It's really rather simple.......One strong conference beats two weak conferences any day of the week. Now if some of you folks (North and South) could put down your egos and regionalism for a second, you might see the reality of this truism. College athletics has become an increasingly dog-eat-dog Hobbesian paradigm. If the BCS itself did not drive this home, this whole expansion fiasco has proven it crystal clear. It's kill or be killed. I'm not here to put down the MAC or defend CUSA. I'm here to say that many of us have a common interest.
The reason you want MAC schools in CUSA is so that you sense your pathetic, lost-eight-teams-in-the-past-three-months league is taking on water, so you want a few quality teams to stop the bleeding.
That and the fact that you can't beat us on the field.
This influx of CUSA morons on our board staring thread after thread telling us how much we "need" you guys is nothing short of hilarious.
Now, head back to your convict-laden shell of a league, please...
Papa Lou BSU Wrote:The reason you want MAC schools in CUSA is so that you sense your pathetic, lost-eight-teams-in-the-past-three-months league is taking on water, so you want a few quality teams to stop the bleeding.
That and the fact that you can't beat us on the field.
This influx of CUSA morons on our board staring thread after thread telling us how much we "need" you guys is nothing short of hilarious.
Now, head back to your convict-laden shell of a league, please...
:rofl: Papa Lou, tell us how you really feel! :rofl:
Gee, Papa Lou, why did you take it so easy on our C-USA visitor? :D
And, Algiers Eagle, you need to remember you're talking to all MAC fans here on this forum..............the majority of their schools are not being considered in your new"super-league" concept, so it's unrealistic to expect a "warm" reception.
The fact is that there is more to the MAC than attendance quota's.......it's been a very stable league for a long, long time, although some among us (including moi) may have not agreed with all our expansion candidates over the years. Now, some of these newer members are in some jeopardy if the new attendance rules go into effect as proposed. What many C-USA'ers fail to see is that there are any number of long-standing rivalries that exist within the conference, plus our regionalism allows minimal travel time (good for student/athletes) and expenses.
Let me give some examples from one Miami alum's perspective:
1) We have been in the conference since 1948.
2) Two of our biggest rivalries (all major sports) through the years has been with Ohio U and Bowling Green. The Miami-BG rivalry has been big throughout history.
3) Within the conference, we have some very good rivalries that may be more specific to one sport...for example, Miami and Ball State are located fairly close to each other, and we have a pretty spirited hoops rivalry.
4) We have always viewed our games with Toledo as being very big, and in hoops, golf and baseball Kent is a big game (for any MAC program).
5) We were developing a fierce (I'll use a polite word for it) rivalry with Marshall, that will now go away.
You could find examples for every MAC schools (i.e. BG-UT, CMU-WMU, etc.), hence I think it pretty unlikely that 2-3 MAC schools would go for your idea unless the conference itself appeared to be unviable. Since the new attendance rule may or may not go into effect as stated, and it may or may not affect the make-up of the MAC, all that kind of talk is premature.
C-USA has always been something of a "conference in transition". Although you have a good TV contract (in part due to UC, UL and Marquette and hoops), and a nice bowl line-up, your members are far-flung geographically, and seem to have little to "tie" themselves to each other...........hence 8 members have now announced their departure. That instability makes going to C-USA a very risky proposition, even though I'm sure your league will stay viable, at least in the far south or perhaps the SW. With your big hoops schools leaving, the revenue streams in C-USA vs. the MAC probably won't be all that different after your current TV deal runs out, so there is little economic incentive for a MAC program to come over at this time.
OK, makes sense: let's invite Memphis and UAB to join the MAC. Not bad for football, and both could compete with the MAC's best in hoops.
We all win. :wave:
Okay, you've convinced us. If the MAC ever expands, we'll look to raid C-USA.
Ok, we'll take one ecu (fb not too far away) and one memphis (bb not too far away).
14 teams:
east: buffalo, akron, kent state, miami-ohio, ohio, ecu, bugs
west: memphis, northern illinois, western michigan, eastern michigan, central michigan, ball state, toledo
i like it!
beats the h#!! out of having marshall and fuc. thanks for the idea!
Nice post ECK! Papa Lou laying the wood!
Like Miami, BG has been in the MAC for decades (so has Ohio, Toledo, Kent, WMU) and we've played these other schools in all sports for over 50 years. I love the MAC and don't see it dying anytime soon no matter what anyone says. It is a solid conference.
Plus, the MAC always beats Conf USA....
I don't care for Conf USA...and its 5 bowl bids are a total joke.
Just my 2 cents...
GO BG!! GO MAC!!!
Algiers Eagle Wrote:I'm here to say that many of us have a common interest.
MAC schools have a common interest in hanging together that appears to outweigh anything Conference USA can put on the table.
We'll see.
Algiers Eagle Wrote:It's really rather simple.......One strong conference beats two weak conferences any day of the week. Now if some of you folks (North and South) could put down your egos and regionalism for a second, you might see the reality of this truism. College athletics has become an increasingly dog-eat-dog Hobbesian paradigm. If the BCS itself did not drive this home, this whole expansion fiasco has proven it crystal clear. It's kill or be killed. I'm not here to put down the MAC or defend CUSA. I'm here to say that many of us have a common interest.
I'll respond by using the example of Toledo.
If you were Toledo, on the boarder of Michigan and Ohio, would you rather play in a Michigan-Ohio conference, or a Texas-Louisana league? What recruiting interests does Toledo regularly have in Texas? Thats a big risk to take; you can move to CUSA for a couple more TV games but will it make you less attractive to regional recruits. A recruit from Michigan likes the idea of playing Central Michigan so Mom and Dad can see the games.
Then with the 5th Bowl game as proposed giving slots to the two highest non-BCS champions, does it advantage Toledo to join CUSA? CUSA will probably be stronger than the MAC, making it more difficult to get that game. And if the MAC drops 4 programs in football.......Toledo will only be fighting 8 schools for a BCS game as opposed to 12.
Finally, whats next for C-DOA? First Army backs out. Then the Big East takes Louisville, Cinncinati, Marquette, DePaul, and South Florida. Next Saint Louis and Charlotte hop to the A-10. Now TCU is backpacking in the Mountain West. If the Big East expands again they'll be looking at grabing ECU, UCF or Marshall. What would be left is a latter day SWC: Memphis, Souther Miss, Houston, Tulsa, SMU, Rice, Tulane, UAB.........does Toledo or the MAC want to hook into this?
Algiers Eagle Wrote:It's really rather simple.......One strong conference beats two weak conferences any day of the week.
ok, i know who the one strong conference is (the MAC)
.....but who are the two weak ones (cusa and.......the sun belt?)
ok, i agree, the MAC is better than cusa and the sun belt.
Dear Algiers Eagle,
You may be as big as a house, but carpet and room deodorizer still can't take the place of conventional deodorant. :D
exCincy Kid Wrote:Gee, Papa Lou, why did you take it so easy on our C-USA visitor? :D
And, Algiers Eagle, you need to remember you're talking to all MAC fans here on this forum..............the majority of their schools are not being considered in your new"super-league" concept, so it's unrealistic to expect a "warm" reception.
The fact is that there is more to the MAC than attendance quota's.......it's been a very stable league for a long, long time, although some among us (including moi) may have not agreed with all our expansion candidates over the years. Now, some of these newer members are in some jeopardy if the new attendance rules go into effect as proposed. What many C-USA'ers fail to see is that there are any number of long-standing rivalries that exist within the conference, plus our regionalism allows minimal travel time (good for student/athletes) and expenses.
Let me give some examples from one Miami alum's perspective:
1) We have been in the conference since 1948.
2) Two of our biggest rivalries (all major sports) through the years has been with Ohio U and Bowling Green. The Miami-BG rivalry has been big throughout history.
3) Within the conference, we have some very good rivalries that may be more specific to one sport...for example, Miami and Ball State are located fairly close to each other, and we have a pretty spirited hoops rivalry.
4) We have always viewed our games with Toledo as being very big, and in hoops, golf and baseball Kent is a big game (for any MAC program).
5) We were developing a fierce (I'll use a polite word for it) rivalry with Marshall, that will now go away.
You could find examples for every MAC schools (i.e. BG-UT, CMU-WMU, etc.), hence I think it pretty unlikely that 2-3 MAC schools would go for your idea unless the conference itself appeared to be unviable. Since the new attendance rule may or may not go into effect as stated, and it may or may not affect the make-up of the MAC, all that kind of talk is premature.
C-USA has always been something of a "conference in transition". Although you have a good TV contract (in part due to UC, UL and Marquette and hoops), and a nice bowl line-up, your members are far-flung geographically, and seem to have little to "tie" themselves to each other...........hence 8 members have now announced their departure. That instability makes going to C-USA a very risky proposition, even though I'm sure your league will stay viable, at least in the far south or perhaps the SW. With your big hoops schools leaving, the revenue streams in C-USA vs. the MAC probably won't be all that different after your current TV deal runs out, so there is little economic incentive for a MAC program to come over at this time.
That's a very thoughtful and well-thought defense. To be perfect frank, I expected it. You have a lot of history and a certain dose of stability (though I think it's more illusory than you might think). However, the way I see it, neither the MAC nor CUSA are going to die. There's too many quality programs remaining therein for that too happen. I also think the MAC's history and geographically concentric identity has isolated many of its members from what's going on in major sports, particularly football-------centralization an concentration. I just wish that those among you who really want to be "players" to understand that at some point, these cold realities of the world are going to catch up with the MAC (the same way they're already catching up with CUSA). At that point, certain schools are going to have to make a choice between "history" and "survival". I would respectfully suggest that some of the upper tier schools in the MAC could bolster their collective profiles by joining what would become the strongest non-BCS league in the country. Please understand that, being a Southern Miss fan, I certainly don't feel like we NEED the likes of Miami, Toledo, and others to survive and prosper. We, like you, have a long and storied history (e.g. haven't had back-to-back losing seasons in over fifty years). We'll be just fine. That being said, I feel like we share something in common------we can help one another.
Papa Lou BSU Wrote:The reason you want MAC schools in CUSA is so that you sense your pathetic, lost-eight-teams-in-the-past-three-months league is taking on water, so you want a few quality teams to stop the bleeding.
That and the fact that you can't beat us on the field.
This influx of CUSA morons on our board staring thread after thread telling us how much we "need" you guys is nothing short of hilarious.
Now, head back to your convict-laden shell of a league, please...
Whose boards are full of "so-and-so arrested" and "so-and-so in trouble"...here's a clue...it's not the CUSA boards!
:D
Falconfreak90 Wrote:Nice post ECK! Papa Lou laying the wood!
Like Miami, BG has been in the MAC for decades (so has Ohio, Toledo, Kent, WMU) and we've played these other schools in all sports for over 50 years. I love the MAC and don't see it dying anytime soon no matter what anyone says. It is a solid conference.
Plus, the MAC always beats Conf USA.... I don't care for Conf USA...and its 5 bowl bids are a total joke.
Just my 2 cents...
GO BG!! GO MAC!!!
How many times has a MAC team besides Marshall beaten a CUSA team besides Louisville and Cincinnati over the 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? Just curious.
axeme Wrote:Memphis...could compete with the MAC's best in hoops.
We all win. :wave:
Don't flatter yourself too much.
Schadenfreude Wrote:Algiers Eagle Wrote:I'm here to say that many of us have a common interest.
MAC schools have a common interest in hanging together that appears to outweigh anything Conference USA can put on the table.
We'll see.
Yes, the illusory stability of mediocrity and second-class status. It's illusory because it's a socialist viewpoint in a cutthroat capitalist system. Look around.
From football.stassen.com:
Individual Game Results of Miami (Ohio) (vs CUSA)
Date Opponent (record) Result Score Site
9/27/2003 vs. Cincinnati (5-7) W 42 37
12/18/2003 vs. Louisville (9-4) W 49 28 @ Mobile, AL GMAC Bowl
10/5/2002 @ Cincinnati (7-7) W 31 26
9/22/2001 vs. Cincinnati (7-5) W 21 14
10/28/2000 @ Cincinnati (7-5) L 15 45
10/30/1999 vs. Cincinnati (3-8) L 42 52
9/12/1998 @ Army (3-8) W 14 13
10/24/1998 @ Cincinnati (2-9) W 41 0
10/25/1997 vs. Cincinnati (8-4) L 31 34
9/28/1996 @ Cincinnati (6-5) L 23 30
Since we have the rivalry with UC, we typically don't play other CUSA schools. Most of our other non-conference games are against BCS-league schools.
Algiers Eagle Wrote:At that point, certain schools are going to have to make a choice between "history" and "survival".
Actually, I see this playing out as a choice between the likes of Eastern Michigan or Akron (on the one hand) or Temple, Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee, Louisiana Tech et al on the other.
Quote:I would respectfully suggest that some of the upper tier schools in the MAC could bolster their collective profiles by joining what would become the strongest non-BCS league in the country.
Miami was tenth in both polls last year, and it wasn't the first time.
Does that profile really need bolstering?
I appreciate your thoughtfulness, but we just have to agree to disagree on pretty much everything.
Algiers Eagle Wrote:Yes, the illusory stability of mediocrity and second-class status. It's illusory because it's a socialist viewpoint in a cutthroat capitalist system. Look around.
Yeesh! I thought it was intercollegiate athletics.
FWIW, the smartest university president in your conference is advocating for more socialism, not less. I'd take that as a hint as to where he thinks his long term interests lie.