(03-26-2014 02:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I could see the Sunbelt grabbing them as football only. I could see CUSA adding UMass and JMU.

For us, I like the idea of adding them as a non-football school and entering a scheduling agreement to help them handle being an indy.

That is too much of a slap in the face to tell a team you want them, but their football team sucks too much. At that point, why would they leave the A-10?

(03-26-2014 02:58 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:16 PM)AACtopER Wrote:  Umass brings nothing to the table we need/want

We aren't talking about Wyoming or Idaho. They are a state flagship of an important state on the east coast. I think that counts for something more and it's a name brand people understand. They have quality basketball and their football has won at least one FCS national championship. No reason to believe that can't have at least decent football at some point.

Exactly. People forget how young the program is. They've got a grand total of I believe 3 years at the FBS level but again, they're a state flagship. Those kind of schools don't just grow on trees, especially in the NE, where we could use a travel partner.

In a better conference there's no reason to believe that they can't at least be respectable.

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

LOL!!!!

I don't think that they are being kicked out because of poor football performance, although they should have been. I think that they are actually getting kicked out for not wanting to be a full member. However, your point is duly noted. They should have been kicked to the curb for having craptastic football.

(03-26-2014 03:00 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:57 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  It's not the Boston market but they get noticed in Boston when they do well in hoops. I've stated it ad naseum, I'm all for adding them. We need another northeastern school and we need another state flagship. Also, UConn needs a potential rival. Football is dead weight now, it would not take much for them to at least become a respectable bottom feeder in the AAC though. UMass could probably be a full member by next season if we wanted them. Could get a championship going immediately. Not sure if they will be decent again in hoops next year though. They are a solid, historic school though and not some no name regional school from somewhere in the middle of Mississippi or Kentucky or something though.

or a regional no name school from somewhere in the middle of Florida or something though

I think you're confusing "regional" with "Tier 1/national" in the cases of USF and UCF. SMH.

revisit in 2 years...they aren't going anywhere, lol

(03-26-2014 03:03 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

LOL!!!!

I don't think that they are being kicked out because of poor football performance, although they should have been. I think that they are actually getting kicked out for not wanting to be a full member. However, your point is duly noted. They should have been kicked to the curb for having craptastic football.

You're right, memphis shouldn't have been added either. FFS, it's not ALL about football guys. UMass is a great fit for the AAC.

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

FYI their avg attendance last year is listed as 15,830 (and like most schools, especially many MAC schools, I'm guessing # that is 'inflated').

UMass was kicked out because UMass was not committed. The MAC wanted full commitment before they added a 14th member. UMass failing to commit fully told the MAC they had no need to add a 14th. Aditionally, the MAC makes more off the new BCS agreement (12 million a year) than their media agreement (1 million a year). Adding additional schools only splits the BCS pie more and would not add enough to media revenue to offset it. The Sunbelt has 11 teams and can add UMass without costing their other members one dime of BCS money. My guess is that UMass heads to the Sunbelt as a football only member. That's way better than adding Liberty---which was their current best choice. It also might leave JMU stuck in FCS. UMass is a better add for the Sunbelt because UMass is already FBS, JMU would just be starting the process. For a league like the Sunbelt---that's significant.

Sunbelt gets a state flagship and a CCG. UMass gets a home to develop in.

(03-26-2014 03:01 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:58 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:16 PM)AACtopER Wrote:  Umass brings nothing to the table we need/want

We aren't talking about Wyoming or Idaho. They are a state flagship of an important state on the east coast. I think that counts for something more and it's a name brand people understand. They have quality basketball and their football has won at least one FCS national championship. No reason to believe that can't have at least decent football at some point.

Exactly. People forget how young the program is. They've got a grand total of I believe 3 years at the FBS level but again, they're a state flagship. Those kind of schools don't just grow on trees, especially in the NE, where we could use a travel partner.

In a better conference there's no reason to believe that they can't at least be respectable.

How is a school in New England going to be a travel partner for ECU?

(03-26-2014 03:05 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:03 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

LOL!!!!

I don't think that they are being kicked out because of poor football performance, although they should have been. I think that they are actually getting kicked out for not wanting to be a full member. However, your point is duly noted. They should have been kicked to the curb for having craptastic football.

You're right, memphis shouldn't have been added either. FFS, it's not ALL about football guys. UMass is a great fit for the AAC.

Fwiw, UMass has hired a consulting firm to obviously get them in the AAC. They probably would have been better served putting that money towards a football stadium and a decent coaching staff.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca...l/6918677/


UMass has also performed some stadium renovations.

http://www.masslive.com/umassfootball/in...n_som.html

(03-26-2014 03:05 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:03 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

LOL!!!!

I don't think that they are being kicked out because of poor football performance, although they should have been. I think that they are actually getting kicked out for not wanting to be a full member. However, your point is duly noted. They should have been kicked to the curb for having craptastic football.

You're right, memphis shouldn't have been added either. FFS, it's not ALL about football guys. UMass is a great fit for the AAC.

Memphis Bball has 15k at every game and makes the tourney every year. UMass has about 5k on average and before this year you had to go back to 1998 to find their last tourney appearance. Not to mention, Memphis FBall has had some occasional success. That was a terrible comment.

They will end up as a football only member of the SunBelt who is looking for a 12th football member. I don't blame them for not wanting to take basketball out of the A-10 for the MAC.

(03-26-2014 03:07 PM)SteveUCF19 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:01 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:58 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:16 PM)AACtopER Wrote:  Umass brings nothing to the table we need/want

We aren't talking about Wyoming or Idaho. They are a state flagship of an important state on the east coast. I think that counts for something more and it's a name brand people understand. They have quality basketball and their football has won at least one FCS national championship. No reason to believe that can't have at least decent football at some point.

Exactly. People forget how young the program is. They've got a grand total of I believe 3 years at the FBS level but again, they're a state flagship. Those kind of schools don't just grow on trees, especially in the NE, where we could use a travel partner.

In a better conference there's no reason to believe that they can't at least be respectable.

How is a school in New England going to be a travel partner for ECU?

I meant where we... the conference could use a travel partner for trips to UConn. One trip for playing 2 schools in Oly sports.

(03-26-2014 02:24 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:22 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Let's see... Navy joins the AAC in 15... Or... Probably... Not.

Could we say full membership for UMass in the AAC instead of football only Navy!?!

Riiiiight...show me something saying Navy isnt joining.

Hey, throughout ALL our trials of the last few years Navy has been steadfast like a ROCK for our conference. Very public about their support too... especially when Boise bailed on us.

(03-26-2014 03:10 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:05 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:03 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

LOL!!!!

I don't think that they are being kicked out because of poor football performance, although they should have been. I think that they are actually getting kicked out for not wanting to be a full member. However, your point is duly noted. They should have been kicked to the curb for having craptastic football.

You're right, memphis shouldn't have been added either. FFS, it's not ALL about football guys. UMass is a great fit for the AAC.

Fwiw, UMass has hired a consulting firm to obviously get them in the AAC. They probably would have been better served putting that money towards a football stadium and a decent coaching staff.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca...l/6918677/

You can assure Aresco is getting plenty of calls. If he even considers them in all sports without an OCS, I will lose it.

(03-26-2014 03:12 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:10 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:05 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:03 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

LOL!!!!

I don't think that they are being kicked out because of poor football performance, although they should have been. I think that they are actually getting kicked out for not wanting to be a full member. However, your point is duly noted. They should have been kicked to the curb for having craptastic football.

You're right, memphis shouldn't have been added either. FFS, it's not ALL about football guys. UMass is a great fit for the AAC.

Fwiw, UMass has hired a consulting firm to obviously get them in the AAC. They probably would have been better served putting that money towards a football stadium and a decent coaching staff.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca...l/6918677/

You can assure Aresco is getting plenty of calls. If he even considers them in all sports without an OCS, I will lose it.

They renovated the old one.

http://www.masslive.com/umassfootball/in...n_som.html

Bottom line for me: the UMASS stadium situation is abysmal and I don't see them doing ANYTHING about it. I'm pretty sure we were tossing links around last year that stated McGurik does not even have bathrooms. The Pats stadium is not working out for them due to the distance. When they pony up any rudimentary upgrade plan for their stadium situation, I'd love to look at UMASS. At this point though, for whatever reason I just don't think they are serious.

EDIT: I see the renovation, but I thought that didn't expand seating, nor did it add bathrooms. I'm not going to bother to check again though, we hashed UMASS last year...

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

FYI their avg attendance last year is listed as 15,830 (and like most schools, especially many MAC schools, I'm guessing # that is 'inflated').

That isn't true. The Mac is playing hardball to get their hoops and umass wants no part of the Mac in hoops. This is a flagship state school and not eastern Michigan.

Attendance would rise playing an AAC schedule and OCS. UCF drew horrible numbers in our Mac days and we were over 42k last year.

(03-26-2014 03:20 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)bearcatfan Wrote:  If UMass is being kicked out of the MAC for poor football performance why on earth would the AAC want them?

FYI their avg attendance last year is listed as 15,830 (and like most schools, especially many MAC schools, I'm guessing # that is 'inflated').

That isn't true. The Mac is playing hardball to get their hoops and umass wants no part of the Mac in hoops. This is a flagship state school and not eastern Michigan.

Attendance would rise playing an AAC schedule and OCS. UCF drew horrible numbers in our Mac days and we were over 42k last year.

Thanks - I just read that.

(03-26-2014 03:12 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:24 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:22 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Let's see... Navy joins the AAC in 15... Or... Probably... Not.

Could we say full membership for UMass in the AAC instead of football only Navy!?!

Riiiiight...show me something saying Navy isnt joining.

Hey, throughout ALL our trials of the last few years Navy has been steadfast like a ROCK for our conference. Very public about their support too... especially when Boise bailed on us.

That what i was saying...so yeah...

This quote cracked me up: “You can’t beat playing in Gillette,” he said. “We’re playing in an NFL stadium. That’s the best thing you can have in college football. I really enjoy playing out there.”

Seems almost unanimous on this board that you need the OCS. USF is doing fine in RJS, it's big and pretty close (unlike the Umass situation), but even we're planning for an OCS in the future. I don't know when, probably when RJS ages a bit more, but it's being talked about.