Any word or good rumors about a replacement for Temple for FB only to match up with UMass in the MAC for 14 teams in the Conference. I read where James Madison took their name off the MAC and WAC lists this past week and that they will remain at the D1AA level for the time being. Army would be a great FB only add if the MAC could convince them to join. They could be competitive in the the MAC as they schedule a lot of MAC teams now. This would give UMass an Eastern travel partner with a NYC market and allow them to leave their less competitive BB and Olympic teams in the Patriot League. An eight game MAC schedule would leave Army with their Commander and Chief games with Navy and Air Force, and two more games to schedule Nationally with other schools and / or at least one game to schedule with a local D1AA team.
I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
Please stop with the "travel partner" idea. You are not alone in throwing out this fallacy, but why and how would two football teams travel together anywhere? We have quite a few MAC teams in clos proximity to each other (KSU-Akron, BG-UT, Miami-BSU, etc. ) and they have never travelled together anywhere. There is no such thing as travel partners in football.
(05-27-2012 09:15 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]Please stop with the "travel partner" idea. You are not alone in throwing out this fallacy, but why and how would two football teams travel together anywhere? We have quite a few MAC teams in clos proximity to each other (KSU-Akron, BG-UT, Miami-BSU, etc. ) and they have never travelled together anywhere. There is no such thing as travel partners in football.
Okay, maybe not travel together, but what about sleep together? They could take own transportation but share hotel rooms!
:rolltide:
(05-27-2012 09:15 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]Please stop with the "travel partner" idea. You are not alone in throwing out this fallacy, but why and how would two football teams travel together anywhere? We have quite a few MAC teams in clos proximity to each other (KSU-Akron, BG-UT, Miami-BSU, etc. ) and they have never travelled together anywhere. There is no such thing as travel partners in football.
According to Big East fans, San Diego State was added to the BE to be a travel partner for Boise.
The "travel partner" concept has evolved from having 2 schools in the same market, same state, same time zone.....and now its about 2 schools in the same hemisphere.
(05-27-2012 08:56 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ]I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
I think the #14 should be split 4 games a piece between Army and BYU.
With Army-BYU as possibles, there is no doubt the MAC would be able to land a coveted 4th bowl tie-in.
1) Liberty (talking the bowl here not the school)
2) Mobile
3) Hawaii
4) Detroit
Army already plays a partial MAC schedule as it is so why can't they be adjusted in as the #14?
(05-27-2012 09:55 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 09:15 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]Please stop with the "travel partner" idea. You are not alone in throwing out this fallacy, but why and how would two football teams travel together anywhere? We have quite a few MAC teams in clos proximity to each other (KSU-Akron, BG-UT, Miami-BSU, etc. ) and they have never travelled together anywhere. There is no such thing as travel partners in football.
According to Big East fans, San Diego State was added to the BE to be a travel partner for Boise.
As we are all painfully aware of, there are a lot of fans that have no idea what they are talking about.
(05-27-2012 11:26 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 09:55 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 09:15 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]Please stop with the "travel partner" idea. You are not alone in throwing out this fallacy, but why and how would two football teams travel together anywhere? We have quite a few MAC teams in clos proximity to each other (KSU-Akron, BG-UT, Miami-BSU, etc. ) and they have never travelled together anywhere. There is no such thing as travel partners in football.
According to Big East fans, San Diego State was added to the BE to be a travel partner for Boise.
As we are all painfully aware of, there are a lot of fans that have no idea what they are talking about.
+1
(05-27-2012 10:00 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 08:56 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ]I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
I think the #14 should be split 4 games a piece between Army and BYU.
With Army-BYU as possibles, there is no doubt the MAC would be able to land a coveted 4th bowl tie-in.
1) Liberty (talking the bowl here not the school)
2) Mobile
3) Hawaii
4) Detroit
Army already plays a partial MAC schedule as it is so why can't they be adjusted in as the #14?
You are dreamin if you think the Mac is gonna get the liberty bowl... I know cusa is going to lose it, but that's only because it's following Memphis to the big east.
Sadly enough, you landing the liberty bowl is more likely than your rediculious plan to split the 14th spot between BYU and army.
(05-27-2012 12:49 PM)Dorrej Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 10:00 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 08:56 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ]I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
I think the #14 should be split 4 games a piece between Army and BYU.
With Army-BYU as possibles, there is no doubt the MAC would be able to land a coveted 4th bowl tie-in.
1) Liberty (talking the bowl here not the school)
2) Mobile
3) Hawaii
4) Detroit
Army already plays a partial MAC schedule as it is so why can't they be adjusted in as the #14?
You are dreamin if you think the Mac is gonna get the liberty bowl... I know cusa is going to lose it, but that's only because it's following Memphis to the big east.
Sadly enough, you landing the liberty bowl is more likely than your rediculious plan to split the 14th spot between BYU and army.
What you aren't getting is how I'm deriving the Liberty to MAC opportunity.
1) None of the Big 5 conferences want to waste a tie-in with the Big East in the Liberty Bowl.
2) CUSA can only certify 4 bowls for 2014. I would look for them to concentrate efforts on the Independence (Shreveport), Ticket City (Dallas), Belk (Charlotte) and Beef O'Brady (St. Pete).
3) SBC can only certify 2 bowls with 3 new FCS schools coming on board for 2014. They've already signed Mobile and my guess would be they'll try and keep the New Orleans Bowl if possible.
4) The MWC wants its champ in the Las Vegas Bowl against the PAC. Beyond that they currently have a tie-in with the Independence and retaining Hawaii is a must. New Mexico is also against the PAC so that will be their 4th allotted game.
5) The MAC even with Temple moving on will be able to certify 4 bowl games....its up to the MAC where they want to go. The MAC will probably pick up Hawaii with the game in Boise folding and then they can add one more.....the Liberty with Army/BYU in a shared bowl arrangement makes sense actually.
Its not that the MAC will take the Liberty from other conferences as much as it could drop into the MAC's lap due to all the factors I've outlined above.
(05-27-2012 02:07 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 12:49 PM)Dorrej Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 10:00 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 08:56 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ]I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
I think the #14 should be split 4 games a piece between Army and BYU.
With Army-BYU as possibles, there is no doubt the MAC would be able to land a coveted 4th bowl tie-in.
1) Liberty (talking the bowl here not the school)
2) Mobile
3) Hawaii
4) Detroit
Army already plays a partial MAC schedule as it is so why can't they be adjusted in as the #14?
You are dreamin if you think the Mac is gonna get the liberty bowl... I know cusa is going to lose it, but that's only because it's following Memphis to the big east.
Sadly enough, you landing the liberty bowl is more likely than your rediculious plan to split the 14th spot between BYU and army.
What you aren't getting is how I'm deriving the Liberty to MAC opportunity.
1) None of the Big 5 conferences want to waste a tie-in with the Big East in the Liberty Bowl.
2) CUSA can only certify 4 bowls for 2014. I would look for them to concentrate efforts on the Independence (Shreveport), Ticket City (Dallas), Belk (Charlotte) and Beef O'Brady (St. Pete).
3) SBC can only certify 2 bowls with 3 new FCS schools coming on board for 2014. They've already signed Mobile and my guess would be they'll try and keep the New Orleans Bowl if possible.
4) The MWC wants its champ in the Las Vegas Bowl against the PAC. Beyond that they currently have a tie-in with the Independence and retaining Hawaii is a must. New Mexico is also against the PAC so that will be their 4th allotted game.
5) The MAC even with Temple moving on will be able to certify 4 bowl games....its up to the MAC where they want to go. The MAC will probably pick up Hawaii with the game in Boise folding and then they can add one more.....the Liberty with Army/BYU in a shared bowl arrangement makes sense actually.
Its not that the MAC will take the Liberty from other conferences as much as it could drop into the MAC's lap due to all the factors I've outlined above.
What are your criteria to "certify bowls"? I'm not saying cusa is as good as it once was, but these threads with sunbelt and Mac fans thinking they are on level footing with cusa are laughable, just like some cusa fans thinking we are on level footing with the big east. The pecking order will remain the same, but I do think the MAC is pulling away from the sun belt and has potential to pass the mwc if the big east ends up adding more teams in the west.
I wouldn't rule JMU out, we just have an idiot president until July 1st. He's content to sit on his hands and has no sense of urgency in anything he does. He's been quoted as saying "No I-A football on my watch", and apparently he intends to stick by that until his final day.... much to the detriment of his institution.
If you have to wait until July 1st, then you might as well wait until after this year's football season.
(05-27-2012 09:15 PM)Steve1981 Wrote: [ -> ]If you have to wait until July 1st, then you might as well wait until after this year's football season.
Unfortunately, that is more likely. We don't expect Alger to address this right out of the gate or the faculty will have a fit if he put athletics first on his list.
It really is the most pressing issue for the school right now, but they won't acknowledge it as such.
When most people say "travel partner" in football, what they really mean is "scheduling opposite," for lack of a better term. In other words, using the Big East as an example, Rutgers would host USF and travel to UCF one year, then switch it up the next year, and so on throughout the conference.
In a more traditional sense, the term "travel partner" was originally coined for minor sports, like volleyball and softball. Kent State would travel to play Toledo on Saturday and Bowling Green on Sunday, for example, while Akron does this trip the other way around. Other teams would line up similarly.
As for the football issue, I still think James Madison should try to do the UMass thing, by placing basketball and minor sports in the A-10 while football joins the MAC. This would create a nice mini-pod in a future 16-member A-10 with JMU, Richmond, VCU, and George Washington. It would work well.
(05-28-2012 02:30 AM)Lolly Popp Wrote: [ -> ]When most people say "travel partner" in football, what they really mean is "scheduling opposite," for lack of a better term. In other words, using the Big East as an example, Rutgers would host USF and travel to UCF one year, then switch it up the next year, and so on throughout the conference.
I'll bite. How is that a benefit to anyone, especially in the MAC? Why would it matter BG had to play at NIU and at UMASS in one year or split them? Slightly more travel one year? It's a negligible difference in either case.
Sure, if you had teams all over the country you wouldn't want all of your furthest opponents in the same season, but it is a completely meaningless concept to the MAC when teams play once a week and only have 6-7 road games a season.
(05-27-2012 02:07 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 12:49 PM)Dorrej Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 10:00 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2012 08:56 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ]I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
I think the #14 should be split 4 games a piece between Army and BYU.
With Army-BYU as possibles, there is no doubt the MAC would be able to land a coveted 4th bowl tie-in.
1) Liberty (talking the bowl here not the school)
2) Mobile
3) Hawaii
4) Detroit
Army already plays a partial MAC schedule as it is so why can't they be adjusted in as the #14?
You are dreamin if you think the Mac is gonna get the liberty bowl... I know cusa is going to lose it, but that's only because it's following Memphis to the big east.
Sadly enough, you landing the liberty bowl is more likely than your rediculious plan to split the 14th spot between BYU and army.
What you aren't getting is how I'm deriving the Liberty to MAC opportunity.
1) None of the Big 5 conferences want to waste a tie-in with the Big East in the Liberty Bowl.
2) CUSA can only certify 4 bowls for 2014. I would look for them to concentrate efforts on the Independence (Shreveport), Ticket City (Dallas), Belk (Charlotte) and Beef O'Brady (St. Pete).
3) SBC can only certify 2 bowls with 3 new FCS schools coming on board for 2014. They've already signed Mobile and my guess would be they'll try and keep the New Orleans Bowl if possible.
4) The MWC wants its champ in the Las Vegas Bowl against the PAC. Beyond that they currently have a tie-in with the Independence and retaining Hawaii is a must. New Mexico is also against the PAC so that will be their 4th allotted game.
5) The MAC even with Temple moving on will be able to certify 4 bowl games....its up to the MAC where they want to go. The MAC will probably pick up Hawaii with the game in Boise folding and then they can add one more.....the Liberty with Army/BYU in a shared bowl arrangement makes sense actually.
Its not that the MAC will take the Liberty from other conferences as much as it could drop into the MAC's lap due to all the factors I've outlined above.
Wait so other conferences don't want to play the BE but would want to sign on to a game involving the MAC+BYU/Army? Yea I don't see that making any sense.
MAYBE I mean *MAYBE* there might be the chance of picking up another bowl if we convince BYU/Army to go in with us but that is a one in million type thing.
(05-28-2012 10:13 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: [ -> ]MAYBE I mean *MAYBE* there might be the chance of picking up another bowl if we convince BYU/Army to go in with us but that is a one in million type thing.
Exactly. I expect BYU to head to the Big East anyway but I'm just throwing it out there as an ideal option for #14.
The MAC should look at the highest ground first (Army, BYU) that could help with SOS and Bowl Games before exploring FCS upgrades.
I think the MAC can wait another year yet to see what happens in the Big East. Outside of the game in Mobile which is already signed we have to wait until the big boys sign their bowl games to see what is left over.
(05-28-2012 06:45 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]I'll bite. How is that a benefit to anyone, especially in the MAC? Why would it matter BG had to play at NIU and at UMASS in one year or split them? Slightly more travel one year? It's a negligible difference in either case.
Sure, if you had teams all over the country you wouldn't want all of your furthest opponents in the same season, but it is a completely meaningless concept to the MAC when teams play once a week and only have 6-7 road games a season.
It may not matter for the MAC, in your opinion, but that's how it's done in nearly every conference around the country. The other issue being overlooked is recruiting.
Let's use the Big East as an example. The northern schools have had a problem getting some of the better recruits from Florida for two decades due to only having one local school in the league. This will change when UCF joins. Now a coach from Rutgers, UConn, Temple, Louisville, or Cincinnati will be able to promise a recruit that he can play a game in front of his family and friends every season, rather than every other year, which improves Florida recruiting for the entire division. It also simplifies scheduling since there will be a Florida trip every year. The same concept applies with Houston and SMU, while also illustrating the need for Fresno State and another school near Boise State, which reinforces my belief that the Big East should go to 16.
Now these issues may not be as important to the MAC, but they do matter in some sports or for some schools, and it is done all around the country as I pointed out.
(05-27-2012 08:56 AM)panite Wrote: [ -> ]Any word or good rumors about a replacement for Temple for FB only to match up with UMass in the MAC for 14 teams in the Conference. I read where James Madison took their name off the MAC and WAC lists this past week and that they will remain at the D1AA level for the time being. Army would be a great FB only add if the MAC could convince them to join. They could be competitive in the the MAC as they schedule a lot of MAC teams now. This would give UMass an Eastern travel partner with a NYC market and allow them to leave their less competitive BB and Olympic teams in the Patriot League. An eight game MAC schedule would leave Army with their Commander and Chief games with Navy and Air Force, and two more games to schedule Nationally with other schools and / or at least one game to schedule with a local D1AA team.
I am aware of Army's intent to remain independent at this time for competitive reasons and because of their loosing experience in CUSA but it might be a good idea to take another run at them with all of the conference upheveal at this point in time. If not them who is the MAC seriously chasing at this point in time with James Madison and possibly Army out of the picture now.
JMU said we were not interested in the WAC. When asked about the MAC, we have said that we have "high interest" if ASU and UD come along. We have not removed ourselves from the MAC picture whatsoever.