Not to mention TU owned the top MWC leftover in the NM Bowl.

(02-12-2012 10:11 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 09:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 05:15 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  Well, if Temple bolts for a C-USA FB only offer, I sure hope we hit as hard as we can with exit penalties. Not in spite, but because the MAC brought in UMASS as a eastern rival and so-called "travel partner" for Temple and if Temple leaves we're stuck with an unbalanced number of teams again. Ironic in that I guess the league didn't learn its lesson last time when UCF temporarily "parked" its football program in the MAC. Schools like UCF and Temple obviously have no history nor loyalty with the MAC. UCF leaving was completely expected, and I think Temple leaving to the BE would be quite understandable. But leaving for C-USA? There are no real football rivalries between Temple and historical MAC teams, and I doubt they'll be any with C-USA if that's where they land (again, most likely temporarily).

There's a pretty big exit fee if only Temple leaves. Quite a bit smaller if UMass leaves too.

The school's buyouts are tied to each other. The first to leave has to pay $2.5 million. The second pays $500k. So if both leave, the MAC gets $3 million. But I don't see UMass having anywhere else to go right now, and I would rather keep them and bring up a replacement for Temple. Maybe a school that can come in for all sports and help convince UMass to do the same.

If UMass is still on board (which we aren't fully sure about) then I think the only way to go for the MAC is to pick up an Eastern member as a replacement.

JMU is the most prepared with that expanded 25,000 seat stadium and brings the MAC back into a large market in DC/Richmond. They have the look of a prototypical residential MAC campus so they fit the culture well.

The question I'm wondering is not if JMU would be interested in joining MAC football because I'm almost certain they would be.....the question is more would it be a football or an all-sport arrangement? Would the CAA kick JMU out in other sports if they left for football? If JMU demands an all sport invite, who else does the MAC target for balancing divisions?

The MAC then is in a situation where its adding 2 all sport schools, going to 15 overall football members with a need of a 16th football only.

(02-13-2012 07:17 AM)pzz189 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 12:20 AM)Beckman4President Wrote:  And this is why I really believe that CUSA is still a better conference than the MAC and I believe that it will always be so. The MAC thinks small and believes in its inferiority whereas CUSA is always looking to improve and doesn't believe in its inferiority.

Honestly, I only think the main thing is the better TV deal. Didn't Ohio stomp Marshall this year? MAC is ahead of the proposed Alliance in the Sagarin ratings.

Their TV deal will shrink significantly. Likely less than half what it is now.

(02-13-2012 12:20 AM)Beckman4President Wrote:  And this is why I really believe that CUSA is still a better conference than the MAC and I believe that it will always be so. The MAC thinks small and believes in its inferiority whereas CUSA is always looking to improve and doesn't believe in its inferiority.

No question that CUSA has better conference leadership.

(02-13-2012 11:01 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 10:11 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 09:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 05:15 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  Well, if Temple bolts for a C-USA FB only offer, I sure hope we hit as hard as we can with exit penalties. Not in spite, but because the MAC brought in UMASS as a eastern rival and so-called "travel partner" for Temple and if Temple leaves we're stuck with an unbalanced number of teams again. Ironic in that I guess the league didn't learn its lesson last time when UCF temporarily "parked" its football program in the MAC. Schools like UCF and Temple obviously have no history nor loyalty with the MAC. UCF leaving was completely expected, and I think Temple leaving to the BE would be quite understandable. But leaving for C-USA? There are no real football rivalries between Temple and historical MAC teams, and I doubt they'll be any with C-USA if that's where they land (again, most likely temporarily).

There's a pretty big exit fee if only Temple leaves. Quite a bit smaller if UMass leaves too.

The school's buyouts are tied to each other. The first to leave has to pay $2.5 million. The second pays $500k. So if both leave, the MAC gets $3 million. But I don't see UMass having anywhere else to go right now, and I would rather keep them and bring up a replacement for Temple. Maybe a school that can come in for all sports and help convince UMass to do the same.

If UMass is still on board (which we aren't fully sure about) then I think the only way to go for the MAC is to pick up an Eastern member as a replacement.

JMU is the most prepared with that expanded 25,000 seat stadium and brings the MAC back into a large market in DC/Richmond. They have the look of a prototypical residential MAC campus so they fit the culture well.

The question I'm wondering is not if JMU would be interested in joining MAC football because I'm almost certain they would be.....the question is more would it be a football or an all-sport arrangement? Would the CAA kick JMU out in other sports if they left for football? If JMU demands an all sport invite, who else does the MAC target for balancing divisions?

The MAC then is in a situation where its adding 2 all sport schools, going to 15 overall football members with a need of a 16th football only.

Yea it kinda sucks but what if we brought in a school all-sports and then got rid of the divisions in non-football sports?

(02-13-2012 12:18 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 11:01 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 10:11 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 09:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 05:15 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  Well, if Temple bolts for a C-USA FB only offer, I sure hope we hit as hard as we can with exit penalties. Not in spite, but because the MAC brought in UMASS as a eastern rival and so-called "travel partner" for Temple and if Temple leaves we're stuck with an unbalanced number of teams again. Ironic in that I guess the league didn't learn its lesson last time when UCF temporarily "parked" its football program in the MAC. Schools like UCF and Temple obviously have no history nor loyalty with the MAC. UCF leaving was completely expected, and I think Temple leaving to the BE would be quite understandable. But leaving for C-USA? There are no real football rivalries between Temple and historical MAC teams, and I doubt they'll be any with C-USA if that's where they land (again, most likely temporarily).

There's a pretty big exit fee if only Temple leaves. Quite a bit smaller if UMass leaves too.

The school's buyouts are tied to each other. The first to leave has to pay $2.5 million. The second pays $500k. So if both leave, the MAC gets $3 million. But I don't see UMass having anywhere else to go right now, and I would rather keep them and bring up a replacement for Temple. Maybe a school that can come in for all sports and help convince UMass to do the same.

If UMass is still on board (which we aren't fully sure about) then I think the only way to go for the MAC is to pick up an Eastern member as a replacement.

JMU is the most prepared with that expanded 25,000 seat stadium and brings the MAC back into a large market in DC/Richmond. They have the look of a prototypical residential MAC campus so they fit the culture well.

The question I'm wondering is not if JMU would be interested in joining MAC football because I'm almost certain they would be.....the question is more would it be a football or an all-sport arrangement? Would the CAA kick JMU out in other sports if they left for football? If JMU demands an all sport invite, who else does the MAC target for balancing divisions?

The MAC then is in a situation where its adding 2 all sport schools, going to 15 overall football members with a need of a 16th football only.

Yea it kinda sucks but what if we brought in a school all-sports and then got rid of the divisions in non-football sports?

That is also an option. I've thought about Western Kentucky in that capacity as a 13th but doing away with basketball divisions.

JMU might want all-sports but demand another all-sport member in the East. That is where Appalachian State may come into play. ASU is only a 4 hour drive from James Madison and surprisingly also Ohio. Harrisonburg is only a few hour bus ride to Athens through West Virginia.

Both JMU and ASU would be delighted to get a MAC invite. The Big East is not going to look their direction and the ACC is completely out.

(02-13-2012 12:36 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 12:18 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 11:01 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 10:11 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(02-12-2012 09:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  There's a pretty big exit fee if only Temple leaves. Quite a bit smaller if UMass leaves too.

The school's buyouts are tied to each other. The first to leave has to pay $2.5 million. The second pays $500k. So if both leave, the MAC gets $3 million. But I don't see UMass having anywhere else to go right now, and I would rather keep them and bring up a replacement for Temple. Maybe a school that can come in for all sports and help convince UMass to do the same.

If UMass is still on board (which we aren't fully sure about) then I think the only way to go for the MAC is to pick up an Eastern member as a replacement.

JMU is the most prepared with that expanded 25,000 seat stadium and brings the MAC back into a large market in DC/Richmond. They have the look of a prototypical residential MAC campus so they fit the culture well.

The question I'm wondering is not if JMU would be interested in joining MAC football because I'm almost certain they would be.....the question is more would it be a football or an all-sport arrangement? Would the CAA kick JMU out in other sports if they left for football? If JMU demands an all sport invite, who else does the MAC target for balancing divisions?

The MAC then is in a situation where its adding 2 all sport schools, going to 15 overall football members with a need of a 16th football only.

Yea it kinda sucks but what if we brought in a school all-sports and then got rid of the divisions in non-football sports?

That is also an option. I've thought about Western Kentucky in that capacity as a 13th but doing away with basketball divisions.

JMU might want all-sports but demand another all-sport member in the East. That is where Appalachian State may come into play. ASU is only a 4 hour drive from James Madison and surprisingly also Ohio. Harrisonburg is only a few hour bus ride to Athens through West Virginia.

Both JMU and ASU would be delighted to get a MAC invite. The Big East is not going to look their direction and the ACC is completely out.

Assuming Temple left though, we'd be at 13 for football. Adding 2 more would put us at 15.

Future MAC?
East: Akron, Buffalo, Delaware, Kent State, James Madison, Massachusetts, Ohio, Old Dominion
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Miami (OH), Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Thoughts? Appalachian State could always substitute for Delaware if the Mountaineers do not end up in the Sun Belt with more southern schools.

WTF is it with this word salad of buzzz-schools that we think are clamouring to join the MAC?

As usual, certain MAC fans and some random hangers-on have put the cart before the horse. The MAC can't just add Delaware, JMU, Illinois State, ECU or anyone else - those individual schools have to WANT to join the MAC. And as evidence by Marshall, UCF and now probably Temple followed by UMass, none of them really want to be here.

So who is jonesin' to join the MAC? Not one single school that I know of..... Which makes these MAC realignment threads a bit more silly than your regular conference realignment threads.

"If Northern Illinois goes to the Big 12, we'll just add Illinois State!" Except Illinois State has shown zero interest in joining the MAC.

"If Temple goes to the Big East, we'll just add ECU!" Except ECU has shown zero interet in joining the MAC.

"We'll just add Appalachian State, they'd be delighted to join the MAC!" Except ASU has shown zero interest in joining the MAC.

I seriously regret that I have but one face to palm for MACbbs.

(02-13-2012 03:28 PM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  Future MAC?
East: Akron, Buffalo, Delaware, Kent State, James Madison, Massachusetts, Ohio, Old Dominion
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Miami (OH), Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Thoughts? Appalachian State could always substitute for Delaware if the Mountaineers do not end up in the Sun Belt with more southern schools.

I think ASU and JMU could be added all sports to the MAC as a package because both are with in 3-4 driving distance of Ohio. They are closer to the MAC footprint than Western Kentucky/Middle Tennessee. Both ASU and JMU are prototype residential schools as well and bring in their own recruiting base.

That would give the MAC 15 football schools with UMass departing. As for the 16th I don't think Delaware could handle a football only situation in the MAC since the CAA has a football conference. The MAC will need another football only school and the best name I can come up with is Stony Brook which plays its sports in the American East while football only in Big South.

Since the American East doesn't sponsor football I don't see what would be stopping Stony Brook from putting its football in the MAC aside from not having 15,000 seats.

(02-13-2012 04:52 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 03:28 PM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  Future MAC?
East: Akron, Buffalo, Delaware, Kent State, James Madison, Massachusetts, Ohio, Old Dominion
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Miami (OH), Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Thoughts? Appalachian State could always substitute for Delaware if the Mountaineers do not end up in the Sun Belt with more southern schools.

I think ASU and JMU could be added all sports to the MAC as a package because both are with in 3-4 driving distance of Ohio. They are closer to the MAC footprint than Western Kentucky/Middle Tennessee. Both ASU and JMU are prototype residential schools as well and bring in their own recruiting base.

That would give the MAC 15 football schools with UMass departing. As for the 16th I don't think Delaware could handle a football only situation in the MAC since the CAA has a football conference. The MAC will need another football only school and the best name I can come up with is Stony Brook which plays its sports in the American East while football only in Big South.

Since the American East doesn't sponsor football I don't see what would be stopping Stony Brook from putting its football in the MAC aside from not having 15,000 seats.

If Temple and UMass are gone, we'll have 12 football schools. Adding ASU and JMU would make it 14.

(02-13-2012 05:10 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 04:52 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 03:28 PM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  Future MAC?
East: Akron, Buffalo, Delaware, Kent State, James Madison, Massachusetts, Ohio, Old Dominion
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Miami (OH), Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Thoughts? Appalachian State could always substitute for Delaware if the Mountaineers do not end up in the Sun Belt with more southern schools.

I think ASU and JMU could be added all sports to the MAC as a package because both are with in 3-4 driving distance of Ohio. They are closer to the MAC footprint than Western Kentucky/Middle Tennessee. Both ASU and JMU are prototype residential schools as well and bring in their own recruiting base.

That would give the MAC 15 football schools with UMass departing. As for the 16th I don't think Delaware could handle a football only situation in the MAC since the CAA has a football conference. The MAC will need another football only school and the best name I can come up with is Stony Brook which plays its sports in the American East while football only in Big South.

Since the American East doesn't sponsor football I don't see what would be stopping Stony Brook from putting its football in the MAC aside from not having 15,000 seats.

If Temple and UMass are gone, we'll have 12 football schools. Adding ASU and JMU would make it 14.

I don't feel confident UMass is going to the alliance (we will get the real name tomorrow at noon) since they are only opting for 1 football only at this time with Temple.

If UMass is gone the MAC could court some of the SBC schools, taking a bloc of them in central timezone. There is no point in going east if UMass is no longer around.

(02-13-2012 12:20 AM)Beckman4President Wrote:  And this is why I really believe that CUSA is still a better conference than the MAC and I believe that it will always be so. The MAC thinks small and believes in its inferiority whereas CUSA is always looking to improve and doesn't believe in its inferiority.

A good point. But at some point you have to put a product out there. And that's where CUSA fails to be superior.

I do agree that the MAC (or its members) should be looking to improve their situation. However, like I said before, I'm not sure the Ohio Regents (and maybe Mich) don't pick administrators who absolutely won't do this.

At 12 teams I have a feeling that the MAC front office would just sit back and make a note on the to do list to make a list of schools they would possibly call to see if they were interested in joining...if it didn't inconvenience them too much.

(02-13-2012 03:50 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  WTF is it with this word salad of buzzz-schools that we think are clamouring to join the MAC?

As usual, certain MAC fans and some random hangers-on have put the cart before the horse. The MAC can't just add Delaware, JMU, Illinois State, ECU or anyone else - those individual schools have to WANT to join the MAC. And as evidence by Marshall, UCF and now probably Temple followed by UMass, none of them really want to be here.

So who is jonesin' to join the MAC? Not one single school that I know of..... Which makes these MAC realignment threads a bit more silly than your regular conference realignment threads.

"If Northern Illinois goes to the Big 12, we'll just add Illinois State!" Except Illinois State has shown zero interest in joining the MAC.

"If Temple goes to the Big East, we'll just add ECU!" Except ECU has shown zero interet in joining the MAC.

"We'll just add Appalachian State, they'd be delighted to join the MAC!" Except ASU has shown zero interest in joining the MAC.

I seriously regret that I have but one face to palm for MACbbs.

Quoted for being the most logical and truthful comment on the thread...

(02-13-2012 12:09 PM)Photodan Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 12:20 AM)Beckman4President Wrote:  And this is why I really believe that CUSA is still a better conference than the MAC and I believe that it will always be so. The MAC thinks small and believes in its inferiority whereas CUSA is always looking to improve and doesn't believe in its inferiority.

No question that CUSA has better conference leadership.

For the most part, CUSA schools are located in large, urban cities, many of which are in some of the fastest-growing population areas. The schools courted for the Big East deliver on TV sets, first and foremost. Further, they are centrally located for most bowl host cities, attractive to conferences as they have a bit of a selling point when at-larges come around.

These are the top advantages and is why CUSA is higher up on an assumed pecking order. But I don't know how this equates to top-notch "leadership" or being a whiz at "improving." A university president or AD given the task of building a program in Dallas, Tampa or Orlando in the Age of ESPN has a far easier assignment than someone in Muncie, Athens or Mount Pleasant.

You happened to be in a big southern city as opposed to small, cold Midwestern town. How much 'skill' is involved in that?

(02-13-2012 05:17 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 05:10 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 04:52 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 03:28 PM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  Future MAC?
East: Akron, Buffalo, Delaware, Kent State, James Madison, Massachusetts, Ohio, Old Dominion
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Miami (OH), Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Thoughts? Appalachian State could always substitute for Delaware if the Mountaineers do not end up in the Sun Belt with more southern schools.

I think ASU and JMU could be added all sports to the MAC as a package because both are with in 3-4 driving distance of Ohio. They are closer to the MAC footprint than Western Kentucky/Middle Tennessee. Both ASU and JMU are prototype residential schools as well and bring in their own recruiting base.

That would give the MAC 15 football schools with UMass departing. As for the 16th I don't think Delaware could handle a football only situation in the MAC since the CAA has a football conference. The MAC will need another football only school and the best name I can come up with is Stony Brook which plays its sports in the American East while football only in Big South.

Since the American East doesn't sponsor football I don't see what would be stopping Stony Brook from putting its football in the MAC aside from not having 15,000 seats.

If Temple and UMass are gone, we'll have 12 football schools. Adding ASU and JMU would make it 14.

I don't feel confident UMass is going to the alliance (we will get the real name tomorrow at noon) since they are only opting for 1 football only at this time with Temple.

If UMass is gone the MAC could court some of the SBC schools, taking a bloc of them in central timezone. There is no point in going east if UMass is no longer around.

Well you said we'd be at 15 with UMass departing, and adding those 2 schools.

Have a wild a$$ idea and a few comments, since I doubt we are going anywhere unless a BCS conference comes calling. How about JMU for all sports and try to convince Ill St join the MAC as well and stay FCS with the understanding they can upgrade anytime. Save your shots because I still have two comments.

Don’t forget we paid 500k to join as well so that would be 3.5 million. The last comment is you can not be whores with that kind of money, perhaps call girl or something.

(02-13-2012 08:32 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Have a wild a$$ idea and a few comments, since I doubt we are going anywhere unless a BCS conference comes calling. How about JMU for all sports and try to convince Ill St join the MAC as well and stay FCS with the understanding they can upgrade anytime. Save your shots because I still have two comments.

Don’t forget we paid 500k to join as well so that would be 3.5 million. The last comment is you can not be whores with that kind of money, perhaps call girl or something.

They can't join the MAC if they're still FCS. Pretty sure Ill St isn't ready to move up, and I don't think they've expressed any interest in it. And I don't think they've even been very good in FCS football. Plus, they wouldn't want to move their basketball to the MAC.

(02-13-2012 06:24 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 05:17 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 05:10 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 04:52 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 03:28 PM)JMU Duke Dog Wrote:  Future MAC?
East: Akron, Buffalo, Delaware, Kent State, James Madison, Massachusetts, Ohio, Old Dominion
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Miami (OH), Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Thoughts? Appalachian State could always substitute for Delaware if the Mountaineers do not end up in the Sun Belt with more southern schools.

I think ASU and JMU could be added all sports to the MAC as a package because both are with in 3-4 driving distance of Ohio. They are closer to the MAC footprint than Western Kentucky/Middle Tennessee. Both ASU and JMU are prototype residential schools as well and bring in their own recruiting base.

That would give the MAC 15 football schools with UMass departing. As for the 16th I don't think Delaware could handle a football only situation in the MAC since the CAA has a football conference. The MAC will need another football only school and the best name I can come up with is Stony Brook which plays its sports in the American East while football only in Big South.

Since the American East doesn't sponsor football I don't see what would be stopping Stony Brook from putting its football in the MAC aside from not having 15,000 seats.

If Temple and UMass are gone, we'll have 12 football schools. Adding ASU and JMU would make it 14.

I don't feel confident UMass is going to the alliance (we will get the real name tomorrow at noon) since they are only opting for 1 football only at this time with Temple.

If UMass is gone the MAC could court some of the SBC schools, taking a bloc of them in central timezone. There is no point in going east if UMass is no longer around.

Well you said we'd be at 15 with UMass departing, and adding those 2 schools.

Typo.