CSNbbs

Full Version: So, what if the MAC split
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Carried from another thread, where I posted a potential Eastern Conference of:
Buffalo, Temple, UMass, Akron or Kent, Ohio, Miami, ECU, Marshall, Army...

And I threw out these reasons

1. I'm not sure the Ohio schools do like being in the same conference, and an amicable split might be good.

2. The league I suggested still maintains quite a few rivalries and reasonable travel costs.

3. The league I mentioned has only two CUSA stragglers. Most of the rest actually have MAC ties. No CUSA block of schools is interesting to anyone but LaTech and SBC teams (who I'm not sure are that interested).

I think leagues of >12 teams are too unwieldy, and not as engaging. That's why divisions matter. But for the current MAC, divisions w/ mostly teams from one state don't spur interest in a broad viewing audience. Stability? Yes. But our blessing is also our curse.

I actually think a break up at this time might be good...with a true Alliance of two conferences as a result.


Any thoughts. There is always expansion talk, but would dividing the MAC into two Alliance conferences (details TBD) be beneficial?
I dunno, Torch. I'm not sure that this new conference would generate much more in the way of TV revenue, etc., and I'd hate to leave behind playing BG and some of the other MAC schools. What would happen to those other MAC programs BTW if this scenario played out?

There supposedly is no "love lost" between Marshall and many MAC schools (administrators), but I don't know how much of that is still in existence (except among the fan bases). We (Miami) recently signed up to play home and aways with Marshal and so has OU. I would love to have ECU in a conference with us, but they are a school with a 50K stadium averaing almost that much in attendance...I can't see their interest in this league unless they had no options..probably same for Marshall just out of pride (I don't think they'd like to slink back to the MAC although NIU did it once already).
Hey guys, I'm new over here so not sure if you guys care for outsiders posting or not. If you do care then I apologize and feel free to remove my post.

I as a Marshall fan do not want to go back to the MAC at all. Not because none of the MAC schools are good, but because it's too close together. I wouldn't mind a new conference with some MAC schools + So. Miss, ECU, and whoever else. Only thing I don't want is to be in a conference where half of it is in the same state.
There should be a requirement for realignment posts: The realigner should have to calculate the costs of flying all the non-revenue teams to the new outposts he suggests creating. You do understand this about more than just football and men's basketball, right? You have any idea what it would cost to fly the women's soccer team to East Neckolina?

UB should have ZERO interest in leaving the MAC or the MAC adding teams a thousand miles away.
(02-08-2012 05:23 PM)zibby Wrote: [ -> ]There should be a requirement for realignment posts: The realigner should have to calculate the costs of flying all the non-revenue teams to the new outposts he suggests creating. You do understand this about more than just football and men's basketball, right? You have any idea what it would cost to fly the women's soccer team to East Neckolina?

UB should have ZERO interest in leaving the MAC or the MAC adding teams a thousand miles away.

Who did I add 1000 miles away? I put Buffalo in w/ Army, UMass, and Kent or Akron (all close). Plus they still keep Temple, Ohio and Miami, which they already play. Adding Marshall isn't that far. ECU is the only one that is far, that's not much different than NIU. (Grow to 12 and it would be N and S and you'd cut travel!)

For the Great Lakes side, you have OH, MI, IN and IL covered, and could add WKU, SIU and/or IL State, as people are wont to propose here.

To address FlyHawk's question...I'm not proposing Marshall to the MAC, I'm proposing Marshall to a new conference that draws from the MAC.

eCK- Losing rivalries is an issue, especially since Miami is committed to playing Cincy annually. But, you still have Ohio and Kent/Akron. You then only miss BG, Toledo, BSU, and Akron/Kent...and you don't play them every year now anyway.

Call it Great Lakes Alliance and East Coast Alliance Conferences, and like the proposed CUSA-MWC alliance, they play a championship game. Then some of the older match-ups would happen too.
That's true, so long as there were only 7 or 8 conference games, Miami could still play BG, BSU, UT every other year.
Do any of the core 12 MAC members resent the presence of the other members, and would separate from them if they could?

It seems like part of what keeps the MAC together is the lack of an alpha dog to dictate terms to the others, like BYU used to in the old WAC or UMiami in the old Big East. None of you can threaten the others with any force behind it.
(02-08-2012 08:36 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote: [ -> ]Do any of the core 12 MAC members resent the presence of the other members, and would separate from them if they could?

Toledo is rabidly jealous of BG, but it's more envy instead of resentment.

I don't think there's a big drive to separate. I'm offering the opinion that it's something conference members should consider. I don't remember it being proposed previously.
(02-08-2012 08:39 PM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-08-2012 08:36 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote: [ -> ]Do any of the core 12 MAC members resent the presence of the other members, and would separate from them if they could?

Toledo is rabidly jealous of BG, but it's more envy instead of resentment.

I don't think there's a big drive to separate. I'm offering the opinion that it's something conference members should consider. I don't remember it being proposed previously.

Huh? Your comments continue to amaze me.
(02-08-2012 08:36 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote: [ -> ]Do any of the core 12 MAC members resent the presence of the other members, and would separate from them if they could?

It seems like part of what keeps the MAC together is the lack of an alpha dog to dictate terms to the others, like BYU used to in the old WAC or UMiami in the old Big East. None of you can threaten the others with any force behind it.

I will speak as an Ohio fan. Ohio founded the MAC and has always pushed for new membership as a bulwark against OSU-Michigan

Ohio backed Kent State for membership when it was the equivalent of a SUNY football school. Like Buffalo lack of weather and sport culture required the school years to come along athletically. Kent State had a credit war with Ohio State as OSU didn't want competition of a major state university in NE Ohio.

The 4 corner Ohio schools (Ohio, BG, Kent, Miami) have always tried to join forces against OSU on political matters. There is concern by all of these schools that leaving the MAC would reduce in-state publicity and the conference basketball tournament is in Cleveland.

The school that has historically ruffled a lot of MAC feathers outside of Marshall has been The Eastern Michigan University. EMU has a long streak of futility in football and no fan support. In the early 80's the MAC was close to ousting EMU and when the vote didn't happen Northern Illinois left the MAC. Every 10 years or so there is a push to drop EMU but for one reason or another it doesn't happen.
Kit Cat's comments amaze me too. NIU didn't leave the MAC because the conference wouldn't kick EMU out. That's funny stuff man!
(02-08-2012 07:22 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]That's true, so long as there were only 7 or 8 conference games, Miami could still play BG, BSU, UT every other year.

If you really want to be playing BG, Ball State and UT every year then in my opinion you should just stay in the MAC.

The only way I see a move for a MAC school making a substantial difference is if a MAC school could get into the Alliance. The Alliance for hoops would be a step up, usually a 3 to 4 bid league.

Any of these other ideas like a MAC split, MAC-SBC hybrid or whatever are not going to produce enough value to be worth the hassle of setting up.
At first, I didn't like this idea. After mulling it over, I would be for an 16 to 20 team MAC, whereby you would have an Eastern League and a Western League. Lots of different scheduling scenarios and some of them just might work.

I am against a "clean" breakup of the conference. The MAC is the last long-standing Division 1 college athletic association that hasn't let greed dictate policy.
(02-08-2012 09:47 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote: [ -> ]Kit Cat's comments amaze me too. NIU didn't leave the MAC because the conference wouldn't kick EMU out. That's funny stuff man!

I'm serious. Both EMU and Kent State were up for a boot led by what is now mostly MAC schools. If it would have happened that would have made for a solid 8 team football conference.

NIU, WMU, CMU, Ball State, Toledo, BGSU, Miami, Ohio

It didn't happen. Kent State became a power in basketball and EMU upgraded its football facilities to some of the best in the MAC.
If you split the MAC the STO contract isn't as attractive. With Toledo, BGSU, Miami, Ohio, Akron and Kent State you have six teams that bring in a decent audience in Cleveland which is the core market of the MAC along with WMU and CMU. Those eight are not gonna leave each other. NIU, Buffalo, UMass and Temple are more for TV sets for ESPN that conference rivalries. Ball State and EMU really aren't gonna draw much themselves but compliment travel costs in the conference due to their location. Marshall was more a TV set type add due to their following in D-AA championship games. Buffalo has become more connected to KSU, Ohio and Akron because of hoops. Temple and UMass would have the least loyalty to the core MAC schools. NIU once pulled a Marshall in leaving the MAC, but realized the mistake they made and coming back to the MAC was the best decision they ever made and won't make the same mistake twice like Marshall did. Now Marshall with CUSA falling part is well on its way back to the southern conference where they were before they re-joined the MAC in hoops and likely becomes and independent in football.
(02-08-2012 09:53 PM)Okie Chippewa Wrote: [ -> ]At first, I didn't like this idea. After mulling it over, I would be for an 16 to 20 team MAC, whereby you would have an Eastern League and a Western League. Lots of different scheduling scenarios and some of them just might work.

I am against a "clean" breakup of the conference. The MAC is the last long-standing Division 1 college athletic association that hasn't let greed dictate policy.

Hmmm....Maybe it would make sense for the MAC to go down your line of thinking and offer other "MAC like" schools to join in the South with the idea that they would fit into the MAC model.

MAC South: La Tech, Ark State, WKU, MTSU, Marshall, So Miss, UAB ECU, Ohio, Miami

MAC North: NIU, Ball State, WMU, CMU, EMU, BG, Toledo, Akron, Kent, Buffalo

Move the MAC Championship from Detroit to Nashville to support a more central geography.

It might not be an ideal situation for USM, UAB, ECU, La Tech ect..to have to go to Cleveland for a men's basketball tournament but at least its at a neutral site.

With 20 schools the MAC could offer a lot of inventory and greatly increase the TV payout. It wouldn't be as high per school as CUSA but it would be close. Travel costs would be way lower than what the Alliance could offer.
(02-09-2012 12:42 AM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote: [ -> ]If you split the MAC the STO contract isn't as attractive. With Toledo, BGSU, Miami, Ohio, Akron and Kent State you have six teams that bring in a decent audience in Cleveland

Now that's a good point. New TV contracts would be needed. There's always uncertainty w/ change, I'm not sure this turns into a problem, since both Alliance members can offer significant intra-Ohio games, and plenty of games involving at least one team from OH.

Quote: NIU once pulled a Marshall in leaving the MAC, but realized the mistake

But I'm not talking about a one or two team exodus. I'm talking about a major restructuring that can allow growth and better allocation of resources.

OkieChippewa Wrote:At first, I didn't like this idea. After mulling it over, I would be for an 16 to 20 team MAC, whereby you would have an Eastern League and a Western League. Lots of different scheduling scenarios and some of them just might work.

I am against a "clean" breakup of the conference. The MAC is the last long-standing Division 1 college athletic association that hasn't let greed dictate policy.

Another good point about the longevity of the MAC. However, w/ a megaconference, I worry about further marginalization from the majors. Take bball for instance, does the MAC still only get 1 AQ, even if it's 20 teams? I'm sure the powers would love to see a conf of 20-24 teams only get one automatic bid.

That's one reason why I'd like to see it as 2 conferences, allied together.

And it plays into other sports, like wrestling. The way I divided it, neither conference could officially sponsor wrestling, but an allied situation could.
(02-08-2012 08:36 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote: [ -> ]Do any of the core 12 MAC members resent the presence of the other members, and would separate from them if they could?


Certain posters that are fans of "The Flagship" university seem to be very afraid of Eastern Michigan University for some unknown reason. It seems like every delusional thread about conference realignment has them dropping EMU from the conference.

I was under the impression that this conference was about more than just football and basketball and why they want to kick out a conference power in many other sports is beyond many of us.
(02-09-2012 08:42 AM)DrTorch Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-09-2012 12:42 AM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote: [ -> ]If you split the MAC the STO contract isn't as attractive. With Toledo, BGSU, Miami, Ohio, Akron and Kent State you have six teams that bring in a decent audience in Cleveland

Now that's a good point. New TV contracts would be needed. There's always uncertainty w/ change, I'm not sure this turns into a problem, since both Alliance members can offer significant intra-Ohio games, and plenty of games involving at least one team from OH.

Quote: NIU once pulled a Marshall in leaving the MAC, but realized the mistake

But I'm not talking about a one or two team exodus. I'm talking about a major restructuring that can allow growth and better allocation of resources.

OkieChippewa Wrote:At first, I didn't like this idea. After mulling it over, I would be for an 16 to 20 team MAC, whereby you would have an Eastern League and a Western League. Lots of different scheduling scenarios and some of them just might work.

I am against a "clean" breakup of the conference. The MAC is the last long-standing Division 1 college athletic association that hasn't let greed dictate policy.

Another good point about the longevity of the MAC. However, w/ a megaconference, I worry about further marginalization from the majors. Take bball for instance, does the MAC still only get 1 AQ, even if it's 20 teams? I'm sure the powers would love to see a conf of 20-24 teams only get one automatic bid.

That's one reason why I'd like to see it as 2 conferences, allied together.

And it plays into other sports, like wrestling. The way I divided it, neither conference could officially sponsor wrestling, but an allied situation could.

Torch I think what you aren't looking at is from an all-sport perspective larger conferences are generally better deals since you have so many schools to work with.

I would think that a split MAC would be of less value than the sum of its parts. Think of sports like wrestling....could the eastern group of Temple, UMass, Buffalo, Ohio, Akron ect. have enough schools to field the sport?
(02-09-2012 09:04 AM)Pulltown Falcon Wrote: [ -> ]I was under the impression that this conference was about more than just football and basketball and why they want to kick out a conference power in many other sports is beyond many of us.

Because their colors are too similar. Simple as that.
Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's