CSNbbs

Full Version: UMass to the MAC Update – Or Not
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Everyone in the know has been very non-committal about UMass coming to the MAC for the 2012 season. In fact, they have flat out changed the subject on me as quickly as they could.

The only fact I can pick up is that this is contingent upon Temple staying the league as a football only member and that decision hasn’t been made by the Owls.

Bottom line – no real update and there doesn’t look to be any sort of announcement in April as originally expected.
Is it true Temple is not actually signed through 2013? That it was agreed apon but not signed?
Is there a extension to Temple on the table beyond 2013?
If Temple hasn't signed then the MAC should amend it to all or nothing and then ask UMass to do the same. FBS Football is the MAC's only leverage. MAC has both these school by the balls. Neither is ever getting into the Big East. MAC needs to make its power play. Add these two and the recruiting for the rest of the MAC will improve.
OhioBobcatJohn, fully understand your view that is shared by a number of posters. As another poster has said, "we are all pawns out side AQ conferences".

Hope the Championship game is a good one, which I'll watch tomorrow. Tonight was corn beef and cabbage at the French club and heading out to Wendell.

- Take care and betwixted on tonights game. It's best for the MAC to have Kent State win and have a higher seed, but do remember the Zips NIT game a few years ago.
I don't get to see much MAC basketball here in Mass but that was a great championship game
I'm getting to the point with this Temple/UMass discussion to simply say enough is enough. If they really don't want to play in the MAC then they can put their football teams somewhere else.

It was Chryst who got us into this Temple mess which has done nothing more than fustrate league scheduling. I think it would have made sense to have a partial schedule arrangement with Temple of 4 MAC teams a year but to give Temple the right to take our bowls and awards for themselves was not a mutually positive move.

If the MAC does want to do something to improve our league, one way they could do it is by doing a better job of balancing the basketball divisions. Miami University is located further west than all but 3 schools (NIU, WMU, Ball State) and should go in the West division. Then bring EMU over to the East where its generally lighter in football stength.

West: NIU, BSU, WMU, CMU, UT, MU
East: EMU, BGSU, KSU, UA, UB, OU

Permanent crossovers should be UT/BGSU, UT/UA, MU/BGSU, MU/OU, EMU/CMU, EMU/WMU. UT/BGSU/MU/EMU would all have 2 of their non-conference games defined every year for a consistent schedule as a tradeoff for the split geography.

This set up would potentially allow for BG/UT, or CMU/EMU football title games. Miami to the west in hoops would largely balance the two basketball divisions in strength.

The MAC doesn't really need to worry about TV markets located in the highly populated midwest. TV money will come anyways as time moves on. CUSA and the MWC have left ESPN. The WAC and SBC are no longer competition. The Big East may be headed to Fox. Eventually this is going to open up some room for the MAC.
(03-13-2011 01:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote: [ -> ]I'm getting to the point with this Temple/UMass discussion to simply say enough is enough. If they really don't want to play in the MAC then they can put their football teams somewhere else.

It was Chryst who got us into this Temple mess which has done nothing more than fustrate league scheduling. I think it would have made sense to have a partial schedule arrangement with Temple of 4 MAC teams a year but to give Temple the right to take our bowls and awards for themselves was not a mutually positive move.

If the MAC does want to do something to improve our league, one way they could do it is by doing a better job of balancing the basketball divisions. Miami University is located further west than all but 3 schools (NIU, WMU, Ball State) and should go in the West division. Then bring EMU over to the East where its generally lighter in football stength.

West: NIU, BSU, WMU, CMU, UT, MU
East: EMU, BGSU, KSU, UA, UB, OU

Permanent crossovers should be UT/BGSU, UT/UA, MU/BGSU, MU/OU, EMU/CMU, EMU/WMU. UT/BGSU/MU/EMU would all have 2 of their non-conference games defined every year for a consistent schedule as a tradeoff for the split geography.

This set up would potentially allow for BG/UT, or CMU/EMU football title games. Miami to the west in hoops would largely balance the two basketball divisions in strength.

The MAC doesn't really need to worry about TV markets located in the highly populated midwest. TV money will come anyways as time moves on. CUSA and the MWC have left ESPN. The WAC and SBC are no longer competition. The Big East may be headed to Fox. Eventually this is going to open up some room for the MAC.

Go away.
After reading the Big East board and this thread, it sounds like a C-USA school is likely to go to the Big East and when Villanova is ready the Big East will move to 12 schools. Temple will move to C-USA (thus not committing to MAC). UMASS will NOT get its invite then and the MAC will be back at 12.
(03-14-2011 07:56 AM)mpurdy22 Wrote: [ -> ]After reading the Big East board and this thread, it sounds like a C-USA school is likely to go to the Big East and when Villanova is ready the Big East will move to 12 schools. Temple will move to C-USA (thus not committing to MAC). UMASS will NOT get its invite then and the MAC will be back at 12.

Would that C-USA school be UCF? 03-shhhh

I hope the MAC doesn't have to go back to 12 teams.

I'm a strong believer of expanding the footprint eastward, as it is the ONLY direction which really makes sense for the MAC with nothing feasible in IL or west of IL or north of IL.

Moving south doesn't really work well as we learned from Marshall.

We learned from Marshall not to add a school (and state) which is not compatible with the MAC.

I never believed Marshall fans felt comfortable with a bunch of midwest universities. They really wanted to be part of a southern conference.

Even the slow-moving Big Ten has, in the last 20 years, added a Pa school and now a heatland state (NE).

Biggest problem for the BT is naming their divisions. 05-stirthepot

Instead of east and west they have leaders and legends, or laggards, as I like to call it. 03-nutkick
Not good for UMASS..
"It was Chryst who got us into this Temple mess"

He also is the one who lined up Western Kentucky to join the MAC for all sports when Marshall left for C-USA. That deal got nixed at the last second when the presidents of Miami (O) and an interim president from EMU voted 'no.' Imagine WKU in the MAC for all sports, especially for b-ball.

It was also Rick Chryst who lined up scheduling arrangements with Army & Navy that many MAC teams do not even take advantage of along with b-ball dates with Temple that several MAC schools continue to shy away from and finalized the contracts for the MAC to be secondary partners with several bowls so that we have at least three bowl bids every year and up to five if opportunities present itself.

Give me Rick over the current guy any day of week !!!
Nick in clev?

What do you think will happen.. Will UMASS move up, or will temple screw us....What is the trickle affect..
No clue Malves 21; I spoke with several MAC staff last week who usually know what's coming down the pipe, none of them did on this subject. My assumption is that this decision is being made in a vacume by only one or two in the MAC front office and a few of the current MAC presidents. Basically, this will be a classic 'wait & see.' Where I was 80% confident this would occur a few weeks ago by the 2012 football season I am now less than 50% confident that UMass will come to the MAC at all.
(03-14-2011 10:00 AM)Nick in Cleveland Wrote: [ -> ]No clue Malves 21; I spoke with several MAC staff last week who usually know what's coming down the pipe, none of them did on this subject. My assumption is that this decision is being made in a vacume by only one or two in the MAC front office and a few of the current MAC presidents. Basically, this will be a classic 'wait & see.' Where I was 80% confident this would occur a few weeks ago by the 2012 football season I am now less than 50% confident that UMass will come to the MAC at all.

'Nick in Cleveland':

If Vill moves up and goes to the BE, does Temple stay put..
(03-14-2011 12:04 PM)malves21 Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-14-2011 10:00 AM)Nick in Cleveland Wrote: [ -> ]No clue Malves 21; I spoke with several MAC staff last week who usually know what's coming down the pipe, none of them did on this subject. My assumption is that this decision is being made in a vacume by only one or two in the MAC front office and a few of the current MAC presidents. Basically, this will be a classic 'wait & see.' Where I was 80% confident this would occur a few weeks ago by the 2012 football season I am now less than 50% confident that UMass will come to the MAC at all.

'Nick in Cleveland':

If Vill moves up and goes to the BE, does Temple stay put..

You're never going to get a good answer on that, from anyone, because there is no way to know. You can't listen to fans on this you need to hear from a decision maker at Temple but I doubt thats going to happen.

If Temple wants all in for Conference USA and there is a slot then its hard to see Temple not going. There is an outside chance that is UCF goes CUSA will try to slid in FIU or FAU to fill their Florida problem but chances are Temple gets dibs.

Then the question is this: Does Temple move *all* of their sports to CUSA. Hoops, Football, Swimming, ...,... The payoff in football & hoops revenue quickly gets eaten away when you send your track team to El Paso..

If the MAC demands all in, I have moved into that camp, I would say 3:1 temple goes to C-USA. Better bowls and a multi bid conference may preserve them.

UMass of course is not going to get into FBS this time around unless (1) Temple stays/comes all in or (2) the ncaa does some rule changing.

--

This nightmare has convinced me the people screaming all in or GTFO are right.
(03-14-2011 01:53 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: [ -> ]If Temple wants all in for Conference USA and there is a slot then its hard to see Temple not going. There is an outside chance that is UCF goes CUSA will try to slid in FIU or FAU to fill their Florida problem but chances are Temple gets dibs.

One of the CUSA insiders has mentioned that Temple is CUSAs #1 target, and rightfully so as they have the best FB/BB teams and the best market. WKU is #2 on their list.

The question is would Temple leave the lucrative A10 basketball fund behind? The A10 received 6.4 million in BB, while CUSA brought in 8.5 million. When looking at TV deals, CUSA is making 14 million a year while the A10 is making nothing. The numbers are good enough for Temple to make the all sports move and you have to look at how much better CUSA would be in BB if Temple joined.

There are a couple of ways of getting to CUSA for Temple. One would be if UCF left as speculated. Another would be if CUSA decided to push for 14 members. Temple is waiting on the BE news and from there to see what CUSA wants to do.
(03-14-2011 07:56 AM)mpurdy22 Wrote: [ -> ]After reading the Big East board and this thread, it sounds like a C-USA school is likely to go to the Big East and when Villanova is ready the Big East will move to 12 schools. Temple will move to C-USA (thus not committing to MAC). UMASS will NOT get its invite then and the MAC will be back at 12.

I don't really see how staying at 12 is a bad thing. The MAC has a footprint advantage either way over the other non-AQs. An interesting way to look at the non-AQs is to what markets they cover at a secondary level after the BCS.

PAC: MWC (5), WAC (3)
Big XII: CUSA (5), WAC (2), SBC (1)
SEC: SBC (9), CUSA (5), WAC (1)
ACC: CUSA (3), SBC (2)
Big Ten: MAC (11)
Big East: MAC (11), SBC (4), CUSA (3)

From the standpoint of TV bidding the WAC is going to have the most trouble dispersed over 3 BCS conferences to trying to pick up a TV deal.

The MWC/CUSA as we know have the best TV deals. To a great degree those two leagues have been making 1 million a year per football team from their contracts since the early 90's as part of the CFA (the SEC and ACC were making the same level of money then too). They have salary history, a tradition of earning more money than the MAC.

With MWC/CUSA off of ESPN, the WAC badly damaged, and the SBC with medicore product there is an opportunity for the MAC to step up in either exposure or cash. The currrent MAC deal is set to expire in 2016 which is a good time following the reorganization of TV networks (e.g. comcast merger).

The MAC has the lockdown on midweek football. I could see the MAC try and use it to its advantage and increase money and exposures. The league won't be able to match MWC or CUSA in the money department but should move gradually closer to those levels.
As far as I know, the major pieces of negotiation are over and the MAC and Temple/UMass are just sending drafts of contracts back and forth, trying to work out the minor details. UMass also has a lot of housekeeping to do on its end before it can go public with its FBS intentions.

All-sports membership is not on the table. It is an impossibility right now. Nevermind the drop in prestige between the basketball conferences, there's the vastly increased travel costs, the loss of millions in A10 tournament revenue, the A10 exit fee, and the MAC requirement that all members must sponsor women's volleyball. UMass does not have women's volleyball. We do not have a facility for women's volleyball. It would cost us millions to comply with this requirement. There would also be fees involved in getting those sports of ours that the MAC doesn't sponsor into other conferences as affiliate members. This all works to completely blow up our financial justification for moving football to the MAC. If we can't keep the MAC move relatively cost-neutral, it's simply not going to happen.

What the MAC needs to be thinking about is how they can parlay Temple and UMass's partial membership into acquiring more eastern members. All of the best eastern FCS programs are going to be watching UMass intently. They couldn't use UConn as a model because they had a golden ticket straight to the BCS, but if UMass makes this work, other state flagships like Delaware and good basketball schools like Old Dominion are going to come knocking on your door. Get at least two more good eastern universities that everyone wants to be associated with, and THEN the MAC is much better positioned to backtrack and bring in the largest university in Philadelphia and the state flagship of Massachusetts during the next round of contract negotiations.

But first, you've got to put us in the game. Then we can hold down this end of the bridge over the Appalachian Mountains for you. Then you've got to come over and figure out your next move from there. That's your best chance to bust out of your Ohio/Michigan-shaped prison.
(03-14-2011 07:00 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote: [ -> ]but if UMass makes this work, other state flagships like Delaware and good basketball schools like Old Dominion are going to come knocking on your door.

I have been as supportive as anyone about TU and UMass football only but this whole deal about having to coordinate multiple deals every coupld of years is tiresome.

Why would Old Dominion or Delaware come into the MAC all in if TU and UMass won't. So *if* we make UMass work we have nothing but these headaches to look forward to.

The MAC is at a crossroads right now... Either we are the conference in which decent programs dip their toes or we grow..
I'm with Minuteman.

Temple and UMass are FB only programs and we need to accept them as such.

Not perfect, but it simply isn't realistic for them to bring all sports.

We can't go back to a retrenching 12 team conference.

I believe Temple and UMass are as good fits as we will find.

Hope to have UMass on board soon...

We aren't the Big Ten who can grab a PSU and then choose among NE, maybe Syracuse, maybe Rutgers, maybe Missouri, etc.
Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's