12-21-2003, 08:08 AM
<a href='http://www.herald-dispatch.com/2003/December/21/MUtop2a.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.herald-dispatch.com/2003/Decemb.../21/MUtop2a.htm</a>
12-21-2003, 08:08 AM
12-21-2003, 09:09 AM
I thought saying Kennedy's take "doesn't hold up" was a bit dismissive -- and I don't even agree with his take.
Guest
12-21-2003, 09:51 AM
Well, the dismissal of Kennedy's remarks fits right in with the rest of the article. It's backed up by nothing.
I do wish Marshall well on an early exit, however.
I do wish Marshall well on an early exit, however.
12-21-2003, 03:34 PM
I REALLY hope MUg and UCF can leave in 2004. I too disagree w/ Kennedy, but he's not advocating anything new. As many pepole have already pointed out, the CAA made sure Richmound didn't grab there automatic bid when they jumped to the A-10. I see Kennedy's reasoning, but the MAC would look bush league should MUg win the East next year. It's a lose lose situation for the MAC.
Guest
12-22-2003, 05:47 AM
I don't see how the MAC will look bush league (more bush league?) by declaring departing teams inelligible for the meager rewards this conference has to offer. There isn't an abundance of riches to go around. The TV games, championship games, and bowl games that this conference has to spread around should not be used to promote two schools that will be in another conference the following year.
As a Kent fan, you probably don't like seeing Toledo, Marshall, Miami, BG and NIU getting the lion's share of the TV games, but can understand the rationale. Can you find the same justification for teams that are departing?
The MAC's resources, as limited as they currently are, need to be used wisely and in a manner that will elevate this conference and promote greater opportunities in the future. Promoting Marshall and UCF accomplishes nothing for us. They are lame duck members, and there is no reason to treat them as anything else.
As a Kent fan, you probably don't like seeing Toledo, Marshall, Miami, BG and NIU getting the lion's share of the TV games, but can understand the rationale. Can you find the same justification for teams that are departing?
The MAC's resources, as limited as they currently are, need to be used wisely and in a manner that will elevate this conference and promote greater opportunities in the future. Promoting Marshall and UCF accomplishes nothing for us. They are lame duck members, and there is no reason to treat them as anything else.
12-22-2003, 09:09 AM
A few thoughts.
I've said all along that there is no way this move happens in 2004. Way too many things have to happen - to include adjusting schedules. I personally think it would be better if everyone could avoid a lame duck season but I just don't see it happening. OTOH, if all the AD's agree that it's a good idea and put their heads together, maybe they could make the move. We'll see.
As for prohibiting Marshall and CFU from participating in the MACC, I would think that such an action would be a breach of contract. Maybe there's some clause in the agreement that allows such an action but, if not, I don't know how you can prohibit their participation without being in violation of that agreement.
When it comes to TV games, the MAC is not in a position to dictate to the media what games they will or will not televise. It's the media executives that make that choice.
I've said all along that there is no way this move happens in 2004. Way too many things have to happen - to include adjusting schedules. I personally think it would be better if everyone could avoid a lame duck season but I just don't see it happening. OTOH, if all the AD's agree that it's a good idea and put their heads together, maybe they could make the move. We'll see.
As for prohibiting Marshall and CFU from participating in the MACC, I would think that such an action would be a breach of contract. Maybe there's some clause in the agreement that allows such an action but, if not, I don't know how you can prohibit their participation without being in violation of that agreement.
When it comes to TV games, the MAC is not in a position to dictate to the media what games they will or will not televise. It's the media executives that make that choice.