I Root For: Buffalo
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(11-30-2010 01:57 PM)zibby Wrote: (11-30-2010 01:48 PM)EMUallday Wrote: The UMASS fans over on their board are pretty arrogant. First off they think they will just come in to our conference and be the best team off the bat.
UB 31 Rhode Island 0. Rhode Island 37, UMass 34: Linky
Yeah, sure, UMass, you'll come right in and win.
The URI game was Buffalo's best performance of the year, regardless of level of competition. URI only got better, and we know what happened to Buffalo.
If UB played URI or UMass on November 20th, I'm sure they would have lost..
|
|
12-01-2010 09:58 AM |
|
BrianNowicki
All American
Posts: 4,438
Joined: Sep 2008
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Toledo
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(12-01-2010 09:45 AM)EMUallday Wrote: (12-01-2010 09:07 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote: Replace EMU. Give em a few years but if they cant win 3 games or get more than 8,000 in the stands they dont deserve it. Its been hard to watch EMU football for 10 years. Bring in Umass, then realign divisions maybe a north and south. Or just move BG/Miami to the west and you got a conferance with one more team with a better name, and one less Michigan directional school. Not trying to smash EMU.
We should take out Toledo because they are always getting in trouble with the ncaa for cheating and players gambling on there own games.
Right, one gambling issue and we are now "always" getting in trouble. Nice rationalization.
Anyone suggesting to get rid of EMU is either just trying to piss off EMU fans, or they have no clue. It isn't like Temple that was a football only member of the Big East. EMU is a full member and do very, very well in some other sports. And it's not like they've never done anything in football. Remember Charlie Batch?
|
|
12-01-2010 12:26 PM |
|
EMUallday
Bench Warmer
Posts: 130
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 4
I Root For: EMU
Location:
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
(12-01-2010 12:26 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: (12-01-2010 09:45 AM)EMUallday Wrote: (12-01-2010 09:07 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote: Replace EMU. Give em a few years but if they cant win 3 games or get more than 8,000 in the stands they dont deserve it. Its been hard to watch EMU football for 10 years. Bring in Umass, then realign divisions maybe a north and south. Or just move BG/Miami to the west and you got a conferance with one more team with a better name, and one less Michigan directional school. Not trying to smash EMU.
We should take out Toledo because they are always getting in trouble with the ncaa for cheating and players gambling on there own games.
Right, one gambling issue and we are now "always" getting in trouble. Nice rationalization.
Anyone suggesting to get rid of EMU is either just trying to piss off EMU fans, or they have no clue. It isn't like Temple that was a football only member of the Big East. EMU is a full member and do very, very well in some other sports. And it's not like they've never done anything in football. Remember Charlie Batch?
Never said multiple gambling issues I said always cheating as in the gambling and "the missing play" from UT's scout tape to Eastern.
Anyway I was just kidding to get the haters mad
|
|
12-01-2010 12:48 PM |
|
astr083
2nd String
Posts: 349
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: -13
I Root For: Ohio State & MAC
Location: Atlanta
|
RE: UMASS and the MAC??
Question.... Am I the only MAC fan that disagrees with adding UMASS as football only members? I like the idea of adding UMASS to the MAC, for all sports, however, I see a football only situation being no different than the Temple addition. Temple benfited from the MAC because the MAC saved there football program. They now have access to bowl games, bowl money & conference scheduling that they otherwise would not have had as an independant. Has the MAC benefited from Temple?? Other than openning a new television market (Philly) to 5 or 6 regionalized football games a year, I would say no. I'm sorry, but a few Temple basketball games against MAC teams have done nothing but lift a few peoples RPI's (NOT BY MUCH), & let's be honest, in the past, a teams RPI has proven to mean very little when it comes to deciding the fate of bubble teams (Miami(OH), Akron & Toledo know this first hand). So no, Temple really hasn't done much for the MAC & what's even worse, is Temple has never won a championship, yet a majority of there fanbase continue to look down upon the conference that has done so much for them! How will adding UMASS be any different? There basketball program has not done a thing since the 90's and is worse off than Temple & there football stadium/team is busch league, yet there fans have the adocity to trash the MAC?? Really?? I say add Temple and UMass for all sports, or don't add them at all. It just makes the MAC look bad & doesn't help the leagues basketball image. How are people outside of the conference going to take MAC basketball seriously, when the league office & conference members i.e. Temple or possible member UMass do not? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new exposure, especially in the Northeast, but I'm not so sure this is the type of exposure that sheds the league in a positive light.... i.e. have any of you taken a look at the UMASS posts/boards?
(This post was last modified: 12-02-2010 12:24 PM by astr083.)
|
|
12-01-2010 01:16 PM |
|