CSNbbs

That's what I am hearing from a very solid source; hope it doesn't turn out that way though. 2013 would be better for the MAC, Big East is pushing hard for an immediate Temple entry. We'll see.

Are you hearing about a larger buyout if Temple leaves early?

(02-26-2012 02:46 PM)Nick in Cleveland Wrote: [ -> ]That's what I am hearing from a very solid source; hope it doesn't turn out that way though. 2013 would be better for the MAC, Big East is pushing hard for an immediate Temple entry. We'll see.

Also word that some Big East ooc opponents are shifting around their schedules with South Florida to accommodate Temple coming in.

When it comes to any school coming/going, I say the sooner the better. It's not that fun for everyone involved to have to go through "lame duck" seasons. It'll cause some scheduling headaches, but if two parties are deead set on having a divorce, no need to wait an extra 12 months if arrangements can happen now.

I get the impression that Temple's invitation is conditional upon them freeing up their football schedule this season. Fail to do that, and the Big East will no longer be in a hurry to make a decision on them.

(02-26-2012 03:30 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote: [ -> ]When it comes to any school coming/going, I say the sooner the better. It's not that fun for everyone involved to have to go through "lame duck" seasons. It'll cause some scheduling headaches, but if two parties are deead set on having a divorce, no need to wait an extra 12 months if arrangements can happen now.

Ohio's been stuck in a bad marriage for 65 years with Western Michigan.

The schools haven't lived together in the same division for 15 years but are still not legally separated.

(02-26-2012 03:49 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote: [ -> ]I get the impression that Temple's invitation is conditional upon them freeing up their football schedule this season. Fail to do that, and the Big East will no longer be in a hurry to make a decision on them.

That probably explains the delay in official announcement on Temple's status.

LastMinuteman Wrote:
I get the impression that Temple's invitation is conditional upon them freeing up their football schedule this season. Fail to do that, and the Big East will no longer be in a hurry to make a decision on them.

eCK: that gives the MAC leverage to drive a "hard bargain" on exit fees so long as the conference doesn't "overplay" their hand on the matter and then Temple waits 2 years and only has to pay out $2.5MM. Sure like to see the MAC collect $5MM..that's not "chump change" when it comes to the MAC.

(02-26-2012 04:08 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]LastMinuteman Wrote:
I get the impression that Temple's invitation is conditional upon them freeing up their football schedule this season. Fail to do that, and the Big East will no longer be in a hurry to make a decision on them.

eCK: that gives the MAC leverage to drive a "hard bargain" on exit fees so long as the conference doesn't "overplay" their hand on the matter and then Temple waits 2 years and only has to pay out $2.5MM. Sure like to see the MAC collect $5MM..that's not "chump change" when it comes to the MAC.

I think the MAC needs to go with a carrot and stick here...

Let Temple leave now for 2.5 Million with two more payments of 2.5 million over the next couple of years.

(02-26-2012 02:46 PM)Nick in Cleveland Wrote: [ -> ]That's what I am hearing from a very solid source; hope it doesn't turn out that way though. 2013 would be better for the MAC, Big East is pushing hard for an immediate Temple entry. We'll see.

I'm happy for Temple and they will get a good deal, but the rest of the MAC needs to benefit too. So far all of these football-only accomodations and Central Florida deal has been a one-way street.

We don't owe any favors to the screwed up Big East. For this to also benefit the rest of the MAC and not just Temple and BE, than we deserve to be paid LARGE, no scheduling deals (that again only benefits BE), do something smart with the money to rais e the MAC profile and exposure, and end all football-only deals now and no more in the future.

No offense to UMass as their fans have been nice and I want them to stay, but we need to give them the option to commit all-in now, or drop them now. The "all our other sports are too good for the MAC, but please let us use the MAC to launch FBS" attitude does the rest of the MAC no benefit and is a slap in the face. If bringing in 1 or 3 other all-sports teams is found to be beneficial to the whole of the MAC, then that needs to be looked at. Otherwise, let's get back to our core 12 members who actually want to be here.


.

I really like the MAC, but If we get a crap Temple exit deal and keep going down this one-sport only deals where the MAC office doesn't look after the core members than I'd like for Miami to explore moving to the MWC/CUSA. Many fans are tired of this.

Miami is in no position to afford the jump in the athletic budget that such a move would require. They are struggling to keep up with MAC level salaries and facilities for the two main sports, to say nothing of the serious attendance issues they have been having in both sports.

By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

(02-26-2012 04:20 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2012 02:46 PM)Nick in Cleveland Wrote: [ -> ]That's what I am hearing from a very solid source; hope it doesn't turn out that way though. 2013 would be better for the MAC, Big East is pushing hard for an immediate Temple entry. We'll see.

I'm happy for Temple and they will get a good deal, but the rest of the MAC needs to benefit too. So far all of these football-only accomodations and Central Florida deal has been a one-way street.

We don't owe any favors to the screwed up Big East. For this to also benefit the rest of the MAC and not just Temple and BE, than we deserve to be paid LARGE, no scheduling deals (that again only benefits BE), do something smart with the money to rais e the MAC profile and exposure, and end all football-only deals now and no more in the future.

No offense to UMass as their fans have been nice and I want them to stay, but we need to give them the option to commit all-in now, or drop them now. The "all our other sports are too good for the MAC, but please let us use the MAC to launch FBS" attitude does the rest of the MAC no benefit and is a slap in the face. If bringing in 1 or 3 other all-sports teams is found to be beneficial to the whole of the MAC, then that needs to be looked at. Otherwise, let's get back to our core 12 members who actually want to be here.


.

100% agreed. I want UMASS to stay, but only with the intent of being a MAC school. We can add 1 or 3 more east coast schools to accommodate, or break up now and stay friends, maybe see a movie and text each other once in awhile... that kind of a thing.

1) NO MORE FOOTBALL ONLY!
2) NO MORE DIRECTIONAL SCHOOLS!
3) NO MORE OHIO, MICHIGAN, ILLINOIS, INDIANA SCHOOLS, ADD A NEW STATE TO THE MAC MEDIA MARKET!!!

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

I don't think they have much interest either, Miami and Toledo previously turned down CUSA when Cincy left. However, I'd guess MAC schools are largely un-impressed with how things have been handled a couple could be thinking about other options. If the MAC office doesn't make a bold move then who knows how this shakes out going forward. As far as the previous poster mentioning our budget size and attendance, outside of ECU and a few others, as bad as our attendance is it is still not as bad as Nevada, UAB, Tulane etc. And our budget is 3rd in the MAC at $26 million and will be second after Temple leaves. $26 million is in the top half of CUSA. And before the ECU crowd flames this post, I said "explore" not "accept our invitation" and our sports history has beaten just as many BCS ranked teams as yours. Attendance is lacking for us.

I like the MAC, I'm just saying the MAC office needs to step up NOW, because the UT and Ohio and NIU fans are thinking the same thing.

(02-26-2012 05:11 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

I don't think they have much interest either, Miami and Toledo previously turned down CUSA when Cincy left. However, I'd guess MAC schools are largely un-impressed with how things have been handled a couple could be thinking about other options. If the MAC office doesn't make a bold move then who knows how this shakes out going forward. As far as the previous poster mentioning our budget size and attendance, outside of ECU and a few others, as bad as our attendance is it is still not as bad as Nevada, UAB, Tulane etc. And our budget is 3rd in the MAC at $26 million and will be second after Temple leaves. $26 million is in the top half of CUSA. And before the ECU crowd flames this post, I said "explore" not "accept our invitation" and our sports history has beaten just as many BCS ranked teams as yours. Attendance is lacking for us.

I like the MAC, I'm just saying the MAC office needs to step up NOW, because the UT and Ohio and NIU fans are thinking the same thing.

+1
I think we would leave with Toledo, Miami & Ohio. Though I am not sure that the TV alliance would want to invite 3 schools in the same state even if they are in 3 totally different TV markets.

(02-26-2012 05:11 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

I don't think they have much interest either, Miami and Toledo previously turned down CUSA when Cincy left. However, I'd guess MAC schools are largely un-impressed with how things have been handled a couple could be thinking about other options. If the MAC office doesn't make a bold move then who knows how this shakes out going forward. As far as the previous poster mentioning our budget size and attendance, outside of ECU and a few others, as bad as our attendance is it is still not as bad as Nevada, UAB, Tulane etc. And our budget is 3rd in the MAC at $26 million and will be second after Temple leaves. $26 million is in the top half of CUSA. And before the ECU crowd flames this post, I said "explore" not "accept our invitation" and our sports history has beaten just as many BCS ranked teams as yours. Attendance is lacking for us.

Attendance is not as important anymore as budget and overall university money.

Take a look at SMU? Do they have very many football and basketball fans? How did they afford to pay June Jones 2 million dollars? Answer: they have money.

The fact that Miami isn't spending money on coaches is probably because they don't want to rather than can't if necessary.

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

Why go to the alliance when the MAC could have everything the alliance has WITHOUT the high level of travel cost.

MAC-18

MAC Atlantic: Buffalo, SBU, UMass, Delaware, JMU, ODU
MAC East: Toledo, BG, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Miami
MAC West: NIU, IL State, Ball State, WMU, CMU, EMU

The MAC can run a 4 team playoff with 3 division winners and a wild card, have 3-4 NCAA bids and 5-6 bowl tie-ins. All of this without resorting to ridiculous travel required by the alliance.

(02-26-2012 05:33 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

Why go to the alliance when the MAC could have everything the alliance has WITHOUT the high level of travel cost.

MAC-18

MAC Atlantic: Buffalo, SBU, UMass, Delaware, JMU, ODU
MAC East: Toledo, BG, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Miami
MAC West: NIU, IL State, Ball State, WMU, CMU, EMU

The MAC can run a 4 team playoff with 3 division winners and a wild card, have 3-4 NCAA bids and 5-6 bowl tie-ins. All of this without resorting to ridiculous travel required by the alliance.

Not that I think what you're saying is realistic but it is an example of the 'bold' decision making that others were talking about. UB, in the MAC needs Kent/Akron and Ohio. Without them this conference is suddenly not a very nice travel conference.

If something happened to gut the OH contingency I'm not sure if the MAC is worth it for UB, even if that means not being FBS..

(02-26-2012 05:33 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2012 04:49 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]By all accounts, insiders at Miami say that we have no interest in C-USA/MWC or the Alliance or whatever anyway.

Why go to the alliance when the MAC could have everything the alliance has WITHOUT the high level of travel cost.

MAC-18

MAC Atlantic: Buffalo, SBU, UMass, Delaware, JMU, ODU
MAC East: Toledo, BG, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Miami
MAC West: NIU, IL State, Ball State, WMU, CMU, EMU

The MAC can run a 4 team playoff with 3 division winners and a wild card, have 3-4 NCAA bids and 5-6 bowl tie-ins. All of this without resorting to ridiculous travel required by the alliance.

realignment board..... thanks. Everyone with common sense.