CSNbbs

Full Version: The MAC should stay @ 12
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Why is the MAC so content on getting 14 teams ? We are bringing in football only schools that we can build up to eventually exit. It makes no sense. We allowed Temple to survive after their first Big East fiasco.

Stay @ 12 !!
Because UMASS is a good addition to the MAC. We need to find #14.
(03-01-2012 03:10 PM)HuskiemobileMan Wrote: [ -> ]Because UMASS is a good addition to the MAC. We need to find #14.

UMASS wants to join in all sports? When did they make us aware of this?

Otherwise, we are adding a 14th that is football only.

We aren't getting paid enough to be a whore.

I'd rather go with an unbalanced schedule than add another football only school.
(03-01-2012 03:17 PM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-01-2012 03:10 PM)HuskiemobileMan Wrote: [ -> ]Because UMASS is a good addition to the MAC. We need to find #14.

UMASS wants to join in all sports? When did they make us aware of this?

Otherwise, we are adding a 14th that is football only.

We aren't getting paid enough to be a whore.

I'd rather go with an unbalanced schedule than add another football only school.

It's looking like the MAC may get far more than 2.5 Million from Temple. Thats about double our TV contract we not a bad nights work 03-wink

Look I don't know what you do but I am not obsessed with 12. I'd be fine if UMass got invited to the alliance payed us 500K and was on their way. I'd also be ok if we pulled another FB only with the same 2.5 Million / 500K deal that we had with TU and Umass.
Of course the buyout fee is nice. Are we guaranteed that? What stops UMASS from actually joining a conference and giving the 2 years notice and getting out with zero fees?

UMASS is already in the MAC, they might be a good fit for another conference down the road...which may or may not benefit us with an exit fee. My point is, how many schools like Temple have a deep desire and a legit shot at joining a conference like the Big East, Conference USA, or any other alliance that may want them AND has the pockets to write the check? Not very many IMO.
How about Army or Old Dominion?
^amen,

enough "playing the college fantasy football" game
(03-01-2012 03:40 PM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]^amen,

enough "playing the college fantasy football" game

Actually, Army, Northern Iowa or ODU?
(03-01-2012 03:42 PM)FloridaJag Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-01-2012 03:40 PM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]^amen,

enough "playing the college fantasy football" game

Actually, Army, Northern Iowa or ODU?

Was directed at the post above yours. The linked article was good.
(03-01-2012 03:42 PM)FloridaJag Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-01-2012 03:40 PM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]^amen,

enough "playing the college fantasy football" game

Actually, Army, Northern Iowa or ODU?

Personally, I'd be okay with going back to 14 by bringing in an all-sports school. I'd rather have unbalanced divisions in other sports - but then, I'm a football fan so I'm biased.

Army adds a little name recognition but doesn't help us otherwise. And I have to think we've asked them already and they weren't interested. The other 2 for all-sports would be okay. If UMass leaves then I don't think we need to add any more teams.
(03-01-2012 04:27 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-01-2012 03:42 PM)FloridaJag Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-01-2012 03:40 PM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]^amen,

enough "playing the college fantasy football" game

Actually, Army, Northern Iowa or ODU?

Personally, I'd be okay with going back to 14 by bringing in an all-sports school. I'd rather have unbalanced divisions in other sports - but then, I'm a football fan so I'm biased.

Army adds a little name recognition but doesn't help us otherwise. And I have to think we've asked them already and they weren't interested. The other 2 for all-sports would be okay. If UMass leaves then I don't think we need to add any more teams.

If it's Army I'm all in,or any other Academy, otherwise, No. It makes no sense to bring in the one sport schools that have their head out the window looking for another destination. The MAC did pretty well at 12 before thess moves.

We appear to be the Florence Nightingale of college football. We nurse the downtrodden programs back to health and send them on their way to better and greener pastures.
(03-01-2012 03:10 PM)HuskiemobileMan Wrote: [ -> ]Because UMASS is a good addition to the MAC. We need to find #14.

Explain why a football-only school that will leave as soon as they can get in an FBS eastern conference for all sports is a good addition.
In the future, all sports memberships offers only or stand pat!
Being from the A10, we constantly see teams leave and we bring in new ones. Leaving for a BCS conference is a compliment that you have a strong non BCS league. (In the A10 proper we lost Villanova, Rutgers, Pittsburg, West Virginia, Penn State, Virginia Tech, and soon Temple and including football add UConn.)

So there are three main choices, stay Mid America at 12 and accept being second rate not only BCS-AQ conferences but to others as the old CUSA. Do you expand the footprint into major markets with teams with big upside and useful for MAC brand recognitions and money down the road. Or do you consider teams in an expand footprint that have some upside, that are not attractive to the BCS-AQ conferences as JMU and UD.

Personally hope we stay for a long time, but we have some upside risk for a BCS conference. Think ODU would be here for a visit, so 15 seems to be the smartest number with JMU and UD.

It’s a healthy discussion and flame away.
(03-01-2012 03:28 PM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]UMASS is already in the MAC, they might be a good fit for another conference down the road...which may or may not benefit us with an exit fee. My point is, how many schools like Temple have a deep desire and a legit shot at joining a conference like the Big East, Conference USA, or any other alliance that may want them AND has the pockets to write the check? Not very many IMO.

The biggest indicator of whether a school is Big East worthy appears to be athletic budget.

Temple has a 30 million dollar athletic budget, spending 10 million alone on football a few million dollars more than any other MAC school in the sport.

After Temple, East Carolina is spending 30 million on athletics and plans to expand its stadium to 65,000 seats.

Every school in the Big East either has a 50,000 seat stadium, plans to expand to 50k, or easy access to an NFL stadium (Cincinnati fits this example).

Interestingly, UNLV just released plans for a new 60,000 seat on campus stadium that will more readily meet the Big East's requirements.
14 is great if they are all sports and a good fit. UMASS + one more school out that way for all sports, with $2-4 mil buyouts is cool. No more FB only, no UNI, no ISU. Solid schools in/with decent/new markets please. Army, ODU are cool, Marshal... James Madison?
(03-01-2012 05:34 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote: [ -> ]In the future, all sports memberships offers only or stand pat!

Even as a traditional fan of the football only relationship, I'm beginning to agree more and more that the MAC should require all sports and quite honestly that might be what future members actually want.

It will be interesting to see what happens with the alliance. Reaching out to UMass sounds fairly logical, especially in light of their state flagship status and NFL stadium to play home games.

I would like to see the MAC if UMass is gone go back to 14 with JMU and ASU to provide additional football power and attendance to the MAC East that is desperately needed AND both schools taken as a pair are close enough to the MAC footprint to make sense from an all-sport perspective.
(03-01-2012 07:02 PM)Steve1981 Wrote: [ -> ]So there are three main choices, stay Mid America at 12 and accept being second rate not only BCS-AQ conferences but to others as the old CUSA. It’s a healthy discussion and flame away.

So UMass is going to change the significance of MAC football ?

Temple was horrible in the MAC and only had 3 decent years against the lesser East. If they were in the West they would've been buried the whole time.

And Temple was in a bigger market than UMass and had a much better team and foundation than UMass. Many come in with loud mouths to leave with their tail between their legs wimpering. I imagine you will follow course. The MAC is very good football but will never be a BCS/AQ conference even with your Might Minutemen entering.

That being said, UMass, if they get any good, would have a better chance at the Big East to be invited than would Temple as there is no state competition for membership, unlike Temple and Nova. In addition there is no college football in the Ex Yankee Conferance area, save UConn (who got their hats handed to them the last 2 years by the MAC).
Not to "thread-jack", but in talking about Temple's impact (or lack thereof) in the MAC in football, did you guys realize that UCF was winless and dead last in the MAC in football their last year in the conference, and immediately went to a contender in C-USA the following year? The MAC got nuthn' outta the UCF experiment other than to have to endure a slew of cocky UCF fans who constantly dissed on the MAC (and now on C-USA as they plan their next exit). I see some of the same sentiments now on the Temple board (e.g. "thank God" we're getting outta the MAC, etc etc.)
Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's