This puts additional pressure on UMass to join all-sports. They have no where else to run if they want a football team. The picture is now much clearer now that CUSA is completely full at 14 members and the CAA has no FCS home left for them to run to.

WAC - DONE
CAA - DONE
CUSA - No Vacancy
Big East - No Vacancy
Sun Belt - Please........
ACC - Give me a break.

The MAC better be invoking the 2-year all-in or done clause. There is no better time. UMass has no choice and if they are silly enough to ruin their football program, let them be and bring in JMU as #13 and Delaware, Appalachian#14.

Its humorous as I read the UMass blogs as they talk about how with the addition of VCU, Mason, and Butler they are now at 15 schools and they wonder how the A-10 will get to 14 or 16 and talk about kicking a member out to get back to 14. They don't understand that THEY are the one leaving to bring the A-10 back to 14. Their fans don't know it yet. The A-10 is not fond of football playing members and they had 3. Now two (Temple and Charlotte) are gone and the other is on its way out. Steinbrecher has been a great Commish and made sound moves.

I suspect the A-10 knew this and proactively talked to Butler, VCU, and Mason to replace Temple, Charlotte, and UMass.

UMass is all out of aces... MAC!, release the hounds!
.

I just dont see it. UMass prioritizes basketball and 'dropping down' to the Mac would be a huge blow for them. I understand why they are there for football but its still a midwestern based league and all sports membership for a northeastern based school is just ridiculous.

(05-02-2012 01:45 AM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  I just dont see it. UMass prioritizes basketball and 'dropping down' to the Mac would be a huge blow for them. I understand why they are there for football but its still a midwestern based league and all sports membership for a northeastern based school is just ridiculous.

Fair enough, but what other option do they have if they want to keep a FBS team and The MAC exercises the all-sports or out the door clause UMass agreed to when Temple left?

Even if UMass was willing, why would the MAC have 13 for all sports? The MAC would really need someone else located in PA, NY, or New England given the Minutemen or on somewhat of an island. UMass would also have to add Volleyball, which the MAC requires, so there would be a cost to that.

I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

If a West coastie like San Diego State can join the Big EAST, then nothing is too far fetched for UMass. But I personally think they'll stay where they are...for the time being.

(05-02-2012 05:36 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

Good point. I also don't see the need for the MAC to rush into making any moves right now. After all, they just received a windfall from the Temple exit fee. Chances are, UMass will want to get established at the FBS level in the MAC before exploring other conference moves.

(05-03-2012 09:45 PM)Owls_Law Wrote:  

(05-02-2012 05:36 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

Good point. I also don't see the need for the MAC to rush into making any moves right now. After all, they just received a windfall from the Temple exit fee. Chances are, UMass will want to get established at the FBS level in the MAC before exploring other conference moves.

UMass would move to CUSA, who would take them immediately for all sports before moving its other teams to the MAC. UMass is a prize. You should try and keep them happy, because CUSA will make a place for them.

Don't think UMass would join the MAC for all sports. I think even Mac knows they have bigger aspirations. Sadly UMass is the only north-eastern school that is capable of joining the Big East for all sports in the near future. Even then that's not happening for at least 5 years till either the state shows they are committed to the athletic program or if UConn is willing to bring them in.

(05-02-2012 12:50 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  The A-10 is not fond of football playing members and they had 3. Now two (Temple and Charlotte) are gone and the other is on its way out. Steinbrecher has been a great Commish and made sound moves.

Seven of the 15 projected A-10 members play football, close to half.

Butler (Football in Pioneer League)
Dayton (Football in Pioneer League)

Duquesne (Football in NEC)
Rhode Island (Football in NEC in 2013)

Fordham (Football in Patriot League)
Richmond (Football in CAA)

Massachusetts (Football in MAC)

That number could rise to 8 of 16, depending on what happens next.

(05-03-2012 09:45 PM)Owls_Law Wrote:  

(05-02-2012 05:36 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

Good point. I also don't see the need for the MAC to rush into making any moves right now. After all, they just received a windfall from the Temple exit fee. Chances are, UMass will want to get established at the FBS level in the MAC before exploring other conference moves.

I disagree. The MAC would be will served to get moving on a couple of FCS upgrades like James Madison that play good football and expand the recruiting base somewhat.

The MAC East is relatively dismal in football compared to the West (in basketball its the opposite situation) so expanding to 14 or 16 with football oriented schools in the eastern division has a lot of sense to it.

(05-05-2012 05:01 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 09:45 PM)Owls_Law Wrote:  

(05-02-2012 05:36 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

Good point. I also don't see the need for the MAC to rush into making any moves right now. After all, they just received a windfall from the Temple exit fee. Chances are, UMass will want to get established at the FBS level in the MAC before exploring other conference moves.

UMass would move to CUSA, who would take them immediately for all sports before moving its other teams to the MAC. UMass is a prize. You should try and keep them happy, because CUSA will make a place for them.

UMass as a football only is no prize for the MAC. C-USA can do us a favor and take them if they want.

Indeed, why tolerate having half the UMass sports that matter when you could have none.
Meanwhile, CUSA just brought in at least two new members who don't play either football or basketball as well as UMass.
As did the Sun Belt.

It's great being a northern school.

(05-06-2012 03:34 AM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  Indeed, why tolerate having half the UMass sports that matter when you could have none.

1. Because Massachusetts is well outside the traditional MAC footprint.
2. Because the MAC brought UMass in to balance #13,Temple. Now the situation is changed, the MAC would need an FCS upgrade to balance #13 UMass.

If I'm the MAC, before I start looking at making permanent, all-sports additions largely motivated by fixing the awkward (and NCAA-illegal) 7-6 west-east split, I'd want assurances in the form of all-sports membership that UMass isn't going anywhere. (Not that all-sports membership in the MAC would keep UMass out of the Big East, but it's a step.)

If UMass is committed to MAC football, great. Commit. If not, UMass can work it out on their own.

(05-06-2012 05:02 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 03:34 AM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  Indeed, why tolerate having half the UMass sports that matter when you could have none.

1. Because Massachusetts is well outside the traditional MAC footprint.
2. Because the MAC brought UMass in to balance #13,Temple. Now the situation is changed, the MAC would need an FCS upgrade to balance #13 UMass.

If I'm the MAC, before I start looking at making permanent, all-sports additions largely motivated by fixing the awkward (and NCAA-illegal) 7-6 west-east split, I'd want assurances in the form of all-sports membership that UMass isn't going anywhere. (Not that all-sports membership in the MAC would keep UMass out of the Big East, but it's a step.)

If UMass is committed to MAC football, great. Commit. If not, UMass can work it out on their own.

The MAC has UMass by the throat...

An independent UMass is cut out of the conference revenue sharing from the MAC postseason. That could be as much as 2 million dollars UMass would be losing out on.

Army has a similar issue. The MAC could offer Army a football only arrangement to balance UMass in the East and since both schools are close together in location that might work.

The MAC received 6 million from Temple's buyout fee so it makes sense at a minimum to at least tie down UMass again with another football only school like Army.

I know Army is looking a spot in the Big East but that may be a while until it materializes due to numbers.

(05-02-2012 05:36 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

Camby took money after the Final Four season was over, but before the draft. They won conference titles and went deep in the tourney before then too. Do some research.

(05-06-2012 10:13 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-02-2012 05:36 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I fail to see how this provides serious benefits to the MAC. The only time in UMass's history that they were relevant in basketball was when they were cheating. Besides, it won't work out in the long run as UMass will put all their effort into gaining access into another conference: Sun Belt, WAC 3.0, whatever, anything to spite someone who would hold them hostage.

Deals are not made with the goal of backing a conference member into a corner and making them weaker by increasing their travel expenses. All it will do is tick them off and send them packing.

Camby took money after the Final Four season was over, but before the draft. They won conference titles and went deep in the tourney before then too. Do some research.

It was never proven. But there were a lot of rumors floating about that the payments began long before that, esayem...

There were identical threads about Temple all sports to the MAC not too long ago. The situation is very fluid, Temple was never going down that road, and UMASS won't either.

UMass may have no other option but all-sports if it wants to remain 1-A. The MAC can opt out of the football-only arrangement after two years.

MAC could bring in an East coast school for UMass that is contingent on UMass making an all-sports commitment. Otherwise we can drop UMass and go back to an even 12 teams.

I don't see any more MAC football-only arrangements being made in the future after the Temple situation. The MAC will want a real commitment going forward.

(05-06-2012 11:23 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  UMass may have no other option but all-sports if it wants to remain 1-A. The MAC can opt out of the football-only arrangement after two years.

MAC could bring in an East coast school for UMass that is contingent on UMass making an all-sports commitment. Otherwise we can drop UMass and go back to an even 12 teams.

I don't see any more MAC football-only arrangements being made in the future after the Temple situation. The MAC will want a real commitment going forward.

+1