Alright people, here is your ace reporter with the latest scope on many fronts.
(1) MAC Expansion, not going to happen anytime soon people, so forget about the MTSU, WKU, SIU or Temple scenarios. The only shot at all would be if Temple agrees to an all-sports membership, which currently they are not. The MAC office wants expansion and feels "if you are not going forwards you are going backwards." The MAC presidents do not want expansion and will likely not approve any of the current scenarios that have been published.
(2) Don't look for the so-called Toronto Bowl to happen anytime soon. Evidently the same people who were trying to kick off the Indy Bowl are trying to get it going in Toronto as well. The city of Toronto seems to be more interested than the city of Indy, and the Big East does want to partner with the MAC if this thing ever gets any legs. At best we are looking at 2006, most likely, not at all.
(3) Doubtful the MAC lands a third direct bowl bid but most certainly the MAC will likely sign some sort of "alliance" with one or two bowls so that if their bowl partners cannot produce enough teams during season, the MAC is the first conference to be contractually approached to fill the slot. Progress is slow people, but progress is still progress.
(4) MAC football schedules should be available in mid to late April. MAC still working out more TV games which are why there is such a delay. I should have a list of all the teams and their opponents (without specific dates) within the next week or so. I am hearing that the Ohio/Toledo game will be a Friday night clash on ESPN. Expect a few more Tuesday, Wednesday. and Friday night games.
(5) After learning more about CSTV, I am glad the MAC is not going down that road to heavily. We need to continue to strengthen our partnerships with ESPN with FoxSports regional as the viable backup.
(6) Opinions range across the board about the league getting multiple bids in the NCAA this year. MAC beat writers were talking about two or three for sure, the national beat writers were saying just one again.
(7) Sounds like the MAC is working hard on having their football teams play "their big brothers" locally more in the near future. The Michigan schools are trying to get on either MSU or UM's schedules a lot more, same with Ball State and IU and PU; UB with Syracuse; NIU with IU and a few of the Ohio MAC schools with OSU.
(8) Had a great conversation with UB's Jim Hofher. Look for much better QB play from the JUCO coming in and a much better developed Stu Sampsel. Jim is a great guy and I certainly hope for his success with the Bulls program. UB's cross-over games are EMU, WMU & Toledo.
(9) I am hearing Miami's cross-over games are NIU (road), CMU & Ball State
Once again, a terrific time and first class production by the MAC. Kudos to all of the fans who made the trip. OU & Buffalo fans really went at each other last night and it should be a great game and atmosphere tonight. WMU brought a lot of fans from Kalamazoo too. Certainly UT & BG fans were the most disgusted while Miami, Akron and KSU fans seemed a little more in shock when their teams lost.
If I can think of more, I'll let everyone know.
I fear we are making a mistake by not adding Western Kentucky.
Maybe, Schad, but until they are D-1A in football, it seems premature. We'll still be here when they make that comittment. I think they would fit in, but the benefits would be modest for both sides. They need to be all-sports, especially football. Looks they are a couple of years away on that one.
So 2007? 2008? Nothing wrong with that.
I heard what Vandelay heard (but from another source) about expansion.
The MAC office is all for it and WKU but the U presidents are "VERY" (I'm quoting a biggie by putting that word in quotes, it is NOT my word) hesitant to add any I-AA FB teams for fear that they will further dilute the conference which has too many bad teams.
I'm in favor of WKU joining after I see the first shovel of dirt turned toward renovating the stadium.
Vandelay Wrote:The MAC office wants expansion and feels "if you are not going forwards you are going backwards." The MAC presidents do not want expansion and will likely not approve any of the current scenarios that have been published.
I guess that I can understand both perspectives. From the MAC office standpoint more teams would be more exposure in more markets so I see why they would be for expansion (quality expansion that is). From the MAC president’s perspective, the more teams the less everyone gets from revenue sharing. Given the fact that two more teams do not mean two more bowl games, the MAC presidents could loose revenue for their respective institutions with expansion.
From a fan's perspective, well it depends on the fan. I personally would like to see Western Kentucky and Temple (all sports), but from what Vandelay is saying this would be doubtful. Disappointing.
Very disappointing news about expansion. I agree that WKU is not going to be ready to play D-IA football anytime soon, but why couldn't we phase them in for football and let them join for all other sports in the meantime?
As far as the MAC vs. Big 11 in football, what we need to do is get more 2 for 1 deals. I know this wouldn't work with teams like UofM (you would make WAY more money playing there than you ever would trying to host them, not to mention the lack of a big enough stadium), but some of the mid-low level Big 11 schools should be up for it. CMU is hosting IU this year after two road games, it seems only natural that the MAC should try this more. EMU hosted Maryland, WMU hosted Va Tech. Why not try to schedule a midwest team like Purdue that would be a big draw?
HorseGlue,
What I think we'll see is the following scenario (for 11 game seasons):
CMU, EMU, etc play a money game at UofM or MSU,
AND
they play one home game vs say a Sun Belt, WAC, etc. type team
and away game vs. say a Sun Belt, WAC, etc. type team.
Hopefully both are part of home and home series.
This would assure each team of 5 home games (4 conf. + 1 OOC) and 6 away (4 conf, 1 part of a home and home series and one $ game).
EMU can bring in more $ by playing at UofM or MSU then playing 5 home games at Rynearson.
I reallly hope the MAC get's more than 1 team in the NCAA tourney, in football, the MAC got 5 teams, i know we didn't do so well but if the MAC gets atleast 3 teams, then we'll show the MAC is more than a mid-major confrence(ofcurse we'd have to win) But great job Ohio! Have fun dancing, and good luck!
I hope to God EMU never plays a game at the Big House. DO NOT be subserviant to the Big Ten. Have your big games at Ford Field, home to the MACC and Motor City Bowl.
Okie,
those deals are signed.
For whatever reasons, Big Ten teams are snapping up MAC teams for OOC games like crazy.
UofM and MSU fans will see a LOT of MAC teams (UofM will see NIU and EMU this Sept).
Quote: Those deals are signed. For whatever reasons, Big Ten teams are snapping up MAC teams for OOC games like crazy.
Let me clarify. I thought the previous poster wanted to play some of Eastern Michigan's HOME GAMES in either Ann Arbor or East Lansing. Now, if either U-M or MSU wants to be the "visiting" team.... :rolleyes:
Don't be surprised to see a lot of football scheduling alliances between the MAC & Big Ten and Big East. From time to time with the Big 12 and very few with SEC & C-USA. Any games with the WAC or MtWest will be truely for TV purposes set up with the assistance of ESPN, such as Fresno St/Toledo.
Vandelay Wrote:Don't be surprised to see a lot of football scheduling alliances between the MAC & Big Ten and Big East. From time to time with the Big 12 and very few with SEC & C-USA. Any games with the WAC or MtWest will be truely for TV purposes set up with the assistance of ESPN, such as Fresno St/Toledo.
I'm not sure everyone is singing the Big Ten song in the MAC. Ohio has 1 for 1's with 2 MWC schools, and plans to sign with WAC schools in the future. We don't appear to have any interest in Big Ten schools opting for a non-BCS scheduling philosophy.
Schadenfreude Wrote:I fear we are making a mistake by not adding Western Kentucky.
i agree
Great reporting as always Nick!
Vandelay Wrote:Don't be surprised to see a lot of football scheduling alliances between the MAC & Big Ten and Big East. From time to time with the Big 12 and very few with SEC & C-USA. Any games with the WAC or MtWest will be truely for TV purposes set up with the assistance of ESPN, such as Fresno St/Toledo.
Most non-conference games are played early in the football schedule. It is hotter than hell during the first half of the football schedule in the south. So who would want to have non-conference games with SEC or C-USA teams? Not me!
Vandelay Wrote:The MAC office wants expansion and feels "if you are not going forwards you are going backwards." The MAC presidents do not want expansion and will likely not approve any of the current scenarios that have been published.
Let me preface this by saying I think Chryst has been an amazing asset to the MAC and has personally elevated the league to new heights. With that said, it worries me that there is such a discrepancy between the presidents and Chryst. While I may be paranoid, I fear the following scenario.
First you must acknowledge Chryst is not going to stay with the MAC forever. His current resume is outstanding - he has done a remarkable job in the MAC - he has taken a struggling conference to the point where we routinely have football teams in the top 25, our television package is the best it has ever been, and the basketball is the best it has been in a while. What is his resume lacking that would be important to possible future employers (Div 1A BCS conferences)? He has no experience with conference expansion of course! There are of course costs and benefits to the member institutions and the conference with respect to expansion. Apparently, the schools think it is a bad idea. For Chryst, however, if he can get the MAC to expand it is another line on his resume, and of course he can argue there will be benefits. The problem is that I doubt he will be here long enough to see how succesful the expansion was (another 6 years or so). For Chryst, it is all upside since he is a rising star and is probably leaving in the future anyway. For the conference, if it doesn't work out, we are stuck with the schools we chose. Could this explain the difference in expansion opinions between Chryst and the Presidents?
IULurker Wrote:First you must acknowledge Chryst is not going to stay with the MAC forever. His current resume is outstanding - he has done a remarkable job in the MAC - he has taken a struggling conference to the point where we routinely have football teams in the top 25, our television package is the best it has ever been, and the basketball is the best it has been in a while. What is his resume lacking that would be important to possible future employers (Div 1A BCS conferences)? He has no experience with conference expansion of course! There are of course costs and benefits to the member institutions and the conference with respect to expansion. Apparently, the schools think it is a bad idea. For Chryst, however, if he can get the MAC to expand it is another line on his resume, and of course he can argue there will be benefits.
And the move to add UCF football only starting for the 2002 season was orchestrated by who?
Kit-Cat Wrote:IULurker Wrote:First you must acknowledge Chryst is not going to stay with the MAC forever. His current resume is outstanding - he has done a remarkable job in the MAC - he has taken a struggling conference to the point where we routinely have football teams in the top 25, our television package is the best it has ever been, and the basketball is the best it has been in a while. What is his resume lacking that would be important to possible future employers (Div 1A BCS conferences)? He has no experience with conference expansion of course! There are of course costs and benefits to the member institutions and the conference with respect to expansion. Apparently, the schools think it is a bad idea. For Chryst, however, if he can get the MAC to expand it is another line on his resume, and of course he can argue there will be benefits.
And the move to add UCF football only starting for the 2002 season was orchestrated by who?
Forgot about that...but would you say that was a succesful expansion.
**ducking**
Kit-Cat Wrote:IULurker Wrote:First you must acknowledge Chryst is not going to stay with the MAC forever. His current resume is outstanding - he has done a remarkable job in the MAC - he has taken a struggling conference to the point where we routinely have football teams in the top 25, our television package is the best it has ever been, and the basketball is the best it has been in a while. What is his resume lacking that would be important to possible future employers (Div 1A BCS conferences)? He has no experience with conference expansion of course! There are of course costs and benefits to the member institutions and the conference with respect to expansion. Apparently, the schools think it is a bad idea. For Chryst, however, if he can get the MAC to expand it is another line on his resume, and of course he can argue there will be benefits.
And the move to add UCF football only starting for the 2002 season was orchestrated by who?
Outside of their first year, UCF was not competitive but the move to bring UCF in was a good move. It opened up Florida to MAC schools more than ever before. Recruits got to see MAC schools on tv on the Sunshine Network and MAC schools have taken advantage of that and now have several Florida kids on their rosters. Also, it helped to create a better perception of the MAC in Florida.