(08-22-2022 09:35 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:13 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:08 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 08:55 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 05:47 AM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  Liberty will also have eight fewer schedule openings every season going forward. So the options for UMASS and UCONN will decline. I doubt Buffalo wants to play either of them every year.

I would be OK with a MAC partial scheduling agreement between UMass/UConn/Army to have one game a piece with them.

It makes more sense for the MAC to pick up easy victories against UMass/UConn/Army than to have to stick Louisiana and Coastal Carolina on the schedule. Plus more regional for a lot of MAC fans.

But do they need a formal scheduling agreement for that?

If MAC schools want to schedule UMass/UConn/Army I suspect that's relatively easy to do (certainly with UMass, maybe a little less so with UConn/Army).

Indy's generally need games. Why lock into a formal agreement if you're the MAC (I would think the interest in something guaranteed would come from the other direction).

MAC has done partial scheduling agreements with Army before.

4 FB games against UMass/UConn/Army would be a conference wide commitment. They would I presume play some of those games in October/November.

It's fine if that's what they want to do.

I just don't understand why they would want to do it (or I guess I should say, I don't understand why they would need to do it).

What's the MAC get out of that? If the answer is "they get 4 games with UConn/Umass/Army" then my question is - can't they get that anyway? And if they can get that anyway, then we're back to what's the MAC get out of that?

They only get something out of it if the deal comes with a requirement that UConn play some number of basketball games at MAC schools. I don't know that getting UMass basketball games is all that big a deal. UMass would only be included to keep an even number of teams in the conference. WKU for all sports and UConn FB only works just fine.

(08-22-2022 08:18 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-20-2022 10:55 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(08-20-2022 08:22 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 10:19 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  UMass' home schedule is not an advertisement for schools to be independents:

09/17 - Stony Brook
10/08 - Liberty
10/15 - Buffalo
10/29 - New Mexico State
11/26 - Army

Actually I don't think it's too bad for their level. Army, Buffalo and Liberty are all close enough. Stony Brook is a fairly close FCS school. NMSt is another Indy that gives fans a far away "exotic team".

Should be 6 games though. They do need to find a league. UMass and UConn really need to join the MAC though as FB only schools.

.

Are UConn and UMass wanted by the MAC for football only? UMass had to leave the MAC due to being unwilling to join as an all sports member. I think that UMass would have to offer all sports in order to get a MAC offer.

I think UConn and UMass together could make an offer to the MAC and maybe the MAC would see the benefit. The next 15 years is going to see Titanic changes in the college sports landscape.

I don't think UConn and UMass should be lumped together here. While they both might be neighboring New England public universities with poor football records in independence, UConn's schedules are *significantly* more attractive with home-and-home series against a large array of P5 opponents. That's simply more important for UConn's brand even if their records don't improve. The last thing that they'd want is to have UMass/MAC-type schedules and *still* have bad records (which is what UMass is going through right now).

(08-22-2022 09:53 AM)ken d Wrote:  WKU for all sports and UConn FB only works just fine.

It does?

The MAC would want that?

Why? How is that an improvement? Are you just banking on UConn's OOC scheduling ability? Why is it important to have an even number for football* and not for other sports?









*I know the answer to this, that was rhetorical. The answer is that it isn't important to have an even number of teams for football.

(08-22-2022 09:53 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:35 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:13 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:08 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 08:55 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I would be OK with a MAC partial scheduling agreement between UMass/UConn/Army to have one game a piece with them.

It makes more sense for the MAC to pick up easy victories against UMass/UConn/Army than to have to stick Louisiana and Coastal Carolina on the schedule. Plus more regional for a lot of MAC fans.

But do they need a formal scheduling agreement for that?

If MAC schools want to schedule UMass/UConn/Army I suspect that's relatively easy to do (certainly with UMass, maybe a little less so with UConn/Army).

Indy's generally need games. Why lock into a formal agreement if you're the MAC (I would think the interest in something guaranteed would come from the other direction).

MAC has done partial scheduling agreements with Army before.

4 FB games against UMass/UConn/Army would be a conference wide commitment. They would I presume play some of those games in October/November.

It's fine if that's what they want to do.

I just don't understand why they would want to do it (or I guess I should say, I don't understand why they would need to do it).

What's the MAC get out of that? If the answer is "they get 4 games with UConn/Umass/Army" then my question is - can't they get that anyway? And if they can get that anyway, then we're back to what's the MAC get out of that?

They only get something out of it if the deal comes with a requirement that UConn play some number of basketball games at MAC schools. I don't know that getting UMass basketball games is all that big a deal. UMass would only be included to keep an even number of teams in the conference. WKU for all sports and UConn FB only works just fine.

They won't get BB games on a partial schedule.

TV appearances maybe.

A chance not to have to pay a FCS school 400k at home when they could have a 1 for 1 with UMass/UConn/Army.

(08-22-2022 11:29 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:35 AM)inutech Wrote:  What's the MAC get out of that?

TV appearances maybe.

A chance not to have to pay a FCS school 400k at home when they could have a 1 for 1 with UMass/UConn/Army.

Assuming this part was in answer to me.

You think so? No idea about the tv part.


But wouldn't those MAC schools still want/need to schedule an FCS game for the home game numbers? Toledo has home and away games scheduled with UMass already for '22 and '23. (Which again, raises the question about why bother with a formal agreement if you can just schedule them anyway without one). In both '22 and '23 Toledo also has FCS games scheduled.

With or without a formal scheduling agreement, the MAC teams wouldn't be scheduling UMass/UConn/Army instead of an FCS game. They'd be scheduling those schools instead of MWC/SB/AAC/CUSA series. For some MAC schools that's a better deal (because of geography or their fan's interests, or because they're trying to schedule wins). But for others, maybe not. So again, can't Buffalo and Toledo just schedule whomever they want?

(08-22-2022 11:03 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 09:53 AM)ken d Wrote:  WKU for all sports and UConn FB only works just fine.

It does?

The MAC would want that?

Why? How is that an improvement? Are you just banking on UConn's OOC scheduling ability? Why is it important to have an even number for football* and not for other sports?









*I know the answer to this, that was rhetorical. The answer is that it isn't important to have an even number of teams for football.

It doesn't help when UConn gets stomped 55-3 by P5's Cuse, NC state, Michigan BC are going to dismantle UConn and Utah State, Fresno, Liberty and Army are going to be UGLY.

Don't mean to totally criticize UConn but why in God's name do raze your on-campus stadium and make the students/fans travel 30 miles away? How many kids are going to be sober and drive/carpool to watch UConn get dismantled?
also I don't get Jim Mora Jr.? He hasn't coached a down in 5 years.

(08-22-2022 09:55 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 08:18 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-20-2022 10:55 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(08-20-2022 08:22 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-18-2022 10:19 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  UMass' home schedule is not an advertisement for schools to be independents:

09/17 - Stony Brook
10/08 - Liberty
10/15 - Buffalo
10/29 - New Mexico State
11/26 - Army

Actually I don't think it's too bad for their level. Army, Buffalo and Liberty are all close enough. Stony Brook is a fairly close FCS school. NMSt is another Indy that gives fans a far away "exotic team".

Should be 6 games though. They do need to find a league. UMass and UConn really need to join the MAC though as FB only schools.

.

Are UConn and UMass wanted by the MAC for football only? UMass had to leave the MAC due to being unwilling to join as an all sports member. I think that UMass would have to offer all sports in order to get a MAC offer.

I think UConn and UMass together could make an offer to the MAC and maybe the MAC would see the benefit. The next 15 years is going to see Titanic changes in the college sports landscape.

I don't think UConn and UMass should be lumped together here. While they both might be neighboring New England public universities with poor football records in independence, UConn's schedules are *significantly* more attractive with home-and-home series against a large array of P5 opponents. That's simply more important for UConn's brand even if their records don't improve. The last thing that they'd want is to have UMass/MAC-type schedules and *still* have bad records (which is what UMass is going through right now).

Yes UConn did get some P5's to come to East Hartford only because it's convenient to an airport, but it really doesn't matter because the P5's are going to run up the score and it'll wind up being 55-10 or something.

(08-22-2022 08:41 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 08:18 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I think UConn and UMass together could make an offer to the MAC and maybe the MAC would see the benefit.

But what would that benefit be?

Do you see one? For football-only? For those two schools? How is that advantageous? What does the MAC get from that?

The benefit? Two new states somewhat contiguous. Buffalo is about 6 hours away to both. One which was a member of a Power Conference at one time.

(08-22-2022 02:35 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 08:41 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 08:18 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I think UConn and UMass together could make an offer to the MAC and maybe the MAC would see the benefit.

But what would that benefit be?

Do you see one? For football-only? For those two schools? How is that advantageous? What does the MAC get from that?

The benefit? Two new states somewhat contiguous. Buffalo is about 6 hours away to both. One which was a member of a Power Conference at one time.

So, the benefit is that your conference now includes schools in two new "somewhat contiguous" states? And they're relatively close to Buffalo?

And one was in a Power Conference (which I guess is sort of technically true, if a little misleading in my opinion).


I think that's what we call "damning with faint praise," right? Hey guys, guess what? Two schools from somewhat contiguous states will be joining our conference! And. . . that is the good thing we can say about them. Luckily it's football only, and they both have football teams! We will not be taking questions at this time. We have confirmed, they are currently fielding football teams. And are in states. And aren't all that far from Buffalo. #winning




(and yeah, about 10 months ago, "has a football team" would have been good enough for my team's current conference, before that gets pointed out, just don't see what that does for the MAC)

There's no reason for any conference to add UMass or UCONN football at this moment.

Small exception would be: scheduling arrangement for UCONN basketball, and to a lesser extent scheduling arrangement for the MAC hockey schools for mostly UMass but also somewhat UCONN.

(08-22-2022 04:33 PM)e-parade Wrote:  There's no reason for any conference to add UMass or UCONN football at this moment.

Small exception would be: scheduling arrangement for UCONN basketball, and to a lesser extent scheduling arrangement for the MAC hockey schools for mostly UMass but also somewhat UCONN.

While the UMass hockey could be a genuine sweetener for the MAC hockey schools ... that's only three MAC schools.

While not every MAC school is serious enough about its basketball for the 4 home / 4 away deal they had with the Temple/UMass pair{*Note} to be a sweetener, enough MAC schools care enough about their basketball that it seems like it was part of what made them try the FB-only pair once Temple had been invited.

But (1) UConn is unlikely to be willing to lock down four of their Basketball Games on an OOC scheduling deal with the MAC, so it seems unlikely that part of the FB-only pair deal could be revived with UConn, and ...

... (2) why would UConn want to have a FB-only deal or a scheduling deal with the MAC, when they have would prefer the schedule they have now to a schedule with more MAC schools on it.

The fact that UConn has seemingly never even touched base with the MAC on what could be done suggests that UConn just doesn't feel any incentive to work out any kind of deal with the MAC, which renders any speculation involving the MAC and UConn moot.

_______________
{*Note: The "sweetener" never actually went into full force, since Temple left just as UMass joined, but the original deal was for both schools to host 2 MAC teams and visit 2 MAC teams each year, so between the pair, every MAC school would have hosted one of the two in a two year time frame and would have played both.}

(08-22-2022 05:20 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 04:33 PM)e-parade Wrote:  There's no reason for any conference to add UMass or UCONN football at this moment.

Small exception would be: scheduling arrangement for UCONN basketball, and to a lesser extent scheduling arrangement for the MAC hockey schools for mostly UMass but also somewhat UCONN.

While the UMass hockey could be a genuine sweetener for the MAC hockey schools ... that's only three MAC schools.

While not every MAC school is serious enough about its basketball for the 4 home / 4 away deal they had with the Temple/UMass pair{*Note} to be a sweetener, enough MAC schools care enough about their basketball that it seems like it was part of what made them try the FB-only pair once Temple had been invited.

But (1) UConn is unlikely to be willing to lock down four of their Basketball Games on an OOC scheduling deal with the MAC, so it seems unlikely that part of the FB-only pair deal could be revived with UConn, and ...

... (2) why would UConn want to have a FB-only deal or a scheduling deal with the MAC, when they have would prefer the schedule they have now to a schedule with more MAC schools on it.

The fact that UConn has seemingly never even touched base with the MAC on what could be done suggests that UConn just doesn't feel any incentive to work out any kind of deal with the MAC, which renders any speculation involving the MAC and UConn moot.

_______________
{*Note: The "sweetener" never actually went into place, of course, since Temple left just as UMass joined, but the original deal was for both schools to host 2 MAC teams and visit 2 MAC teams each year, so between the pair, every MAC school would have hosted one of the two in a two year time frame and would have played both.}

I agree with this assessment. UConn will remain FBS independent in hopes that a spot might open up for them someday in a reorganized ACC.

(08-22-2022 05:20 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-22-2022 04:33 PM)e-parade Wrote:  There's no reason for any conference to add UMass or UCONN football at this moment.

Small exception would be: scheduling arrangement for UCONN basketball, and to a lesser extent scheduling arrangement for the MAC hockey schools for mostly UMass but also somewhat UCONN.

While the UMass hockey could be a genuine sweetener for the MAC hockey schools ... that's only three MAC schools.

While not every MAC school is serious enough about its basketball for the 4 home / 4 away deal they had with the Temple/UMass pair{*Note} to be a sweetener, enough MAC schools care enough about their basketball that it seems like it was part of what made them try the FB-only pair once Temple had been invited.

But (1) UConn is unlikely to be willing to lock down four of their Basketball Games on an OOC scheduling deal with the MAC, so it seems unlikely that part of the FB-only pair deal could be revived with UConn, and ...

... (2) why would UConn want to have a FB-only deal or a scheduling deal with the MAC, when they have would prefer the schedule they have now to a schedule with more MAC schools on it.

The fact that UConn has seemingly never even touched base with the MAC on what could be done suggests that UConn just doesn't feel any incentive to work out any kind of deal with the MAC, which renders any speculation involving the MAC and UConn moot.

_______________
{*Note: The "sweetener" never actually went into full force, since Temple left just as UMass joined, but the original deal was for both schools to host 2 MAC teams and visit 2 MAC teams each year, so between the pair, every MAC school would have hosted one of the two in a two year time frame and would have played both.}

Yeah, I probably should have said "to a much lesser extent" there.

And there's always hope of a full system-wide collapse that results in the northern members of the ACC needing to add schools after being left behind, resulting in UCONN, UMass, Temple, and Buffalo filling out a conference with BC, Syracuse, Pitt, and Louisville. Here's hoping for that!

https://twitter.com/ESPNEvents/status/15...7OtZ2WFURA

Here's the UMass announcement about it: https://umassathletics.com/news/2022/8/3...vents.aspx

Quote:The bowl games currently owned and operated by ESPN Events include the Boca Raton Bowl, the Camellia Bowl, the Cure Bowl, the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl, the Fenway Bowl, the Frisco Bowl, the Myrtle Beach Bowl, and the New Mexico Bowl.

If we can get our act together and get a .500+ season in there we now have access to some interesting bowls. The Fenway Bowl would be particularly enticing for sure.