H2Oville Rocket
Legend
Posts: 26,389
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Toledo R0ckets
Location:
|
RE: So, what if the MAC split
(02-09-2012 02:09 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote: (02-09-2012 02:04 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: (02-09-2012 02:00 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote: (02-09-2012 01:23 PM)DrTorch Wrote: (02-09-2012 01:21 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: Louis is from OU- he doesn't know how to spell "miniscule".
You can't spell miniscule without N I U.
You can't spell GeNIUs without it either.
But geniuses know better than to capitalize the word "genius" when used in the middle of a sentence. So that doesn't really apply.
Not when it's a proper noun.
Geniuses know that your usage did not constitute a proper noun. Since it was obvious (to most) I didn't bother to include that exception.
|
|
02-09-2012 02:17 PM |
|
Howl-n-Prowl
Three SDs above the mean
Posts: 5,636
Joined: Sep 2011
I Root For: Los NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Territory
|
RE: So, what if the MAC split
(02-09-2012 02:17 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: (02-09-2012 02:09 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote: (02-09-2012 02:04 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: (02-09-2012 02:00 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote: (02-09-2012 01:23 PM)DrTorch Wrote: You can't spell miniscule without N I U.
You can't spell GeNIUs without it either.
But geniuses know better than to capitalize the word "genius" when used in the middle of a sentence. So that doesn't really apply.
Not when it's a proper noun.
Geniuses know that your usage did not constitute a proper noun. Since it was obvious (to most) I didn't bother to include that exception.
Geniuses would have accounted for that possibility.
|
|
02-09-2012 02:21 PM |
|
nert
1st String
Posts: 1,700
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 41
I Root For: Utah, CMU, Cincinnati
Location:
|
RE: So, what if the MAC split
(02-09-2012 12:51 PM)DrTorch Wrote: There are limits to expansion. The MAC has hit just about all of them:
1. Distance between outliers too far to drive, and too far to stir interest. MAC isn't the worst here, but we're pushing it w/ UMass v NIU and Temple v WMU.
2. Too much concentration w/in the current footprint. MAC is definitely the king of this situation. OH and MI are covered, but that hasn't maintained interest w/in the states, and certainly doesn't pique interest outside of the state.
3. Too many teams diluting the brand, and leaving outsiders (and sometimes insiders) wondering who's a member. MAC is definitely knocking at this door, especially w/ football only members, and BG repeatedly switching divisions.
Getting bigger, especially to something like 20, is a big mistake in my mind. UMass v SIU= ECU v UTEP...neither interests anybody outside of atheletes' parents. And I've already pointed out that 1AQ among 20 teams isn't going to make anyone but the power conferences happy.
All that being said, expanding the current conference seems like a mistake. I'm not seeing good support for the logic.
And paring back the conference is also not promising, b/c every school brings a strength (and history) in some sports.
So you're against trimming schools out; against expansion past the current number of teams; and you want access to new markets like St. Louis and Kentucky, you also want to reduce the concentration of the schools without expanding the footprint too much - and bring outliers in.....
hmmm
Let's get Akron to move their campus to Frankfort, KY - and get EMU to move theirs to St. Louis. We'll bring Temple to Pittsburgh, and UMass to Indianapolis. And obviously, Bowling Green can be moved to Bowling Green (KY, that is). OK, done. Let's kick off.
(This post was last modified: 02-09-2012 03:01 PM by nert.)
|
|
02-09-2012 03:00 PM |
|
DrTorch
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:
|
RE: So, what if the MAC split
(02-09-2012 03:00 PM)nert Wrote: (02-09-2012 12:51 PM)DrTorch Wrote: There are limits to expansion. The MAC has hit just about all of them:
1. Distance between outliers too far to drive, and too far to stir interest. MAC isn't the worst here, but we're pushing it w/ UMass v NIU and Temple v WMU.
2. Too much concentration w/in the current footprint. MAC is definitely the king of this situation. OH and MI are covered, but that hasn't maintained interest w/in the states, and certainly doesn't pique interest outside of the state.
3. Too many teams diluting the brand, and leaving outsiders (and sometimes insiders) wondering who's a member. MAC is definitely knocking at this door, especially w/ football only members, and BG repeatedly switching divisions.
Getting bigger, especially to something like 20, is a big mistake in my mind. UMass v SIU= ECU v UTEP...neither interests anybody outside of atheletes' parents. And I've already pointed out that 1AQ among 20 teams isn't going to make anyone but the power conferences happy.
All that being said, expanding the current conference seems like a mistake. I'm not seeing good support for the logic.
And paring back the conference is also not promising, b/c every school brings a strength (and history) in some sports.
So you're against trimming schools out; against expansion past the current number of teams; and you want access to new markets like St. Louis and Kentucky, you also want to reduce the concentration of the schools without expanding the footprint too much - and bring outliers in.....
hmmm
Let's get Akron to move their campus to Frankfort, KY - and get EMU to move theirs to St. Louis. We'll bring Temple to Pittsburgh, and UMass to Indianapolis. And obviously, Bowling Green can be moved to Bowling Green (KY, that is). OK, done. Let's kick off.
You make my point. If MAC university sports are to be more successful, they have to do things differently.
|
|
02-09-2012 03:15 PM |
|