CSNbbs

West Kent gonna be tougher game than anybody thinks.

Can you fill some of us in on the acronyms? What is West Kent?

WKU. Western Kentucky University.

axeme Wrote:WKU. Western Kentucky University.

Thanks.

Western Kentucky was a good program in D-AA and a very good D-A program in basketball. MAC missed an opportunity get a good athletic program in both football and basketball.

OUBOBCATJOHN Wrote:Western Kentucky was a good program in D-AA and a very good D-A program in basketball. MAC missed an opportunity get a good athletic program in both football and basketball.

Do you really think that ship has sailed forever?

I wouldn't rule something out down the road.

Anyway, those who want a good look at Western Kentucky should visit Perry Stadium in eight days. It could be a very good game.

Schadenfreude Wrote:

OUBOBCATJOHN Wrote:Western Kentucky was a good program in D-AA and a very good D-A program in basketball. MAC missed an opportunity get a good athletic program in both football and basketball.

Do you really think that ship has sailed forever?

I wouldn't rule something out down the road.

Anyway, those who want a good look at Western Kentucky should visit Perry Stadium in eight days. It could be a very good game.

I really don't think WKU to the MAC is going to happen at this point because the SBC is starting to take off making a jump from SBC to MAC a latteral move.

CUSA from what I've heard is looking at Temple because of its basketball program. That would bring the MAC back down to 12.

templefootballfan Wrote:West Kent gonna be tougher game than anybody thinks.

Heck, we even managed to beat SIU in Carbondale last year!

Kit-Cat Wrote:I really don't think WKU to the MAC is going to happen at this point because the SBC is starting to take off making a jump from SBC to MAC a latteral move.

CUSA from what I've heard is looking at Temple because of its basketball program. That would bring the MAC back down to 12.

I agree. When the Sunbelt gets a second bowl, there will be 2 Sunbelt bowl trips for 9 teams vs. 3 ( is that right?) for 13 MAC teams. Roughly the same ratio. And no offense but I would prefer to head south in December.

Still I have to wonder what WKU in MAC basketball would have been like.

Temple won't go to CUSA. If they leave the A-10, the MAC will be the destination. Temple is building rivalries in the MAC with football and over the next four years they will buy into being a member. The MAC biggest issue is Eastern Michigan which is a program that appears to be done as a D-A member. 5k fans is unacceptable and MAC leadership will pull the plug on EMU as soon as they lock up Temple longterm.

OUBOBCATJOHN Wrote:The MAC biggest issue is Eastern Michigan which is a program that appears to be done as a D-A member. 5k fans is unacceptable and MAC leadership will pull the plug on EMU as soon as they lock up Temple longterm.

I agree, EMU should be ashamed of themselves. Awful attendance figures.

OUBOBCATJOHN Wrote:The MAC biggest issue is Eastern Michigan which is a program that appears to be done as a D-A member. 5k fans is unacceptable and MAC leadership will pull the plug on EMU as soon as they lock up Temple longterm.

I don't agree with this post to the extent that I don't think the MAC leadership will take action against Eastern Michigan.

It doesn't seem to be the style of the conference office. And, since the conference is ultimately run by the university presidents, action against Eastern Michigan would seem to require a statement on the part of virtually all university presidents that Eastern Michigan is no longer worthy of MAC membership. That's pretty tough to imagine.

So, instead, I would expect Eastern Michigan to follow its own course and, perhaps, eventually, reach the conclusion on their own that they would be better off in another league.

In fact, I think even fans who love the program as much as I love my own might eventually reach that conclusion someday.

I realize how important it is for us fans for our football teams to compete at the I-A level. It's an absolute core value for me, and I think most of us share that value, including the Eagle fans.

And yet the present situation seems virtually hopeless for Eastern Michigan. Imagine buying an NFL expansion team and locating it in a nice high school stadium in Parma, Ohio. That's the analogy I keep coming back to. The Eagles are in a terrible situation trying to compete at I-A. Eastern Michigan is a perfectly logical member of the MAC -- except for the fact that this is a I-A conference.

Wouldn't it be better for Eastern Michigan if football was moved to the Gateway and other sports were moved into the Horizon or Summit (both have natural rivals in Detroit and Oakland, respectively)? Eastern Michigan has very good facilities that would shine in I-AA. They could be a force in the Gateway, and this could give them rebuild their fan base.

A lot of electrons have been spilled on this board the past few years complaining about the membership of Buffalo and Temple.

I have never agreed with those posts. I think both are valuable additions to our conference. I'm glad we brought Temple in, and I'm proud to be in a conference with Buffalo.

But I do agree with those who have concerns about Eastern Michigan. In my mind, Eastern Michigan does not add value to the conference.

It may have seemed like a nice idea in the early 1970s to bring Eastern Michigan in along with Central Michigan, Ball State and Northern Illinois. But, by and large, it hasn't been working.

(Eagle fans who want to argue otherwise should spare any mention of their Olympic sports. Because, at the end of the day, who gives a crap? And, yes, I'm aware of Earl Boinkins. But, basketball programs who've put together a few good years are a dime a dozen, and this is a I-A conference.)

In fact, if memory serves, the MAC was going to take action to weed out Eastern Michigan during the mid-1980s. But the Eagles won their only MAC title in football, and the imperitative to act disappeared.

Eastern Michigan has some good fans who post here. I don't dislike them. But I mean what I'm saying in this post, too.

To wrap up: I was going to try to answer a question that has been gnawing at me for a while. Is Eastern Michigan even eligible for post season play right now? Do they need to make 15,000 this year?

I'm not sure I know the answer. And, while I would think we would know if they have been barred from post season play because of their attendance problems, we do have a bit of a tree-falling-in-the-forest problem here. If a team with no hope of post season play is barred from post season play, will we ever hear about it?

Attendance was hopelessly low in 2005 -- a 5,219 average at Rynearson, decidedly not mitigated by 11,191 who showed up for the Western Michigan game at Ford Field.

Last year they came close, according to the NCAA's attendance report -- 14,734 at Rynearson. Throw in the 15,816 who attended their game with Navy at Ford Field and that gets them to about 14,950.

Perhaps they were able to come up with a different way of counting, not submitted to the NCAA week by week, to get to 15,000. If any Eastern fans know, I'm interested in hearing about it.

But the big picture is this: Eastern Michigan is expending all kinds of revenue to try to keep their program above the 15,000 mark every two years. Eventually, I wonder if they are going to conclude this just isn't worth it, and they'd be better off taking a different course.

So I'm not sure the MAC needs to take action. Perhaps this will sort itself out in an atmosphere of politeness and (feigned, at times, perhaps) respect.

Schadenfreude Wrote:

OUBOBCATJOHN Wrote:The MAC biggest issue is Eastern Michigan which is a program that appears to be done as a D-A member. 5k fans is unacceptable and MAC leadership will pull the plug on EMU as soon as they lock up Temple longterm.

I don't agree with this post to the extent that I don't think the MAC leadership will take action against Eastern Michigan.

It doesn't seem to be the style of the conference office. And, since the conference is ultimately run by the university presidents, action against Eastern Michigan would seem to require a statement on the part of virtually all university presidents that Eastern Michigan is no longer worthy of MAC membership. That's pretty tough to imagine.

So, instead, I would expect Eastern Michigan to follow its own course and, perhaps, eventually, reach the conclusion on their own that they would be better off in another league.

In fact, I think even fans who love the program as much as I love my own might eventually reach that conclusion someday.

I realize how important it is for us fans for our football teams to compete at the I-A level. It's an absolute core value for me, and I think most of us share that value, including the Eagle fans.

And yet the present situation seems virtually hopeless for Eastern Michigan. Imagine buying an NFL expansion team and locating it in a nice high school stadium in Parma, Ohio. That's the analogy I keep coming back to. The Eagles are in a terrible situation trying to compete at I-A. Eastern Michigan is a perfectly logical member of the MAC -- except for the fact that this is a I-A conference.

Wouldn't it be better for Eastern Michigan if football was moved to the Gateway and other sports were moved into the Horizon or Summit (both have natural rivals in Detroit and Oakland, respectively)? Eastern Michigan has very good facilities that would shine in I-AA. They could be a force in the Gateway, and this could give them rebuild their fan base.

A lot of electrons have been spilled on this board the past few years complaining about the membership of Buffalo and Temple.

I have never agreed with those posts. I think both are valuable additions to our conference. I'm glad we brought Temple in, and I'm proud to be in a conference with Buffalo.

But I do agree with those who have concerns about Eastern Michigan. In my mind, Eastern Michigan does not add value to the conference.

It may have seemed like a nice idea in the early 1970s to bring Eastern Michigan in along with Central Michigan, Ball State and Northern Illinois. But, by and large, it hasn't been working.

(Eagle fans who want to argue otherwise should spare any mention of their Olympic sports. Because, at the end of the day, who gives a crap? And, yes, I'm aware of Earl Boinkins. But, basketball programs who've put together a few good years are a dime a dozen, and this is a I-A conference.)

In fact, if memory serves, the MAC was going to take action to weed out Eastern Michigan during the mid-1980s. But the Eagles won their only MAC title in football, and the imperitative to act disappeared.

Eastern Michigan has some good fans who post here. I don't dislike them. But I mean what I'm saying in this post, too.

To wrap up: I was going to try to answer a question that has been gnawing at me for a while. Is Eastern Michigan even eligible for post season play right now? Do they need to make 15,000 this year?

I'm not sure I know the answer. And, while I would think we would know if they have been barred from post season play because of their attendance problems, we do have a bit of a tree-falling-in-the-forest problem here. If a team with no hope of post season play is barred from post season play, will we ever hear about it?

Attendance was hopelessly low in 2005 -- a 5,219 average at Rynearson, decidedly not mitigated by 11,191 who showed up for the Western Michigan game at Ford Field.

Last year they came close, according to the NCAA's attendance report -- 14,734 at Rynearson. Throw in the 15,816 who attended their game with Navy at Ford Field and that gets them to about 14,950.

Perhaps they were able to come up with a different way of counting, not submitted to the NCAA week by week, to get to 15,000. If any Eastern fans know, I'm interested in hearing about it.

But the big picture is this: Eastern Michigan is expending all kinds of revenue to try to keep their program above the 15,000 mark every two years. Eventually, I wonder if they are going to conclude this just isn't worth it, and they'd be better off taking a different course.

So I'm not sure the MAC needs to take action. Perhaps this will sort itself out in an atmosphere of politeness and (feigned, at times, perhaps) respect.

After having suffered thru the BE ejection, I can tell you that conferences who expell members are engaging in a slippery slope. E Mich. needs to find its own solution.

Hilltopper2K Wrote:

templefootballfan Wrote:West Kent gonna be tougher game than anybody thinks.

Heck, we even managed to beat SIU in Carbondale last year!

Kit-Cat Wrote:I really don't think WKU to the MAC is going to happen at this point because the SBC is starting to take off making a jump from SBC to MAC a latteral move.

CUSA from what I've heard is looking at Temple because of its basketball program. That would bring the MAC back down to 12.

I agree. When the Sunbelt gets a second bowl, there will be 2 Sunbelt bowl trips for 9 teams vs. 3 ( is that right?) for 13 MAC teams. Roughly the same ratio. And no offense but I would prefer to head south in December.

And no offense but I'd perfer to watch a game in front of 50,000 fans in Detroit instead of 5 in New Orleans.

When the Sunbelt gets a second bowl? The MAC had to wait a very long time. The main reason the MAC earned that second bowl is because they had 10 win teams being left out. The GMAC said the competitive level of the MAC was the main reason for giving them a second automatic bowl berth. Even with the bowl saturation we have today the SBC has been no better then two bowls deep while the MAC has placed 4-5 schools in bowls with its depth.

The MAC is in negotiations for a 4th bowl as we speak. They are part of discussions with new bowls in St. Louis and Baltimore. Also there is talk of the Independence Bowl opening up with the Big XII leaving that bowl because its small market. The MAC has already played 1 time in the Independence and the SEC respects MAC football as they want nothing to do with CUSA or the Sun Belt.

And I've long said that 4 bowl tie-ins is about right for the MAC. I like the flexibility of placing a 5th school in an at-large bowl or BCS. CUSA is retarded with agreements in 7 bowls (Liberty, GMAC, NO, FT Worth, Hawaii, Houston, Papa Johns). The point of bowls for a mid major is to ensure your top teams are showcased. Its not to put every school that you can in a bowl game like a BCS conference.

The dump Eastern Michigan argument had a lot of steam 10 years ago as they along with KSU/UA were non-competitive drags on the conference while Marshall was running through the MAC. There would be less schools recruiting 1-A in Michigan and Ohio so more talent around for everyone.

The theory was if the MAC could pair down to 8-10 schools its computer ratings would be higher and it would be more appealing for TV games because at that time the MAC did not have any kind of deal with ESPN and only 1 bowl. It made sense to drop bottom feeders to get the league moving forward.

The college football landscape has changed a lot since 2000. The MAC is now on par with CUSA competitively and with bowls. MAC TV deal with ESPN is a significant improvement. Kent and Akron are now competitive football members of the MAC. Marshall has gone to another conference. The idea of a MAC split making a difference has no credibility anymore. MAC schools recruit California, Texas, Georgia, and Florida so having extra Ohio and Michigan members is not really a factor in competitiveness.

EMU may be an attendance dog, but their football and basketball facilities are in the upper half of the conference. They beat traditional MAC power NIU last week. If you want to look at an outlier in this conference look at Temple on the East Coast playing in a 70,000 seat stadium. They would be a better fit in CUSA, geographically it makes about as much sense as the MAC.

Kit-Cat Wrote:If you want to look at an outlier in this conference look at Temple on the East Coast playing in a 70,000 seat stadium. They would be a better fit in CUSA, geographically it makes about as much sense as the MAC.

How would Temple be a better fit for CUSA? That is a Southern league with all of its members located far below the Mason-Dixon Line.

Temple is only playing football in the MAC. It is one sport. You act like people are being forced to fly their softball teams to Philadelphia.

At the end of the day, there are only two Division I-FBS leagues that make geographical sense for Temple, the ACC and the Big East.

Me thinks the WK game at Ball State won't be the cake walk I thought it might be.

Krocker Krapp Wrote:

Kit-Cat Wrote:If you want to look at an outlier in this conference look at Temple on the East Coast playing in a 70,000 seat stadium. They would be a better fit in CUSA, geographically it makes about as much sense as the MAC.

How would Temple be a better fit for CUSA? That is a Southern league with all of its members located far below the Mason-Dixon Line.

I was thinking more in terms of many CUSA schools having large stadiums like Rice, UAB, and Tulane with most of the others 40k+

Temple is pretty much the same distance to ECU and Marshall as it is to Buffalo and Ohio.

I could see CUSA a league where they'd be willing to put their basketball. As far as exposure and tradition CUSA is fairly equal with A-10 basketball. Memphis, UAB, and Tulsa have done a lot over the years in the tourney.

The MAC is more like the CAA in basketball. It usually puts 2-3 teams in the post season but almost never anyone top 25.

Kit-Cat Wrote:And no offense but I'd perfer to watch a game in front of 50,000 fans in Detroit instead of 5 in New Orleans.

When the Sunbelt gets a second bowl? The MAC had to wait a very long time. The main reason the MAC earned that second bowl is because they had 10 win teams being left out. The GMAC said the competitive level of the MAC was the main reason for giving them a second automatic bowl berth. Even with the bowl saturation we have today the SBC has been no better then two bowls deep while the MAC has placed 4-5 schools in bowls with its depth.

The MAC is in negotiations for a 4th bowl as we speak. They are part of discussions with new bowls in St. Louis and Baltimore. Also there is talk of the Independence Bowl opening up with the Big XII leaving that bowl because its small market. The MAC has already played 1 time in the Independence and the SEC respects MAC football as they want nothing to do with CUSA or the Sun Belt.

And I've long said that 4 bowl tie-ins is about right for the MAC. I like the flexibility of placing a 5th school in an at-large bowl or BCS. CUSA is retarded with agreements in 7 bowls (Liberty, GMAC, NO, FT Worth, Hawaii, Houston, Papa Johns). The point of bowls for a mid major is to ensure your top teams are showcased. Its not to put every school that you can in a bowl game like a BCS conference.

The Sunbelt is adding a bowl in 2009, just in time for WKU.

Hilltopper2K Wrote:

Kit-Cat Wrote:And no offense but I'd perfer to watch a game in front of 50,000 fans in Detroit instead of 5 in New Orleans.

When the Sunbelt gets a second bowl? The MAC had to wait a very long time. The main reason the MAC earned that second bowl is because they had 10 win teams being left out. The GMAC said the competitive level of the MAC was the main reason for giving them a second automatic bowl berth. Even with the bowl saturation we have today the SBC has been no better then two bowls deep while the MAC has placed 4-5 schools in bowls with its depth.

The MAC is in negotiations for a 4th bowl as we speak. They are part of discussions with new bowls in St. Louis and Baltimore. Also there is talk of the Independence Bowl opening up with the Big XII leaving that bowl because its small market. The MAC has already played 1 time in the Independence and the SEC respects MAC football as they want nothing to do with CUSA or the Sun Belt.

And I've long said that 4 bowl tie-ins is about right for the MAC. I like the flexibility of placing a 5th school in an at-large bowl or BCS. CUSA is retarded with agreements in 7 bowls (Liberty, GMAC, NO, FT Worth, Hawaii, Houston, Papa Johns). The point of bowls for a mid major is to ensure your top teams are showcased. Its not to put every school that you can in a bowl game like a BCS conference.

The Sunbelt is adding a bowl in 2009, just in time for WKU.

Which bowl is this?

Kit-Cat Wrote:

Krocker Krapp Wrote:

Kit-Cat Wrote:If you want to look at an outlier in this conference look at Temple on the East Coast playing in a 70,000 seat stadium. They would be a better fit in CUSA, geographically it makes about as much sense as the MAC.

How would Temple be a better fit for CUSA? That is a Southern league with all of its members located far below the Mason-Dixon Line.

I was thinking more in terms of many CUSA schools having large stadiums like Rice, UAB, and Tulane with most of the others 40k+

Temple is pretty much the same distance to ECU and Marshall as it is to Buffalo and Ohio.

I could see CUSA a league where they'd be willing to put their basketball. As far as exposure and tradition CUSA is fairly equal with A-10 basketball. Memphis, UAB, and Tulsa have done a lot over the years in the tourney.

The MAC is more like the CAA in basketball. It usually puts 2-3 teams in the post season but almost never anyone top 25.

What about the distance from Philadelphia to El Paso, Houston, Dallas, Tulsa, New Orleans, Memphis, and Birmingham? Temple is trying to, perhaps, make its football program attractive to a post-split Big East. Wasting money on trips halfway across the country is not the wisest use of their cashflow.

For the time being, what Temple is doing will suit its purposes, football in the MAC and everything else in the A-10. It would make no sense to leave the history and tradition of the A-10 to join a league that might reformulate in a few years. No one knows what future Big East changes might happen.

After that issue is solved, once and for all, then perhaps there will be some finality about what Temple wants to do. If the Owls do not get into a post-split Big East or maybe the ACC, replacing Boston College, then they could end up joining the MAC in all sports or, possibly, continuing the status quo.