(02-26-2012 06:01 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 05:33 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

Why go to the alliance when the MAC could have everything the alliance has WITHOUT the high level of travel cost.

MAC-18

MAC Atlantic: Buffalo, SBU, UMass, Delaware, JMU, ODU
MAC East: Toledo, BG, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Miami
MAC West: NIU, IL State, Ball State, WMU, CMU, EMU

The MAC can run a 4 team playoff with 3 division winners and a wild card, have 3-4 NCAA bids and 5-6 bowl tie-ins. All of this without resorting to ridiculous travel required by the alliance.

Not that I think what you're saying is realistic but it is an example of the 'bold' decision making that others were talking about. UB, in the MAC needs Kent/Akron and Ohio. Without them this conference is suddenly not a very nice travel conference.

You've got me thinking here about how an 8 game schedule could work. Normally in a 12 team divisional set up each school plays 3 schools of the opposite division on a rotating basis.

In an 18 team, 3 divisional set up.....the MAC Atlantic for example would play 18 crossover games, 9 from the MAC East, 9 from the MAC West. The MAC East would then play those 9 games from the MAC Atlantic and 9 games from the MAC West.

An 8 game schedule could then work with 18 schools. Instead of playing 50% of the opposite division, each school would play 25% of the opposite division(s).

In basketball an 16 game schedule would work, 10 games within the division and play 50% of the out-of-division foes (6 games).

I have seen some posts on this board (not specifically this thread) which state that the MAC should try to get as much money as possible from Temple ie 10 million plus, comparing it to the big east getting 20 million from WVU and this is later than that. I'm not against that from your perspective and this might not even be the right thread to post this in, but one fact i wanted to point out is that temple is only leaving one sport while WVU was leaving the big east for every sport. While of coarse football runs everything that is still a big difference.

i don't think anyone is legitimately suggesting a similar sized payout based on the reason you listed but I think the sentiment is the MAC would be wise to press for something greater than the 2.5m that comes with a 2yr notice. The most reasonable suggestions I've seen is start at $10m and negotiate from there. End at $5m-$7m, Big East picks up the tab and solved their scheduling problem while still netting $13m and everyone goes home happy.

(02-26-2012 10:57 PM)cttu Wrote:  I have seen some posts on this board (not specifically this thread) which state that the MAC should try to get as much money as possible from Temple ie 10 million plus, comparing it to the big east getting 20 million from WVU and this is later than that. I'm not against that from your perspective and this might not even be the right thread to post this in, but one fact i wanted to point out is that temple is only leaving one sport while WVU was leaving the big east for every sport. While of coarse football runs everything that is still a big difference.

It's all relative. $2.5 million was based on the fact that Temple was in for football only as opposed to a much higher starting point had it been all sports. The Big East set the precedent by demanding 4x $5 million based on the agreed amount from WVU's participation in sports. So I don't even know how the Big East could expect anything less than 4x $2.5 million. Should be very easy and simple if it goes to arbitration. The precedent is set, and by the very same party involved.

The whole point of a contract like this is to discourage these type of things. Temple knew what it signed up for based on football only. Syracuse and Pitt are staying an extra year not because they want to, but because they don't want to pay an enormous amount. The Big East needs Temple and demanded 4x exit fee after playing hard ball from West Virginia and now they want the MAC to rollover and hand them Temple and keep their $20 Million, all the while making Pitt and Syracuse stay when they don't want to.

(02-26-2012 11:39 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 10:57 PM)cttu Wrote:  I have seen some posts on this board (not specifically this thread) which state that the MAC should try to get as much money as possible from Temple ie 10 million plus, comparing it to the big east getting 20 million from WVU and this is later than that. I'm not against that from your perspective and this might not even be the right thread to post this in, but one fact i wanted to point out is that temple is only leaving one sport while WVU was leaving the big east for every sport. While of coarse football runs everything that is still a big difference.

It's all relative. $2.5 million was based on the fact that you only were in for football as opposed to a much higher starting point had it been all sports. The Big East set the precedent by demanding 4x $5 million based on the agreed amount based on WVU's participation in sports. So I don't even know how the Big East could expect anything less than 4x $2.5 million. Should be very easy and simple if it goes to arbitration. The precedent is set, and by the very same party.

yes the precedent has been set, but im saying its different because it is only football in this example, where as the precedent you are talking about is all sports

I think the MAC makes an offer the Big East can't refuse. They get Temple football and the MAC gets Depaul and Providence hoops plus Villanova football.

A buyout is a buyout whether its for all sports or just one. BE agreed to a 27 month $5M buyout. Temple agreed to 24 month $2.5M buyout. That looks damn near the same thing. BE received 4x the amount no reason to think the MAC shouldn't get the same thing. But since there is a 3 month difference I guess that should leave the MAC at only getting 3.8x the $2.5M which is $9.5M.

(02-26-2012 10:57 PM)cttu Wrote:  I have seen some posts on this board (not specifically this thread) which state that the MAC should try to get as much money as possible from Temple ie 10 million plus, comparing it to the big east getting 20 million from WVU and this is later than that. I'm not against that from your perspective and this might not even be the right thread to post this in, but one fact i wanted to point out is that temple is only leaving one sport while WVU was leaving the big east for every sport. While of coarse football runs everything that is still a big difference.

But Temple's one sport leaving is the only one the buyout was built for. Were not asking for half of the BE buyout, whats being proposed is 4 times the existing buyout (2.5 mil) for leaving two years early.

If Temple thought the MAC was worth less than that (2.5 million and two years) they should not have signed.

(02-27-2012 08:51 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  If Temple thought the MAC was worth less than that (2.5 million and two years) they should not have signed.

Agree.

I'm sure each conference has now executed these kind of 'exit agreements.' (in human relationships, it might be thought of as a 'divorce').

Each contract is UNIQUE in terms of sports covered, timing, etc.

I'm sure a judge would look at that was promised and the remedy agreed to if the promise (i.e., early exit) was breached.

What is bad about these contracts is they don't provide for anything other than 'planned' exits (I"d hardly call the Temple exit 'planned' - it is like the guy who comes home and tells his wife "I found a new woman and we want to live together. I want an immediate divorce").

I believe some Temple fans aren't being realistic.

Temple PROMISED 2.5M and 24 months to exit. That is contractual. It has nothing to do with whether it is fair or not, etc. etc. Temple's presence was a premise for adding UMass.

I'm sure the MAC will try to make the point that it suffers 'damages' by having to replace Temple. The MAC LOST a valuable member. Fans here get into the silliness of 'don't let the door hit you...".

(02-27-2012 09:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Agree.

I'm sure each conference has now executed these kind of 'exit agreements.' (in human relationships, it might be thought of as a 'divorce').

Each contract is UNIQUE in terms of sports covered, timing, etc.

I'm sure a judge would look at that was promised and the remedy agreed to if the promise (i.e., early exit) was breached.

What is bad about these contracts is they don't provide for anything other than 'planned' exits (I"d hardly call the Temple exit 'planned' - it is like the guy who comes home and tells his wife "I found a new woman and we want to live together. I want an immediate divorce").

I believe some Temple fans aren't being realistic.

Temple PROMISED 2.5M and 24 months to exit. That is contractual. It has nothing to do with whether it is fair or not, etc. etc. Temple's presence was a premise for adding UMass.

I'm sure the MAC will try to make the point that it suffers 'damages' by having to replace Temple. The MAC LOST a valuable member. Fans here get into the silliness of 'don't let the door hit you...".

I like your analogy. The MAC presidents saw that there was a reasonable chance that Temple would be offered an invitation to another conference and constructed the contract in place currently. I'm not sure whether they anticipated the current circumstances with the desire for an immediate divorce.

Comparisons to WVU's exit are pointless because the Big East had a compelling financial incentive to keep WVU as a member according to the terms of the conference by laws. IMO, the MAC find themselves in the exact opposite situation. Their financial incentive is for Temple to leave since whatever exit fees paid by Temple will greatly exceed the value of Temple remaining in the conference.

Therefore a deal will be made. The presidents aren't, I hope, approaching this with the same emotions as fans. The MAC needs to strike a deal that delivers the most money possible without actually exceeding Temple's ability/desire to pay (I'm assuming that the BE will not pay any portion of Temple's exit fee) and leading Temple to remain in the MAC. IMO that number is less than 10 million and the 5 - 6 million mentioned on the realignment board seems to me to be a realistic figure.

The time pressure involved may well lead to this deal being less than optimal for either Temple or the MAC. People make mistakes when they are rushed. In the end, I think the MAC will receive a significant financial windfall, just not the amount that fans on this board seem to think is appropriate.

(02-27-2012 06:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(02-27-2012 09:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Agree.

I'm sure each conference has now executed these kind of 'exit agreements.' (in human relationships, it might be thought of as a 'divorce').

Each contract is UNIQUE in terms of sports covered, timing, etc.

I'm sure a judge would look at that was promised and the remedy agreed to if the promise (i.e., early exit) was breached.

What is bad about these contracts is they don't provide for anything other than 'planned' exits (I"d hardly call the Temple exit 'planned' - it is like the guy who comes home and tells his wife "I found a new woman and we want to live together. I want an immediate divorce").

I believe some Temple fans aren't being realistic.

Temple PROMISED 2.5M and 24 months to exit. That is contractual. It has nothing to do with whether it is fair or not, etc. etc. Temple's presence was a premise for adding UMass.

I'm sure the MAC will try to make the point that it suffers 'damages' by having to replace Temple. The MAC LOST a valuable member. Fans here get into the silliness of 'don't let the door hit you...".

I like your analogy. The MAC presidents saw that there was a reasonable chance that Temple would be offered an invitation to another conference and constructed the contract in place currently. I'm not sure whether they anticipated the current circumstances with the desire for an immediate divorce.

Comparisons to WVU's exit are pointless because the Big East had a compelling financial incentive to keep WVU as a member according to the terms of the conference by laws. IMO, the MAC find themselves in the exact opposite situation. Their financial incentive is for Temple to leave since whatever exit fees paid by Temple will greatly exceed the value of Temple remaining in the conference.

Therefore a deal will be made. The presidents aren't, I hope, approaching this with the same emotions as fans. The MAC needs to strike a deal that delivers the most money possible without actually exceeding Temple's ability/desire to pay (I'm assuming that the BE will not pay any portion of Temple's exit fee) and leading Temple to remain in the MAC. IMO that number is less than 10 million and the 5 - 6 million mentioned on the realignment board seems to me to be a realistic figure.

The time pressure involved may well lead to this deal being less than optimal for either Temple or the MAC. People make mistakes when they are rushed. In the end, I think the MAC will receive a significant financial windfall, just not the amount that fans on this board seem to think is appropriate.

I disagree with the comments in bold. UMass was brought in as a partner for Temple, maybe to build on an eastern strength, who knows exactly for sure? Any plans for expansion, if there were any, are probably all but gone for now.

I have no sympathy for Temple's situation. They put themselves in it and will easily recoup any exit fees in the forthcoming years.

(02-27-2012 01:29 AM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  I think the MAC makes an offer the Big East can't refuse. They get Temple football and the MAC gets Depaul and Providence hoops plus Villanova football.

You are welcome to all of them.

(02-27-2012 06:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(02-27-2012 09:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Agree.

I like your analogy. The MAC presidents saw that there was a reasonable chance that Temple would be offered an invitation to another conference and constructed the contract in place currently. I'm not sure whether they anticipated the current circumstances with the desire for an immediate divorce.

Comparisons to WVU's exit are pointless because the Big East had a compelling financial incentive to keep WVU as a member according to the terms of the conference by laws. IMO, the MAC find themselves in the exact opposite situation. Their financial incentive is for Temple to leave since whatever exit fees paid by Temple will greatly exceed the value of Temple remaining in the conference.

Therefore a deal will be made. The presidents aren't, I hope, approaching this with the same emotions as fans. The MAC needs to strike a deal that delivers the most money possible without actually exceeding Temple's ability/desire to pay (I'm assuming that the BE will not pay any portion of Temple's exit fee) and leading Temple to remain in the MAC. IMO that number is less than 10 million and the 5 - 6 million mentioned on the realignment board seems to me to be a realistic figure.

The time pressure involved may well lead to this deal being less than optimal for either Temple or the MAC. People make mistakes when they are rushed. In the end, I think the MAC will receive a significant financial windfall, just not the amount that fans on this board seem to think is appropriate.

I disagree with the comments in bold. UMass was brought in as a partner for Temple, maybe to build on an eastern strength, who knows exactly for sure? Any plans for expansion, if there were any, are probably all but gone for now.

I have no sympathy for Temple's situation. They put themselves in it and will easily recoup any exit fees in the forthcoming years.

Sympathy, or lack thereof is irrelevant. Obtaining the best financial outcome for the MAC is the relevant concern.

Let's assume that Temple pays 6 million dollars to the MAC. As a point of reference, I believe the current MAC football TV contract with ESPN pays the league less than two million per year. The only way that Temple as a member of the MAC could deliver a similar or greater sum than $6MM to the conference would be to make at least one (not sure what the MAC cut would be) BCS bowl appearance in the next five years. The odds of that happening are infinitesimally small.

The MAC presidents really aren't stupid. I doubt they had any illusions about Temple either becoming a full member or having a long tenure in the conference. They negotiated the current contract preceisely to mitigate risk given the possibilty that Temple might have an invitation to another, more lucrative, conference. I don't think they (nor did anyone else) anticipated how messy the realignment process would become. Given the circumstances, it's in the interests of both parties to devise a compromise that offers fair value to both.

I'm assuming that the people representing the MAC and Temple in the negotiation are competent. I assume that those representing the MAC aren't going to hold firm on financial demands that they have no reasonable basis to expect that Temple would actaully be able to satisfy. They wouldn't be acting in their own best interest if they did so. The deal won't satisfy the desires of this board to punish Temple for lack of loyalty to the conference, creating scheduling difficulties, having annoying fans, being the alma mater of Bill Cosby or any number of other reasons. But, the MAC will be better off financially by collecting exit fees from Temple. IOW, they'll cut a deal.

(02-27-2012 08:32 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(02-27-2012 06:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(02-27-2012 09:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Agree.

I like your analogy. The MAC presidents saw that there was a reasonable chance that Temple would be offered an invitation to another conference and constructed the contract in place currently. I'm not sure whether they anticipated the current circumstances with the desire for an immediate divorce.

Comparisons to WVU's exit are pointless because the Big East had a compelling financial incentive to keep WVU as a member according to the terms of the conference by laws. IMO, the MAC find themselves in the exact opposite situation. Their financial incentive is for Temple to leave since whatever exit fees paid by Temple will greatly exceed the value of Temple remaining in the conference.

Therefore a deal will be made. The presidents aren't, I hope, approaching this with the same emotions as fans. The MAC needs to strike a deal that delivers the most money possible without actually exceeding Temple's ability/desire to pay (I'm assuming that the BE will not pay any portion of Temple's exit fee) and leading Temple to remain in the MAC. IMO that number is less than 10 million and the 5 - 6 million mentioned on the realignment board seems to me to be a realistic figure.

The time pressure involved may well lead to this deal being less than optimal for either Temple or the MAC. People make mistakes when they are rushed. In the end, I think the MAC will receive a significant financial windfall, just not the amount that fans on this board seem to think is appropriate.

I disagree with the comments in bold. UMass was brought in as a partner for Temple, maybe to build on an eastern strength, who knows exactly for sure? Any plans for expansion, if there were any, are probably all but gone for now.

I have no sympathy for Temple's situation. They put themselves in it and will easily recoup any exit fees in the forthcoming years.

Sympathy, or lack thereof is irrelevant. Obtaining the best financial outcome for the MAC is the relevant concern.

Let's assume that Temple pays 6 million dollars to the MAC. As a point of reference, I believe the current MAC football TV contract with ESPN pays the league less than two million per year. The only way that Temple as a member of the MAC could deliver a similar or greater sum than $6MM to the conference would be to make at least one (not sure what the MAC cut would be) BCS bowl appearance in the next five years. The odds of that happening are infinitesimally small.

The MAC presidents really aren't stupid. I doubt they had any illusions about Temple either becoming a full member or having a long tenure in the conference. They negotiated the current contract preceisely to mitigate risk given the possibilty that Temple might have an invitation to another, more lucrative, conference. I don't think they (nor did anyone else) anticipated how messy the realignment process would become. Given the circumstances, it's in the interests of both parties to devise a compromise that offers fair value to both.

I'm assuming that [1]the people representing the MAC and Temple in the negotiation are competent. I assume that those representing the MAC aren't going to hold firm on financial demands that they have no reasonable basis to expect that Temple would actaully be able to satisfy. They wouldn't be acting in their own best interest if they did so. [2]The deal won't satisfy the desires of this board to punish Temple for lack of loyalty to the conference, creating scheduling difficulties, having annoying fans, being the alma mater of Bill Cosby or any number of other reasons. But, the MAC will be better off financially by collecting exit fees from Temple. IOW, they'll cut a deal.

Very good post. I personally don't care if Temple pays the MAC $1 or $10, in the grand scheme of things, it's irrelevant to me. I feel the same way about that as I do the amount of money tv networks pay conferences for games. What I care about is the quality of play on the field, the amount of exposure teams get, and the way teams go about handling their own business. And in this case, I don't think Temple should be "punished" for anything.

In reference to the bolded items:

[1] Be careful what you assume.

[2] LOL. Very true. I've never understood the dislike toward Temple from many of our fans on this board, outside of things started by JGH. [We] never liked you when you were in our conference and now [we're] all pissed that you're leaving.

The MAC will not suffer from losing Temple. They're football program is way overated for whatever reason. OU, Toledo, NIU will continue to carry the MAC banner.

(02-28-2012 08:08 AM)SVHerd Wrote:  The MAC will not suffer from losing Temple. They're football program is way overated for whatever reason. OU, Toledo, NIU will continue to carry the MAC banner.

Completely agree !!

Would also like to get a home and away deal started with the Herd in the not too distant future...

(02-27-2012 06:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  Therefore a deal will be made. The presidents aren't, I hope, approaching this with the same emotions as fans. The MAC needs to strike a deal that delivers the most money possible without actually exceeding Temple's ability/desire to pay (I'm assuming that the BE will not pay any portion of Temple's exit fee) and leading Temple to remain in the MAC. IMO that number is less than 10 million and the 5 - 6 million mentioned on the realignment board seems to me to be a realistic figure.

That's the critical part. And it goes back to making this a win-win situation.Getting greedy, or trying to be spiteful won't work here. The BE doesn't value Temple that much to go throwing around 8-figure numbers like it's Monopoly money. I'd guess that $4M is closer to the mark, but the conference can negotiate some other games that benefit the MAC as part of the deal. Again, those sorts of games benefit the MAC far more than they cost the BE. That's where the gain is to be made.

Take the money, not worthless games.

(02-28-2012 09:25 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  Take the money, not worthless games.

:ncaabbs: The Big East is a declining conferance that is not a REAL BCS conference and will be thrown out sooner than later. It ain't like we are getting games with SEC or Pac 10.

(02-28-2012 09:21 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(02-27-2012 06:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  Therefore a deal will be made. The presidents aren't, I hope, approaching this with the same emotions as fans. The MAC needs to strike a deal that delivers the most money possible without actually exceeding Temple's ability/desire to pay (I'm assuming that the BE will not pay any portion of Temple's exit fee) and leading Temple to remain in the MAC. IMO that number is less than 10 million and the 5 - 6 million mentioned on the realignment board seems to me to be a realistic figure.

That's the critical part. And it goes back to making this a win-win situation.Getting greedy, or trying to be spiteful won't work here. The BE doesn't value Temple that much to go throwing around 8-figure numbers like it's Monopoly money. I'd guess that $4M is closer to the mark, but the conference can negotiate some other games that benefit the MAC as part of the deal. Again, those sorts of games benefit the MAC far more than they cost the BE. That's where the gain is to be made.

The BE already made it clear that they have no interest in spending any of their own "new" money to move teams around. They were happy to take WVU's and TCU's money but didn't want to help Boise out. If they did this invite never happens. I think it's all on Temple. This is part of the problem with having teams with different affiliations (BB only, all-sports, etc.). Just look at what the Big 12 was able to do to get WVU, they ponied up some $$ up front to get them in. Hard to believe but the BE has bigger leadership issues than us.