perimeter: the point is you can't dismiss their best 6 seasons because with doing so you must also do that with the every MAC teams best 6 seasons, or "6 year window".
UMass has a history most MAC teams want. They're better than average and would sit atop the MAC year in and year out.
In the MAC they'd probably have 3 or 4 dance appearances in the last 15 seasons, where in the A10 they have too tough of a road to go through.

(02-26-2014 11:41 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  perimeter: the point is you can't dismiss their best 6 seasons because with doing so you must also do that with the every MAC teams best 6 seasons, or "6 year window".
UMass has a history most MAC teams want. They're better than average and would sit atop the MAC year in and year out.
In the MAC they'd probably have 3 or 4 dance appearances in the last 15 seasons, where in the A10 they have too tough of a road to go through.

I'm not dismissing their 6 best seasons, quite the opposite, I'm saying you can judge 100+ years of program history by one really good 6 years run.

I don't buy the theory that they would have had more bids if in the MAC, they're in a multi bid league, playing against their peers. Last year the A10 had five bids and UMass couldn't get one. FIVE!

My point is not that UMass isn't a good team or that they wouldn't do well in the MAC, my point is that they aren't on some other level where we couldn't possibly play them competitively. Too many MAC fans have the self esteem of a battered spouse,.

Remember, my original response was to YOUR quote- " Umass is historically better than just about every MAC team by leaps and bounds."

It's just not true.

(02-27-2014 12:59 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(02-26-2014 11:41 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  perimeter: the point is you can't dismiss their best 6 seasons because with doing so you must also do that with the every MAC teams best 6 seasons, or "6 year window".
UMass has a history most MAC teams want. They're better than average and would sit atop the MAC year in and year out.
In the MAC they'd probably have 3 or 4 dance appearances in the last 15 seasons, where in the A10 they have too tough of a road to go through.

I'm not dismissing their 6 best seasons, quite the opposite, I'm saying you can judge 100+ years of program history by one really good 6 years run.

I don't buy the theory that they would have had more bids if in the MAC, they're in a multi bid league, playing against their peers. Last year the A10 had five bids and UMass couldn't get one. FIVE!

My point is not that UMass isn't a good team or that they wouldn't do well in the MAC, my point is that they aren't on some other level where we couldn't possibly play them competitively. Too many MAC fans have the self esteem of a battered spouse,.

Remember, my original response was to YOUR quote- " Umass is historically better than just about every MAC team by leaps and bounds."

It's just not true.

Remember my response was to Inductchucks quote "Anyone know why the MAC only got their football program?" The answer is UMASS has a better history than 9 of 12 MAC teams by leaps and bounds. 3-5 MAC teams have had nice histories, and every team has had a good team or two but not 12 like the Minutemen. Nothing of the winning in huge tournament game ways like Umass has! Miami may have a history that is better than UMass' but that doesn't mean they would be getting bids in the A10. Which is what you are saying when you pitty their performance in the past 15 seasons for not being able to compete with Xavier, and Creighton.

We agree to disagree that win % defines history as a sports program. If so NIU would be near the bottom or at least middle of the MAC in that statistic. We all know their recent 4 year stretch has put them at the top tier of MAC historical accomplishments. Toledo may be 27-14 vs. NIU all time, but we don't have an Orange bowl appearance, a player invited to the Heisman Ceremony or national recognition from 4 straight MACC's like the Huskies do.

Does UMass' final four, elite 8 trip and sweet 16's make up for 15 years of mediocrity vs. stiff competition and some down years? I think it does.

Who the heck judges a basketball team based on one hundred years. How about starting after man landed on the moon. We sucked the first 50 years of basketball, but no cared. Sure the 1899 season was a nail bitter.

So UMass is a better program than any one in the MAC but I can't look at its overall record as an indicator, and I can't use the last 15 years as an indicator, so let's just keep focusing in on 6 very specific years in the 1990. makes since. Got it.

(02-27-2014 06:17 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  So UMass is a better program than any one in the MAC but I can't look at its overall record as an indicator, and I can't use the last 15 years as an indicator, so let's just keep focusing in on 6 very specific years in the 1990. makes since. Got it.

Even as obnoxious as you normally are, I have to admit I got a good laugh with that video as a perfect tie-in to your post.

(02-27-2014 06:17 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  So UMass is a better program than any one in the MAC but I can't look at its overall record as an indicator, and I can't use the last 15 years as an indicator, so let's just keep focusing in on 6 very specific years in the 1990. makes since. Got it.

No, You have to take the best group of MAC teams, throw em in the A10 and see how well they'd do in the last 15 years. Also judging on the best of the best of our MAC programs. Take 10 years from each program. UMASS has the best 10 years. You don't judge someone on how low the drop, but how high are there highs.

first time I've ever seen some of these arenas, my first impressions

WMU looks like a smaller version of Bulter's arena
CMU looks like a smaller version of U of Indiana's arena.
Ohio's looks very similar to West Virginia

We are in the conference in field hockey and swimming so I'll post our arena

I always got this feeling that a Zamboni is going to appear from out that larger-than-necessary opening on the side line. Sometimes I sit around Millet Hall after the 2nd period... er half well after everyone else has gone home.

(02-10-2014 12:26 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Miami was capable of good crowds when we were winning.

A good shot from the Ohio game

Another from the Akron game

President's visit

(02-28-2014 12:03 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(02-27-2014 06:17 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  So UMass is a better program than any one in the MAC but I can't look at its overall record as an indicator, and I can't use the last 15 years as an indicator, so let's just keep focusing in on 6 very specific years in the 1990. makes since. Got it.

No, You have to take the best group of MAC teams, throw em in the A10 and see how well they'd do in the last 15 years. Also judging on the best of the best of our MAC programs. Take 10 years from each program. UMASS has the best 10 years. You don't judge someone on how low the drop, but how high are there highs.

by your own definition its literally impossible to compare two teams that haven't played identical schedules. Therefore, by your own logic and reasoning, you cannot say definitively that "UMass is historically better than just about every MAC team by leaps and bounds".

WTF, can't you guys stop. I care about a couple of things. One that our RPI helps the teams we play and there by helping the MAC a bit. Do appreciate fans sticking up for us, but have to say some Ohio fans are over the top as Kit-Kat and Perimeterpost.

If you want to compare a number of ratings, this is a good site.
MasseyRating