(12-13-2021 01:50 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:43 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:05 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If UMass wants to solve their affiliation dilemma, the question they should be asking is who from the A-10 could they recruit to go with them that would make MAC basketball better.

Would a package deal of UMass, Dayton, St Louis, plus a TBD school and UConn for football only be something that would get the MAC suddenly very interested?

Maybe they even leverage UConn for a long basketball series in exchange for brokering a move that helps both of their football teams.

Dayton and SLU want nothing to do with MAC basketball, though. That's the whole problem - why would basketball-focused schools without football want anything to do with a league where (a) realignment is driven by football and (b) the basketball is much worse than their current league? That's basically the worst of both worlds. Note that the MAC's Midwestern geography is actually a huge *minus* for a school like SLU that wants East Coast exposure. (That's one thing that I always need to emphasize every time that someone tries to put SLU into a Midwestern league. They *don't* want to be in a Midwestern league. They keep making this clear over and over and over again.)

UConn is also looking at independence in football very differently. With basketball already secure in the Big Ten, their goal is to play as many P5 teams as possible in football even if it means getting crushed every week. It's similar to BYU's stance with independence (albeit UConn having a much worse football program) - they don't want the "stench" of any type of G5 affiliation at all.

And the MAC wants nothing to do with Catholic schools.

As for the "stench" of any G5 affiliation, UConn best check its back side as to the source of that stench!

It's not the MAC in a position of power over Dayton/SLU. It's Dayton/SLU who have all the power/leverage over the MAC. The odds of those two ever willingly wanting to join the MAC are close to 0.0%. Whereas, the odds of the MAC accepting Dayton/SLU if those two wanted to join are far above 0.0%.

Right - I actually very much like the MAC as a league.

However, Dayton and SLU definitely have all of the leverage in this hypothetical situation.

I'd compare it to the leverage that Gonzaga would have over the MWC (and that's even though the MWC would arguably be a legitimate upgrade in basketball terms compared to the WCC after BYU leaves).

The basketball schools are the ones that are the choosers in this scenario.

It’s almost cringeworthy at this point reading anything of the back-and-forth from UMass and how thin or non-existent the responses or follow-up’s are. Like, this reads as simply a courtesy call from the conferences to UMass. And probably UMass being told numerous times: “no.”

I just wonder if in any of this that someone is telling UMass to stop just selling football and that they can stop wasting time calling if they won’t put something else on the table. The school simply does not have the right wiring to listen to what others want from them. UMass: nobody is buying your football. I honestly don’t know why MAC even listened to them, if not to turn the tables and try to talk some sense into UMass about putting more on the table.

(12-13-2021 01:50 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:43 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:05 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If UMass wants to solve their affiliation dilemma, the question they should be asking is who from the A-10 could they recruit to go with them that would make MAC basketball better.

Would a package deal of UMass, Dayton, St Louis, plus a TBD school and UConn for football only be something that would get the MAC suddenly very interested?

Maybe they even leverage UConn for a long basketball series in exchange for brokering a move that helps both of their football teams.

Dayton and SLU want nothing to do with MAC basketball, though. That's the whole problem - why would basketball-focused schools without football want anything to do with a league where (a) realignment is driven by football and (b) the basketball is much worse than their current league? That's basically the worst of both worlds. Note that the MAC's Midwestern geography is actually a huge *minus* for a school like SLU that wants East Coast exposure. (That's one thing that I always need to emphasize every time that someone tries to put SLU into a Midwestern league. They *don't* want to be in a Midwestern league. They keep making this clear over and over and over again.)

UConn is also looking at independence in football very differently. With basketball already secure in the Big Ten, their goal is to play as many P5 teams as possible in football even if it means getting crushed every week. It's similar to BYU's stance with independence (albeit UConn having a much worse football program) - they don't want the "stench" of any type of G5 affiliation at all.

And the MAC wants nothing to do with Catholic schools.

As for the "stench" of any G5 affiliation, UConn best check its back side as to the source of that stench!

It's not the MAC in a position of power over Dayton/SLU. It's Dayton/SLU who have all the power/leverage over the MAC. The odds of those two ever willingly wanting to join the MAC are close to 0.0%. Whereas, the odds of the MAC accepting Dayton/SLU if those two wanted to join are far above 0.0%.

Actually, no it's not!

(12-13-2021 02:06 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  It’s almost cringeworthy at this point reading anything of the back-and-forth from UMass and how thin or non-existent the responses or follow-up’s are. Like, this reads as simply a courtesy call from the conferences to UMass. And probably UMass being told numerous times: “no.”

I just wonder if in any of this that someone is telling UMass to stop just selling football and that they can stop wasting time calling if they won’t put something else on the table. The school simply does not have the right wiring to listen to what others want from them. UMass: nobody is buying your football. I honestly don’t know why MAC even listened to them, if not to turn the tables and try to talk some sense into UMass about putting more on the table.

I actually think everyone knew exactly what was happening:

-UMass knew there was a conference shakeup so they "had" to put some feelers out.
-The conferences knew UMass had to reach out.
-Both parties knew UMass basketball was not on the table.
-Both parties knew that membership was not on the table without UMass basketball on the table.

UMass sends along a powerpoint that someone at an Assistant AD level took two hours putting together, the brass makes a few 10 minute courtesy calls, and they get to tell the 9 members of the gridiron club that they did their due diligence to reach out to conferences.

In return, the conference home offices get to present UMass' interest to their fans and the administrations of their constituent schools to show how attractive they are, and how hard they are working to find the right institutional fits, etc.

It's a charade on both sides.

(12-13-2021 12:38 PM)3BNole Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:27 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:16 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:04 PM)3BNole Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  The question remains whether UMass is sufficiently committed to finding a conference home for its football program to abandon its stance on only joining as a football only affiliate. It's hard to see how UMass football adds enough value to any FBS conference to justify an invitation.

This is the key. If UMASS offered to join as a full member, CUSA would take them in a second. If they’re only bringing football though, I’m not really sure what would be attractive for a conference. It’s a tough decision. I understand the basketball thing, plus travel wouldn’t be great in CUSA, but unless they go all in, I just don’t see a conference taking them. So it depends on what their priorities are.

I'm not even sure CUSA would be interested at all. UMass basketball is still living off its reputation earned by the likes of Dr. J, Marcus Camby and John Calipari. Since then they have been ordinary at best, and travel considerations would be just as bad for current CUSA members as it would be for UMass.

To me, it seems like it's MAC all-sports or bust for UMass, and if they don't want that they will have to look hard at the long-term future of their football program.

Bingo! If UMass wants to join the MAC, it will likely need to be for all sports, along with WKU.

Is it possible the MAC would consider a situation similar to what the AAC has with Navy (football affiliate) and Wichita State (Olympic sports), whereby they bring UMass back as a football affiliate, then invite Northern Kentucky from the Horizon League for Olympic sports?

This would make for an ideal fit with WKU as an instate rival and easy travel partner as well as a bridge from the Cincinnati metroplex to the rest of the MAC.

That actually wouldn’t be a bad strategy for UMASS. I’d try to find some non-football school with semi-decent basketball, approach them, and try to present as a package deal to either the MAC or CUSA. You could still pursue CUSA in that situation. I could see a situation where the MAC might listen if they could take in UMASS for football only and a NKU or someone like that for basketball, plus a full member WKU to even it out. I could also see CUSA listening with the same sort of deal, plus maybe a UT Arlington or a FGCU or someone like that.

Good creativity on coming up with these FGCU, NKU, UTA combinations. The problem is what is in it for those basketball schools? A lot more travel and loss of local conf. rivals. They have higher expenses (except MAC-NKU) and less time in class with approx. the same money or TV.

(12-13-2021 01:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If UMass wants to solve their affiliation dilemma, the question they should be asking is who from the A-10 could they recruit to go with them that would make MAC basketball better.

Would a package deal of UMass, Dayton, St Louis, plus a TBD school and UConn for football only be something that would get the MAC suddenly very interested?

Maybe they even leverage UConn for a long basketball series in exchange for brokering a move that helps both of their football teams.

Why would Dayton / SLU want that though? they're in, basically, a national conference, stretching from Chicago to Boston (almost anyway) to Charlotte. Why would they trade that in for an Ohio-Michigan focused MAC?

More sharply, why would non-Division-I-A Dayton agree to be a junior partner to Miami, Ohio U, Akron, Toledo, Bowling Green? What's in it for UD?

That’s where UMass has to make a hard sell to the other 3 A-10 schools and convince them that they are collectively the ones carrying the A-10 and the real kingmakers here and that they can maintain the same quality of conference, with less travel, by bringing their programs to the MAC.

Is it possible they could persuade enough members of the CAA to move up to FBS together and then add UMass and UConn as football only affiliates? Like:

Villanova
Albany
Rhode Island
Stony Brook
Delaware
Maine
New Hampshire

That would make a nice 9 team conference with a small footprint.

(12-13-2021 04:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  Is it possible they could persuade enough members of the CAA to move up to FBS together and then add UMass and UConn as football only affiliates? Like:

Villanova
Albany
Rhode Island
Stony Brook
Delaware
Maine
New Hampshire

That would make a nice 9 team conference with a small footprint.

No, there's no way Nova, Rhode Island, Maine, or New Hampshire can move up.

(12-13-2021 04:34 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If UMass wants to solve their affiliation dilemma, the question they should be asking is who from the A-10 could they recruit to go with them that would make MAC basketball better.

Would a package deal of UMass, Dayton, St Louis, plus a TBD school and UConn for football only be something that would get the MAC suddenly very interested?

Maybe they even leverage UConn for a long basketball series in exchange for brokering a move that helps both of their football teams.

Why would Dayton / SLU want that though? they're in, basically, a national conference, stretching from Chicago to Boston (almost anyway) to Charlotte. Why would they trade that in for an Ohio-Michigan focused MAC?

More sharply, why would non-Division-I-A Dayton agree to be a junior partner to Miami, Ohio U, Akron, Toledo, Bowling Green? What's in it for UD?

That’s where UMass has to make a hard sell to the other 3 A-10 schools and convince them that they are collectively the ones carrying the A-10 and the real kingmakers here and that they can maintain the same quality of conference, with less travel, by bringing their programs to the MAC.

But that's not true, though. VCU, St. Joseph's, Davidson, GWU, newly-added Loyola - there's simply a lot more depth in the A-10. Plus, the A-10 has a fantastic basketball recruiting footprint. I actually have a lot more personal affinity for the MAC compared to the A-10, but can't deny that the A-10 is a significantly deeper league that goes far beyond Dayton and SLU.

Maybe the MAC could convince some MVC schools into this type of arrangement, but there's no way it would occur with the A-10. Once again, schools such as SLU and Dayton (and now Loyola) *like* that the A-10 is *not* Midwestern. That's a feature instead of a bug. They're not looking for football recruits in Ohio or Michigan. Instead, they're looking for basketball recruits... and those are located in NYC, Chicago, DC, Philly and North Carolina... which is the A-10 footprint.

UMass made the decision not the join the MAC for all-sports. Now they have to live with that decision. Their AD can email, text, Zoom chat all he likes, but no one is going to jump on the 'UMass as a FB-only" train. Their best bet is to be a package deal with WKU for the MAC.

(12-13-2021 05:23 PM)DMV 313 Wrote:  UMass made the decision not the join the MAC for all-sports. Now they have to live with that decision. Their AD can email, text, Zoom chat all he likes, but no one is going to jump on the 'UMass as a FB-only" train. Their best bet is the be a package deal with WKU for the MAC.

... AND THAT train (option to join all sports) will eventually leave the station too. Things change. FBS. CFP$. NCAA constitution. Conference openings, etc..

(12-13-2021 03:23 PM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 02:06 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  It’s almost cringeworthy at this point reading anything of the back-and-forth from UMass and how thin or non-existent the responses or follow-up’s are. Like, this reads as simply a courtesy call from the conferences to UMass. And probably UMass being told numerous times: “no.”

I just wonder if in any of this that someone is telling UMass to stop just selling football and that they can stop wasting time calling if they won’t put something else on the table. The school simply does not have the right wiring to listen to what others want from them. UMass: nobody is buying your football. I honestly don’t know why MAC even listened to them, if not to turn the tables and try to talk some sense into UMass about putting more on the table.

I actually think everyone knew exactly what was happening:

-UMass knew there was a conference shakeup so they "had" to put some feelers out.
-The conferences knew UMass had to reach out.
-Both parties knew UMass basketball was not on the table.
-Both parties knew that membership was not on the table without UMass basketball on the table.

UMass sends along a powerpoint that someone at an Assistant AD level took two hours putting together, the brass makes a few 10 minute courtesy calls, and they get to tell the 9 members of the gridiron club that they did their due diligence to reach out to conferences.

In return, the conference home offices get to present UMass' interest to their fans and the administrations of their constituent schools to show how attractive they are, and how hard they are working to find the right institutional fits, etc.

It's a charade on both sides.

That actually seems like a pretty fair assessment.

All sides did a little dancing for show even if they realistically knew that they wouldn't end up with each other.

(12-13-2021 04:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 04:34 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 01:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If UMass wants to solve their affiliation dilemma, the question they should be asking is who from the A-10 could they recruit to go with them that would make MAC basketball better.

Would a package deal of UMass, Dayton, St Louis, plus a TBD school and UConn for football only be something that would get the MAC suddenly very interested?

Maybe they even leverage UConn for a long basketball series in exchange for brokering a move that helps both of their football teams.

Why would Dayton / SLU want that though? they're in, basically, a national conference, stretching from Chicago to Boston (almost anyway) to Charlotte. Why would they trade that in for an Ohio-Michigan focused MAC?

More sharply, why would non-Division-I-A Dayton agree to be a junior partner to Miami, Ohio U, Akron, Toledo, Bowling Green? What's in it for UD?

That’s where UMass has to make a hard sell to the other 3 A-10 schools and convince them that they are collectively the ones carrying the A-10 and the real kingmakers here and that they can maintain the same quality of conference, with less travel, by bringing their programs to the MAC.

But that's not true, though. VCU, St. Joseph's, Davidson, GWU, newly-added Loyola - there's simply a lot more depth in the A-10. Plus, the A-10 has a fantastic basketball recruiting footprint. I actually have a lot more personal affinity for the MAC compared to the A-10, but can't deny that the A-10 is a significantly deeper league that goes far beyond Dayton and SLU.

Maybe the MAC could convince some MVC schools into this type of arrangement, but there's no way it would occur with the A-10. Once again, schools such as SLU and Dayton (and now Loyola) *like* that the A-10 is *not* Midwestern. That's a feature instead of a bug. They're not looking for football recruits in Ohio or Michigan. Instead, they're looking for basketball recruits... and those are located in NYC, Chicago, DC, Philly and North Carolina... which is the A-10 footprint.

The lowest MBB budget in the A10 (135th) is *higher* than the highest MBB budget in the MAC (146th). SLU/Dayton would be leaving a league with 11 privates and 8 Catholics for a league with neither. 12 A-10 schools are ranked top-175 nationally in USNWR or Forbes. And the A-10 has had *41* at-large bids since the MAC last had one. And that’s before all the student recruiting and athlete recruiting target markets.

The odds of UMass being able to convince SLU/Dayton to join the MAC are - no hyperbole - the odds of an asteroid hitting Earth (0.1% per NASA).

I'm surprised that the A-10 hasn't added Valpo already. But I think that is going to be an add that'll happen in the future.

No one wants UMass FB only. The program is currently a mess and a joke with UConn FB in the same sentence and region. UMass blew conference membership when it rejected the MAC offer a few years ago. As long as this school tries to separate its loser program from programs of value in the A-10, the FB program will be going nowhere. Maybe reality will finally set in as the school was completely rejected by the AAC in this last realignment, which is the conference they want for all sports. Their best option right now is to try the MAC again all sports with WKU, or try for a five year contract with CUSA while they are in shambles and try to hang on after that. The five year contract would mirror the same contract NMST and Idaho had with the Sunbelt a few years ago.

(12-13-2021 12:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  The question remains whether UMass is sufficiently committed to finding a conference home for its football program to abandon its stance on only joining as a football only affiliate. It's hard to see how UMass football adds enough value to any FBS conference to justify an invitation.

Exactly - that's the key. Everything that has happened points to the answer to that question being "No" here... and I don't blame UMass. The MAC is the only league where it could even plausibly make sense and, even then, I think a lot of people are underestimating just how much of a step down the MAC is compared to the A-10 for basketball. UMass moving all sports to C-USA or the Sun Belt would be completely unpalatable both in terms of all-sports geography and quality. The only leagues that UMass would be willing to move all sports are the P5 and AAC, yet those leagues aren't calling. (If the AAC didn't add UMass with this fall's mass expansion that was almost entirely focused on new markets regardless of football quality, I don't believe UMass will ever have a chance with them.)

That would all make perfect sense if UMass actually had good basketball. This whole saga has just shown how utterly clueless the UMass administration has been all this time. They've had a "we'll build it after we find a home" kind of attitude since they left the MAC. The commitment has never been there from them. IDK if it's a cultural thing or what but they just don't seem to get it.

(12-14-2021 08:29 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  The question remains whether UMass is sufficiently committed to finding a conference home for its football program to abandon its stance on only joining as a football only affiliate. It's hard to see how UMass football adds enough value to any FBS conference to justify an invitation.

Exactly - that's the key. Everything that has happened points to the answer to that question being "No" here... and I don't blame UMass. The MAC is the only league where it could even plausibly make sense and, even then, I think a lot of people are underestimating just how much of a step down the MAC is compared to the A-10 for basketball. UMass moving all sports to C-USA or the Sun Belt would be completely unpalatable both in terms of all-sports geography and quality. The only leagues that UMass would be willing to move all sports are the P5 and AAC, yet those leagues aren't calling. (If the AAC didn't add UMass with this fall's mass expansion that was almost entirely focused on new markets regardless of football quality, I don't believe UMass will ever have a chance with them.)

That would all make perfect sense if UMass actually had good basketball. This whole saga has just shown how utterly clueless the UMass administration has been all this time. They've had a "we'll build it after we find a home" kind of attitude since they left the MAC. The commitment has never been there from them. IDK if it's a cultural thing or what but they just don't seem to get it.

The thing is that conference realignment is often counterintuitive in this way. The worse that your signature program (whether it’s football or basketball) might be performing, the more that you actually need the protection of higher revenue, exposure and/or prestige from being in a better conference. The happiest athletic department in the SEC isn’t Alabama or Florida. Instead, it’s Vanderbilt - they’re the ones that truly thank their lucky stars everyday that they made the right conference decision many decades ago because their alternative would be where Tulane and Rice are today. I went to DePaul for law school and believe me that they are still amazed at their good fortune of getting into the Big East when they did instead of now way more than Villanova does. The fact that UMass and DePaul basketball haven’t been playing well actually magnifies how fortunate they are to be in their respective leagues already.

So, I could see UMass looking at this situation and not looking at it is as, “Man, our basketball program is down on the dumps, so we might as well try to help out football on going to an all-sports home.”

Instead; they’re probably saying, “Yikes! Our basketball program is down in dumps and the A-10 is the best league that we could ever hope to get into outside of the P5 and Big East! Why would we throw that all away for G5 football?”

That last point is critical: when the AAC defections to the Big 12 happen, the A-10 is arguably going to be the best basketball conference top to bottom outside of the P5 and Big East. Realistically, it’s the best basketball conference that UMass could ever hope to be in and they’re fortunate enough to be already there.

Once again, I think this board is often very football-focused, but people need to internalize that going from a major basketball conference that’s arguably going to be the best league outside of the 6 power basketball conferences to a midmajor basketball league in order to have a G5 football home is going to cause a lot of consternation.

Plus, that’s assuming that the MAC is interested in the first place. They really wanted WKU and MTSU as a specific pair where WKU had the better on-field/court sports while MTSU brought the fast-growing market and recruiting location that’s near WKU but not overlapping. That pair together brought more value than the sum of the individual parts.

A UMass/WKU addition to the MAC doesn’t have the same network effects. UMass had a large population base on paper, but it’s not fast growing, a good recruiting location or a real geographic fit with the league outside of Buffalo. (Nashville is closer to the Midwest than what a lot people seem to have in their minds along with being an easy flight.)

It just doesn’t seem to be a match for either UMass or the MAC. The parties want totally different things out of any conference realignment.

(12-14-2021 09:54 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-14-2021 08:29 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  The question remains whether UMass is sufficiently committed to finding a conference home for its football program to abandon its stance on only joining as a football only affiliate. It's hard to see how UMass football adds enough value to any FBS conference to justify an invitation.

Exactly - that's the key. Everything that has happened points to the answer to that question being "No" here... and I don't blame UMass. The MAC is the only league where it could even plausibly make sense and, even then, I think a lot of people are underestimating just how much of a step down the MAC is compared to the A-10 for basketball. UMass moving all sports to C-USA or the Sun Belt would be completely unpalatable both in terms of all-sports geography and quality. The only leagues that UMass would be willing to move all sports are the P5 and AAC, yet those leagues aren't calling. (If the AAC didn't add UMass with this fall's mass expansion that was almost entirely focused on new markets regardless of football quality, I don't believe UMass will ever have a chance with them.)

That would all make perfect sense if UMass actually had good basketball. This whole saga has just shown how utterly clueless the UMass administration has been all this time. They've had a "we'll build it after we find a home" kind of attitude since they left the MAC. The commitment has never been there from them. IDK if it's a cultural thing or what but they just don't seem to get it.

The thing is that conference realignment is often counterintuitive in this way. The worse that your signature program (whether it’s football or basketball) might be performing, the more that you actually need the protection of higher revenue, exposure and/or prestige from being in a better conference. The happiest athletic department in the SEC isn’t Alabama or Florida. Instead, it’s Vanderbilt - they’re the ones that truly thank their lucky stars everyday that they made the right conference decision many decades ago because their alternative would be where Tulane and Rice are today. I went to DePaul for law school and believe me that they are still amazed at their good fortune of getting into the Big East when they did instead of now way more than Villanova does. The fact that UMass and DePaul basketball haven’t been playing well actually magnifies how fortunate they are to be in their respective leagues already.

So, I could see UMass looking at this situation and not looking at it is as, “Man, our basketball program is down on the dumps, so we might as well try to help out football on going to an all-sports home.”

Instead; they’re probably saying, “Yikes! Our basketball program is down in dumps and the A-10 is the best league that we could ever hope to get into outside of the P5 and Big East! Why would we throw that all away for G5 football?”

That last point is critical: when the AAC defections to the Big 12 happen, the A-10 is arguably going to be the best basketball conference top to bottom outside of the P5 and Big East. Realistically, it’s the best basketball conference that UMass could ever hope to be in and they’re fortunate enough to be already there.

Once again, I think this board is often very football-focused, but people need to internalize that going from a major basketball conference that’s arguably going to be the best league outside of the 6 power basketball conferences to a midmajor basketball league in order to have a G5 football home is going to cause a lot of consternation.

Plus, that’s assuming that the MAC is interested in the first place. They really wanted WKU and MTSU as a specific pair where WKU had the better on-field/court sports while MTSU brought the fast-growing market and recruiting location that’s near WKU but not overlapping. That pair together brought more value than the sum of the individual parts.

A UMass/WKU addition to the MAC doesn’t have the same network effects. UMass had a large population base on paper, but it’s not fast growing, a good recruiting location or a real geographic fit with the league outside of Buffalo. (Nashville is closer to the Midwest than what a lot people seem to have in their minds along with being an easy flight.)

It just doesn’t seem to be a match for either UMass or the MAC. The parties want totally different things out of any conference realignment.

Well, UMass isn't going to find a home for football.

It's not like people around UMass are going to care if football's playing in C-USA or the MAC. Not worth sacrificing A-10 opponents for.

Jeez— there are a larger number of threads about UMass and UConn FB on this board than there are people in their stadiums (combined).