No more FCS call ups. If the MAC ads another it needs to be an established FBS program. UC, UConn, Marshall, Temple would be first 4 choices*


*I'm fully aware that these programs would rather jump off a cliff than join the MAC, I'm simply saying that the MAC would be better suited to aim high than aim low. And who knows, the way things continue to shift the stability and regional proximity the MAC offers might be attractive enough to another program to make a move under the right circumstances.

(04-24-2013 10:12 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 06:18 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Any opinion on who the front runners are #14?

Assuming UMass stays, JMU is definitely the leader. UD is in the running, although I still think they're complacent with staying in FCS.

If UMass leaves, I can see us trying to go after Missouri State and stAte for 13 and 14, seeing how we would: a) get away from the Big Ten, who's eastward expansion would mitigate our gains from the UMass-JMU expansion, b) add a good b-ball program and rising football program, c) stay reasonably within our geographical footprint, and d) lock up our current bowl opportunities in the south and possibly attract another one if we're lucky.

They've been working on Illinois State for a while, but obviously they aren't ready. I think there was a thread stating Missouri State had changed their mind and were thinking about it but weren't ready. Not sure JMU is ready. Delaware has made it clear that they weren't interested in the past. Don't think there is an imminent #14.

I think the MAC would be best off going after higher teams instead of FCS schools. Marshall, Temple, but neither may be interested right now. Middle Tenn., WKU, but they may not be interested now. Ark St. ditto.
Getting UMASS settled seems to be first. These others can follow in the future if the CUSA, SB, etc. stumble. However, I do think a handful of MAC schools may be attractive to other conferences - Buffalo, NIU, Toledo. If I were them, I would not sign away any rights.

A lot of love for UMass here. I think it's a good call to secure UMass, the AAC messed up by not grabbing them.

This makes no m sense.

I don't see what a GOR accomplishes, since the MAC is already the most stable conference in FBS.
Are they trying to force UMass' hand, and guarantee that there will be in fact 13 so there can be an add?
I was under the impression that the MAC contractually holds all the cards re UMass by virtue of the Temple move anyway.
Where would UMass go? I am not aware of the AAC clamoring for them, and it would take a pretty good deal to pull mbb from the sure thing that is the A10.

As far as a 14th, given the modest returns of the MAC media deal, why add another school at all and dilute the whole?

But, If as speculated above, the MAC does want to add, and no FBS program is available, then it will almost certainly go after a media market.
UD
Although physically on the periphery, Delaware is in fact in the Philly DMA, and thus would guarantee a MAC presence on cable in that market.

My take on Delaware AD Ziady's comments was not he is 100% committed to the CAA, but that he would consider anything except for the SBC.

(04-25-2013 09:19 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  This makes no m sense.

I don't see what a GOR accomplishes, since the MAC is already the most stable conference in FBS.
Are they trying to force UMass' hand, and guarantee that there will be in fact 13 so there can be an add?
I was under the impression that the MAC contractually holds all the cards re UMass by virtue of the Temple move anyway.
Where would UMass go? I am not aware of the AAC clamoring for them, and it would take a pretty good deal to pull mbb from the sure thing that is the A10.

As far as a 14th, given the modest returns of the MAC media deal, why add another school at all and dilute the whole?

But, If as speculated above, the MAC does want to add, and no FBS program is available, then it will almost certainly go after a media market.
UD
Although physically on the periphery, Delaware is in fact in the Philly DMA, and thus would guarantee a MAC presence on cable in that market.

My take on Delaware AD Ziady's comments was not he is 100% committed to the CAA, but that he would consider anything except for the SBC.

Its really irrelevant. A GOR cant be enforced by a majority. It has to be unanomous. I guess they could kick out UMass if they dont sign it---but how does that help if the whole purpose is to keep everyone together?

(04-25-2013 10:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 09:19 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  This makes no m sense.

I don't see what a GOR accomplishes, since the MAC is already the most stable conference in FBS.
Are they trying to force UMass' hand, and guarantee that there will be in fact 13 so there can be an add?
I was under the impression that the MAC contractually holds all the cards re UMass by virtue of the Temple move anyway.
Where would UMass go? I am not aware of the AAC clamoring for them, and it would take a pretty good deal to pull mbb from the sure thing that is the A10.

As far as a 14th, given the modest returns of the MAC media deal, why add another school at all and dilute the whole?

But, If as speculated above, the MAC does want to add, and no FBS program is available, then it will almost certainly go after a media market.
UD
Although physically on the periphery, Delaware is in fact in the Philly DMA, and thus would guarantee a MAC presence on cable in that market.

My take on Delaware AD Ziady's comments was not he is 100% committed to the CAA, but that he would consider anything except for the SBC.

Its really irrelevant. A GOR cant be enforced by a majority. It has to be unanomous. I guess they could kick out UMass if they dont sign it---but how does that help if the whole purpose is to keep everyone together?

It helps because it forces UMass to make a decision, football-only is an unsustainable relationship long term. If UMass leaves the MAC is back to a more natural 12, if they stay it would increase the likelihood of a long term relationship. The MAC doesn't want to be a stepping stone or a place for wayward programs to rehab.

I'm a fan of UMass in the MAC and hope they commit long term. A long term commitment would also make the MAC more attractive to adding a quality FBS program as #14 as opposed to adding an FCS call up.

(04-25-2013 10:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 09:19 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  This makes no m sense.

I don't see what a GOR accomplishes, since the MAC is already the most stable conference in FBS.
Are they trying to force UMass' hand, and guarantee that there will be in fact 13 so there can be an add?
I was under the impression that the MAC contractually holds all the cards re UMass by virtue of the Temple move anyway.
Where would UMass go? I am not aware of the AAC clamoring for them, and it would take a pretty good deal to pull mbb from the sure thing that is the A10.

As far as a 14th, given the modest returns of the MAC media deal, why add another school at all and dilute the whole?

But, If as speculated above, the MAC does want to add, and no FBS program is available, then it will almost certainly go after a media market.
UD
Although physically on the periphery, Delaware is in fact in the Philly DMA, and thus would guarantee a MAC presence on cable in that market.

My take on Delaware AD Ziady's comments was not he is 100% committed to the CAA, but that he would consider anything except for the SBC.

Its really irrelevant. A GOR cant be enforced by a majority. It has to be unanomous. I guess they could kick out UMass if they dont sign it---but how does that help if the whole purpose is to keep everyone together?

Actually, I don't think UMass fits. I have thought that since Temple left.
I makes for an odd number within the conference.
It's not all sport.
It's geographically isolated.
It has major issues with it's football program.
It is another mouth to feed.

The only real positive is the market. Does that bring enough revenue to offset the negatives?

So, the MAC has three options.
(1) Stay at 13 )
(2) Add a 14th
WKU, MTSU, JMU, UD, and Ark St. IMO the three FBS schools will not be interested.
(3) Force UMass in all sport or boot 'em as per the Temple proscription.
The problem for UMass is that it has nowhere to go unless the AAC comes calling, and so far that hasn't happened.

None of the above warrants a GOR, and the networks know this.
Maybe this is indeed a way to force UMass' hand....?


EDIT: typed this before I saw the above.

I just don't see the AAC as currently constituted lasting more than a decade. Miami (OH) and the University of Ohio would not be bad adds for a reconfigured northeastern conference consisting of Temple, UMASS, James Madison, Delaware, etc. Some of those CAA and Patriot League schools have pretty high revenues (30 mil +/-) and could join to be a force if the Big 5 conferences ever split away. That grouping would be every bit as valuable as a reconfigured SWC everyone keeps hollering for (SMU, Houston, USM, Tulane, etc.) At the end of it, I just hope everyone ends up where they want and should be.

(04-25-2013 09:19 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  This makes no m sense.

I don't see what a GOR accomplishes, since the MAC is already the most stable conference in FBS.

Are they trying to force UMass' hand, and guarantee that there will be in fact 13 so there can be an add?

I was under the impression that the MAC contractually holds all the cards re UMass by virtue of the Temple move anyway.

Not all the cards. According to what others are saying, UMass could join all-sports and then leave with no exit fee. A GOR would take that play off the table.

UMass would still be a small market share school with a position in a large media market that is heavily tilted to pro sports, mediocre basketball with a history of more success, abysmal FB so far in their step up to FBS, and hockey as the sport in which they are the most recognizable as a marquee name. So there's always some degree of risk that some conference further up in the pecking order looks on UMass as a market play, if over the coming five to ten years they get their act together on their FB.

Against that background, a GOR would be a guarantee to the MAC that they are not going to be used as the greenhouse for UMass FBS football only for UMass to move on if and when UMass has started to actually contribute to the profile of MAC football.

With major conference realignment mostly settling down for a decade or so, a lot of the scenarios that bring most desirable FBS schools into the frame are much less likely. That is, a gutting of the American that left Temple behind might make a return to the MAC look good to Temple. A gutting of CUSA as a result of a gutting of the American that left Marshal behind might make a return to the MAC look good to Marshall. Etc. But those are now a lot less likely.

The strategic situation that the MAC is in is that there is one FBS school out there which the MAC would add as a FB-only school in a hot New York minute ... Army. The academies don't want to put their future officers and gentlemen through the meat grinder of Major Conference football week after week (which says something about the average size and strength of Old Big East football teams if Navy was willing to join the Old Big East).

With Navy joining The American, the Army-Navy game will have to be rescheduled. Maybe the Black Knights want to be in the same conference as Navy, in which case they say so and are in. But maybe Army prefers not being on the same conference ladder as Navy. The Black Knights would get their share of #MACtion games on national cable. Maybe they decide they have reasonable prospects of going bowling if they had a schedule that was not mostly away games the second half of the season.

The Black Knights are not going to be sharing with any of us whether they are looking to get into a conference or not, but if the MAC is talking to them, the risk of joining a division that allows the Black Knights to play in Boston every second year and then seeing that walk away before Army joins, that would come up.

For most of the FCS prospective adds, there's no harm in waiting for one among several well-placed schools to be ready to join. So locking UMass in place and playing with 13 for a year or two waiting for Army to decide if its going to join a conference would be a quite reasonable strategy for the MAC, if its talking to the Black Knights and they are simply undecided as to whether they want to make it 3 of 3 service academies in a Group of Five conference.

Is Army even looking for a conference? I don't think they want to join the MAC. And I don't want any football-onlies, even if it's Army.

(04-25-2013 01:05 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Is Army even looking for a conference? I don't think they want to join the MAC.

That's a total unknown. We do know that the back end of their schedule sucks regarding home games, but kind of like BYU, they are a school with an entirely different set of priorities from the run of the mill mid-major FBS school. We know that Air Force and Navy decided going into a conference was better than staying independent ~ Air Force first, since because of location they were in the worst spot of the three for independent scheduling. I don't know whether there is anything distinctive about Army that makes it different from Navy in respect to whatever led Navy to decide to join a conference.

As far as whether it would want the MAC, that's a two step decision, isn't it? First, if it decides it wants to join a football conference, does it want to join the American? If so, the door is open. Second, if not, would it rather the MAC, Conference USA or the Sunbelt. I'd guess the MAC.

Quote: And I don't want any football-onlies, even if it's Army.

How Big Ten of you. The MAC has always added affiliates if they were to the benefit of its individual sports. The problem with football has been how footloose the FB-only schools have proven to be, but its possible a Grant of Rights could fix that problem.

Why bother to improve your athletics programs if you have no option to move on to somewhere better?

(04-25-2013 04:14 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 01:05 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Is Army even looking for a conference? I don't think they want to join the MAC.

That's a total unknown. We do know that the back end of their schedule sucks regarding home games, but kind of like BYU, they are a school with an entirely different set of priorities from the run of the mill mid-major FBS school. We know that Air Force and Navy decided going into a conference was better than staying independent ~ Air Force first, since because of location they were in the worst spot of the three for independent scheduling. I don't know whether there is anything distinctive about Army that makes it different from Navy in respect to whatever led Navy to decide to join a conference.

As far as whether it would want the MAC, that's a two step decision, isn't it? First, if it decides it wants to join a football conference, does it want to join the American? If so, the door is open. Second, if not, would it rather the MAC, Conference USA or the Sunbelt. I'd guess the MAC.

Quote: And I don't want any football-onlies, even if it's Army.

How Big Ten of you. The MAC has always added affiliates if they were to the benefit of its individual sports. The problem with football has been how footloose the FB-only schools have proven to be, but its possible a Grant of Rights could fix that problem.

Army already tried CUSA and didn't like it, so they got out. Although CUSA would have been a tougher conference than now. I believe it was related to competitiveness, though possibly there were other issues with being in a conference also.

Football-onlies have not worked for the MAC. A GOR might help, but I would rather just have 12 schools than a team that doesn't fit geographically and currently brings down the conference ratings, and doesn't provide anything in other sports. And the northeast isn't exactly a hotbed of college football.

(04-25-2013 04:27 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Why bother to improve your athletics programs if you have no option to move on to somewhere better?

The same reason why everybody does. To do better. To be more competitive. To win championships of all sorts. Kill your enemies, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.

What do teams in the SEC, PAC, Big 10, and whatnot have to look forward to? The same exact thing. About the only thing the MAC has not been able to crack is a national championship game in football/ better than elite 8 in basketball. The basketball one could be done the football one of course is a different story.

If you need the motivation of moving around then you will only feel disappointment and are missing the out on some of the true reasons why we have college athletics in the first place but alas that is a common problem nowadays.

(04-25-2013 05:11 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 04:27 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Why bother to improve your athletics programs if you have no option to move on to somewhere better?

The same reason why everybody does. To do better. To be more competitive. To win championships of all sorts. Kill your enemies, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.

What do teams in the SEC, PAC, Big 10, and whatnot have to look forward to? The same exact thing. About the only thing the MAC has not been able to crack is a national championship game in football/ better than elite 8 in basketball. The basketball one could be done the football one of course is a different story.

If you need the motivation of moving around then you will only feel disappointment and are missing the out on some of the true reasons why we have college athletics in the first place but alas that is a common problem nowadays.

+100!
.

(04-25-2013 04:27 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Why bother to improve your athletics programs if you have no option to move on to somewhere better?

Did Fowler ever answer you on twitter when asked why the MAC is doing the GoR?

.

(04-25-2013 04:37 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Army already tried CUSA and didn't like it, so they got out.

Yes. The unknowns are (1) whether they decided that being in a conference itself was a mistake or (2) it was CUSA that was the mistake; and if (1), whether (3) conditions have changed enough to change that decision. Given that Navy, with the longest tradition of independence in FBS football is going to join The American, conditions may have changed, but OTOH the two academies may be drawing from sufficiently different recruiting bases (overall, not just athletic) that Navy and Army are not marching to the beat of the same drummer there.

Is playing in the same conference as Navy a plus or a minus? Unless its a strong plus, I'd expect Army would not want to be in the American, since its a moderately upgraded version of the Conference USA that Army left.

(04-24-2013 04:53 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Actually in a weird way, that does make sense. None of the MAC schools will be moving to one of the power 5 conferences, but there is risk of Conference USA or the AAC competing for a member at somepoint or even the Sunbelt. Since it isn't clear who though and since the MAC as is is in pretty good condition, it might make sense to everyone to just lock down now.

The Sun Belt will not be taking a MAC school anytime soon... The Belt wants no part of a MAC School and no MAC school wants a part of the Belt..

The somewhat feasible MAC Targets (as in something that could happen in the next 5-10 years if a bunch of dominoes -performance / revenue / market - fall the right way) might be

NIU - MWC / AAC
Ohio - AAC
UMass - AAC
Toledo - AAC
Buffalo - AAC

(04-24-2013 06:23 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 06:15 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(04-24-2013 05:24 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  WHY?

UMass and #14. They don't want anymore football-only or temporary members like UCF or Temple. If you want in, you are sticking around. It has to be for that because the core 12 are stable so it must be for UMass and #14. But you cant just ask UMass and #14 to sign away GoR and not the rest, so everybody is.

You don't need a GoR to get UMass to join for all sports. It's already built into the contract if they want to force the issue.

If you want in to the MAC for all sports, you're sticking around anyway. A GoR doesn't change that. It doesn't protect any media rights, either, since the MAC TV contract is beyond pitiful and if anybody leaves they're not really losing anything on that front

GOR is not about the teams Current media revenue but future value in a new conference..