(08-16-2015 06:24 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 06:14 PM)pablowow Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 12:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 11:15 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Don't remember ECU being football only

They were originally given a football only invite at the same meeting where Tulane was offered a full invite. ECU's invite was later upgraded to an all sports invite after the C7 left. It was the C7 that had blocked an ECU all sports invite.

Correct!

For some reason ECU basketball was hated by the Catholic schools. I understand we are not good but Tulane was no better then us in basketball neither is UCF and they got full invites. Also our baseball is pretty good but I do not think the northern catholic schools care for baseball nor football.

Every so often I feel like I have to sing the same song...over, and over, and over again...

Different conferences have different requirements. If you want to know "why" ECU was not invited to join the BE...and let's face it, that's what the "Catholic 7" were... it was because THEY DIDN'T FIT.
---They were not in the NE.
---They were a "football first" school who paid very little attention to BB.
---They were a large, public school.
---They are in a largely rural setting (ie. not urban).

Tulane is a private school in an urban environment...they were simply a better fit than ECU.
Tulsa is a private, religious school in an urban environment...they too were a better fit.
Cincinnati and Louisville were "BB primary" schools when they were invited and in an urban environments.

When the BE started to fall apart...and then morphed into the AAC...the primary strategy was to go after urban schools that might bring instant TV markets. (There was even a discussion of whether the emerging conference should use the name "Metro"...) When other options were exhausted, ECU was determined to be the best fit for a full membership and the "urban" strategy was abandoned.

(08-17-2015 03:53 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 06:24 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 06:14 PM)pablowow Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 12:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 11:15 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Don't remember ECU being football only

They were originally given a football only invite at the same meeting where Tulane was offered a full invite. ECU's invite was later upgraded to an all sports invite after the C7 left. It was the C7 that had blocked an ECU all sports invite.

Correct!

For some reason ECU basketball was hated by the Catholic schools. I understand we are not good but Tulane was no better then us in basketball neither is UCF and they got full invites. Also our baseball is pretty good but I do not think the northern catholic schools care for baseball nor football.

Every so often I feel like I have to sing the same song...over, and over, and over again...

Different conferences have different requirements. If you want to know "why" ECU was not invited to join the BE...and let's face it, that's what the "Catholic 7" were... it was because THEY DIDN'T FIT.
---They were not in the NE.
---They were a "football first" school who paid very little attention to BB.
---They were a large, public school.
---They are in a largely rural setting (ie. not urban).

Tulane is a private school in an urban environment...they were simply a better fit than ECU.
Tulsa is a private, religious school in an urban environment...they too were a better fit.
Cincinnati and Louisville were "BB primary" schools when they were invited and in an urban environments.

When the BE started to fall apart...and then morphed into the AAC...the primary strategy was to go after urban schools that might bring instant TV markets. (There was even a discussion of whether the emerging conference should use the name "Metro"...) When other options were exhausted, ECU was determined to be the best fit for a full membership and the "urban" strategy was abandoned.

Absolutely correct all all accounts, except for Tulsa. Tulsa was announced to be joining in March of 2013. The C7 announced they were leaving in December of 2012. The C7 had no involvement or talks with regards to Tulsa joining the Old Big East.

But yes, the C7 was actually in favor of Tulane (despite what our former AD Larry Williams was quoted as saying) as a full member over ECU due to the reasons mentioned by BearcatJerry above.

(08-04-2015 10:29 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  Seven of the eight original schools had football programs. I'm surprised those schools didn't consider making football an A10 sport.

George Washington had dropped football less than ten years before the founding of the ECBL/E-8. They were playing at RFK Stadium.

If the AAC could make it work, they have an opportunity to really amp up their BB side with some good expansion moves - although it might be hard to pull off. But now that football has fallen so far back, upping their stature in BB becomes even more important.

The path to 14/14 is there.

Army football-only to go with Navy. UMASS for all sports, VCU and Wichita State taking the spots of Army and Navy for all sports.

Imagine this BB league:

UMASS
UCONN
Temple
VCU
East Carolina
South Florida
Central Florida

Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulsa
Wichita State
Houston
SMU
Tulane

That could be a 4-5 NCAA bid league many years. UMASS is a long-term project in football, but they are solid in BB. The unknown potential hangup there is the relationship with UCONN. It also depends on Army willing to play. Obviously the divisions in FB would be different.

UMASS
UCONN
Army
Navy
Temple
ECU
UCF

USF (w/ a guaranteed yearly crossover game w/ UCF)
Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
Tulsa
Houston
SMU

It does nothing to weaken them in FB - and brings in the Army/Navy game to the conference. It strengthens them elsewhere and would improve their overall stature.

If I'm UMASS, i'm on the phone with VCU and WSU and the AAC pitching this. It's the only way I can see them ending their status as an Independent, short of AAC losing at least one school to the Big 12 (possible with Cincinnati). UMASS doesn't have much leverage so they will need to be part of an overall package.

(08-25-2015 09:37 PM)4thDown Wrote:  It also depends on Army willing to play.

"Willing to play" = "sees a benefit to their school/program".

So, what's the benefit to Army?

(08-25-2015 11:25 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(08-17-2015 06:36 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  yes, the C7 was actually in favor of Tulane (despite what our former AD Larry Williams was quoted as saying) as a full member over ECU due to the reasons mentioned by BearcatJerry above.

It's all over and done with now, but it still seems curious to me that Williams made those comments while his daughter was working at Tulane. I have sometimes wondered if she had made some private comments to her father that influenced his public comments.

Let's just say there is a list of reasons why that Larry Williams is no longer the AD at Marquette. His public quotes regarding Tulane was most certainly one of them.

(08-26-2015 01:53 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:37 PM)4thDown Wrote:  It also depends on Army willing to play.

"Willing to play" = "sees a benefit to their school/program".

So, what's the benefit to Army?

It would have to help with scheduling and bowl game access, I would imagine. Do they get on TV much? Might give them a bit more visibility. Navy obviously saw enough benefit to do it, so no reason why Army couldn't as well.

As far as needing help to find a conference, definitely agree. The MAC had more universities like us than the A10. That said we have a new AD in town and the culture of basketball first is changing. Going independent is high risk, high reward proposition. The upper limit for us being independent would be around 5 years. Hope we find a conference sooner than later. Conference realignment has slowed down, but in 5 years have to say there will be some movement.

Regarding this season, still not confident on our terrible kicking game. The Temple, best defensive against our explosive offensive should be a good game. Our defensive line has been small.

Here is a write up from ABC News, "Pick 6: Teams Coming off Bad Season That Will Go Bowling"
Aug 27, 2015, 3:02 AM ET
By RALPH D. RUSSO AP College Football Writer

Quote:UMASS

The Minutemen will exit the Mid-American Conference after this season and might be able to take an East Division title and trip to the league championship game with them on the way out. They bring back one of the most experienced teams in the country and a prolific passing game with quarterback Blake Frohnapfel (3,345 and 23 TD passes). The nonconference slate is tough (at Colorado, Temple and at Notre Dame) so UMass will likely have to rack up in conference. The MAC East is accommodating.

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/p...g-33349246

(06-05-2015 07:55 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Just was seeing on a CFB scheduling site the UMass schedules posted for the next few years...
http://www.umassathletics.com/sports/m-f...dules.html

2016- they have 10 games so far, with only 3 home games. No FCS games yet so would need only 1 more FBS home game to be set.
2017- they have 9 games so far, 4 home. No FCS game so they are set.
2018- 6 games scheduled, 3 home.

So really right now, get 1 more home FBS game in 2016 and they'll be fine. Would kind of think UAB if they are classified FBS would be a very likely source.

2016 schedule is complete but very tough. The game with South Carolina also includes a basketball home and home.
Other details from masslive, Daniel Malone, Springfield Republican

Quote:As for specifics about the new additions, Bamford said UMass will receive $1.5 million in guaranteed money from South Carolina for the Oct. 22 game, while paying roughly $310,000-$315,000 to Wagner, an FCS program, to come to Amherst on Oct. 29 of that season.

Bamford said $325,000 of the money from South Carolina will end up going to Appalachian State as a payout for agreeing to move the 2016 matchup out to 2020. That money will be used by Appalachian State to secure an FCS home opponent of its own, a technicality that held up the overall deal, which Bamford said had been in place for three or four weeks, from being announced before Friday.

Additionally, as part of the negotiations with South Carolina, Bamford secured a home-and-home basketball series with the Gamecocks that is tentatively set to begin on the road in Columbia for the 2016-17 season before returning to Amherst in 2017-18. Exact game dates have yet to be established.

Quote:The addition of South Carolina, which is scheduled to be played at the Gamecocks' Williams-Brice Stadium in Columbia on Oct. 22, 2016, is the third game an SEC opponent UMass has scheduled for next season. The team opens the season on Sept. 3 at Florida and hosts Mississippi State at Gillette Stadium on Sept. 24.

The Wagner game is set for Oct. 29 and will presumably be played at McGuirk Stadium in Amherst, making it UMass' only on-campus game for 2016. The team's bye week will be held Nov. 12, the third-to-last week of the regular season.

As part of some scheduling rearrangement that had to be done to fit both SC and Wagner onto the calendar, UMass also announced that the road trip to Appalachian State previously set for 2016 has been pushed out to Sept. 26, 2020.

Here's a look at the complete schedule:
•Sept. 3 at Florida
•Sept. 10 vs. UConn (Gillette Stadium)
•Sept. 17 at Boston College
•Sept. 24 vs. Mississippi State (Gillette Stadium)
•Oct. 1 vs. Tulane (Gillette Stadium)
•Oct. 8 at Old Dominion
•Oct. 15 vs. Louisiana Tech (Gillette Stadium)
•Oct. 22 at South Carolina
•Oct. 29 vs. Wagner
•Nov. 5 at Troy
•Nov. 19 at BYU
•Nov. 26 at Hawaii

http://www.masslive.com/umassfootball/in...cart_river

UMASS will need strong alliances with BYU, Army, Idaho when they are kicked out of the SB, Buffalo regionally from the MAC, and scheduling arrangements with the AAC northern teams if it is going to survive as an independent. Typical scheduling as a long run independent:

FCS school

2 P-5 schools - one for the money and one with a return game at Gillette. Rutgers and BC could full fill the return game requirement if they can get them on the schedule regularly.

AAC - Temple and UConn regularly and three more schools with Navy slipping in there every few years. Hopefully with this arrangement UMASS can get in on their bowl arrangement as an opponent in Miami or get one of their lower end bowls with all of their future bowl commitments. They can also play a series of BB games in this arrangement.

An annual regional game with Buffalo.

The rest of the schedule made up with SB, MAC, and CUSA home and home's.

UMASS will also need a TV contract of some sort to survive as an independent. Try to hook on with Army, be a lead in game to ND when thy play later in the day, or hook on with a sports channel like the BE.

UMASS should have stayed in the MAC even if it meant bringing in their other sports. James Madison might have moved up then for a 14 school all sports conference. Good luck on your future though.

(08-29-2015 09:25 AM)carolinaknights Wrote:  UMASS will need strong alliances with BYU, Army, Idaho when they are kicked out of the SB, Buffalo regionally from the MAC, and scheduling arrangements with the AAC northern teams if it is going to survive as an independent. Typical scheduling as a long run independent:

FCS school

2 P-5 schools - one for the money and one with a return game at Gillette. Rutgers and BC could full fill the return game requirement if they can get them on the schedule regularly.

AAC - Temple and UConn regularly and three more schools with Navy slipping in there every few years. Hopefully with this arrangement UMASS can get in on their bowl arrangement as an opponent in Miami or get one of their lower end bowls with all of their future bowl commitments. They can also play a series of BB games in this arrangement.

An annual regional game with Buffalo.

The rest of the schedule made up with SB, MAC, and CUSA home and home's.

UMASS will also need a TV contract of some sort to survive as an independent. Try to hook on with Army, be a lead in game to ND when thy play later in the day, or hook on with a sports channel like the BE.

UMASS should have stayed in the MAC even if it meant bringing in their other sports. James Madison might have moved up then for a 14 school all sports conference. Good luck on your future though.

Threes no way UMass is going to "get in" on any conferences bowl line up. On the up side, with so many bows out there, they have a shot of being selected to fill a vacant bowl slot from the at large pool.

(08-26-2015 06:32 PM)4thDown Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:53 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 09:37 PM)4thDown Wrote:  It also depends on Army willing to play.

"Willing to play" = "sees a benefit to their school/program".

So, what's the benefit to Army?

It would have to help with scheduling and bowl game access, I would imagine. Do they get on TV much?

Army has a dedicated bowl slot when they are eligible, likes having a national schedule, and has a weekend game on broadcast TV when nobody else is playing. And left CUSA v2.0 because the level of competition was too tough.

Quote:Might give them a bit more visibility. Navy obviously saw enough benefit to do it, so no reason why Army couldn't as well.

Due to West Point conditioning standards, Army has the smallest O-line in FBS football. So they are in a different position than Navy.

http://sportsnola.com/size-still-matters...n-in-2015/

Looks like it's Air Force this year

(08-16-2015 06:24 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 06:14 PM)pablowow Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 12:16 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 11:15 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Don't remember ECU being football only

They were originally given a football only invite at the same meeting where Tulane was offered a full invite. ECU's invite was later upgraded to an all sports invite after the C7 left. It was the C7 that had blocked an ECU all sports invite.

Correct!

For some reason ECU basketball was hated by the Catholic schools. I understand we are not good but Tulane was no better then us in basketball neither is UCF and they got full invites. Also our baseball is pretty good but I do not think the northern catholic schools care for baseball nor football.

The C7 wanted nothing to do with their ungodly bad Basketball. That was the reason why.

(08-29-2015 12:42 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 12:34 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Due to West Point conditioning standards, Army has the smallest O-line in FBS football. So they are in a different position than Navy.

Never heard about this, although it obviously explains a lot. Link?

Should have written "one of the" ~ I was on the Greyhound between Knoxville and Northeast yesterday, posting from my tablet instead of the laptop.

The lightest in the WSJ article I read actually was Air Force (2010) ... which makes sense, because they would have the tightest size restrictions. Navy's height / weight limits would be the least restrictive among the service academies. That year FAU was lighter than Army, but the service academies were three of the lightest four, and I have seen line weight charts in other years where they are the lightest three in a row ... AF, Army, Navy.

(08-29-2015 02:42 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 06:24 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  For some reason ECU basketball was hated by the Catholic schools. I understand we are not good but Tulane was no better then us in basketball neither is UCF and they got full invites. Also our baseball is pretty good but I do not think the northern catholic schools care for baseball nor football.

The C7 wanted nothing to do with their ungodly bad Basketball. That was the reason why.

One other difference is that Tulane is a prestigious university, while ECU isn't.

As far as UCF vs ECU, there is also the number of bad BBall schools to reckon, since FB-first, bad BBall program addition waters down your conference RPI further ... the reaction to ECU after UCF was already added would be, "oh no, not another hopelessly bad BBall program!!!"

(08-30-2015 07:22 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 12:42 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 12:34 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Due to West Point conditioning standards, Army has the smallest O-line in FBS football. So they are in a different position than Navy.

Never heard about this, although it obviously explains a lot. Link?

Should have written "one of the" ~ I was on the Greyhound between Knoxville and Northeast yesterday, posting from my tablet instead of the laptop.

The lightest in the WSJ article I read actually was Air Force (2010) ... which makes sense, because they would have the tightest size restrictions. Navy's height / weight limits would be the least restrictive among the service academies. That year FAU was lighter than Army, but the service academies were three of the lightest four, and I have seen line weight charts in other years where they are the lightest three in a row ... AF, Army, Navy.

(08-29-2015 02:42 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 06:24 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  For some reason ECU basketball was hated by the Catholic schools. I understand we are not good but Tulane was no better then us in basketball neither is UCF and they got full invites. Also our baseball is pretty good but I do not think the northern catholic schools care for baseball nor football.

The C7 wanted nothing to do with their ungodly bad Basketball. That was the reason why.

One other difference is that Tulane is a prestigious university, while ECU isn't.

As far as UCF vs ECU, there is also the number of bad BBall schools to reckon, since FB-first, bad BBall program addition waters down your conference RPI further ... the reaction to ECU after UCF was already added would be, "oh no, not another hopelessly bad BBall program!!!"

Again, ex-NFL Commish Paul Tagliabue is (or was?) president of Georgetown's Board of Trustees. There was a strategy at work, (ALL TEH MARKETZZ) establishing outposts in Dallas, Houston, Orlando, San Diego, even Memphis and New Orleans. ECU being in Greenville instead of Charlotte or even Greensboro hurt.

(ECU fans argued their reach in Charlotte and Winston-Salem etc. I know. It doesn't matter for at least three different reasons--in the past; don't tell me tell Paul Tagliabue/the C7 Presidents,;the Old Big East media markets jackpot strategy was a bust. I'm not re-arguing that, just stating that it was a big factor in Old Big East and C-7 decisionmaking.)

(08-30-2015 09:27 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Again, ex-NFL Commish Paul Tagliabue is (or was?) president of Georgetown's Board of Trustees. There was a strategy at work, (ALL TEH MARKETZZ) establishing outposts in Dallas, Houston, Orlando, San Diego, even Memphis and New Orleans. ECU being in Greenville instead of Charlotte or even Greensboro hurt.

Yes ... which was why Boise was so critical to the success of the Big East of Reno strategy. Because its one thing "being in" big media markets, its another thing putting on a game that gets TV sets in those markets tuned in.

(08-30-2015 09:37 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-30-2015 09:27 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Again, ex-NFL Commish Paul Tagliabue is (or was?) president of Georgetown's Board of Trustees. There was a strategy at work, (ALL TEH MARKETZZ) establishing outposts in Dallas, Houston, Orlando, San Diego, even Memphis and New Orleans. ECU being in Greenville instead of Charlotte or even Greensboro hurt.

Yes ... which was why Boise was so critical to the success of the Big East of Reno strategy. Because its one thing "being in" big media markets, its another thing putting on a game that gets TV sets in those markets tuned in.

Yes, if ECU had won 100 games in 10 years, or won a BCS bowl, that would have been different. But they didn't. As it was, they were a school with a good-sized football fanbase and no national profile, coupled with awful basketball in a tiny market. Boise State and Navy were worth making exceptions for, ECU not so much.

(08-29-2015 09:25 AM)carolinaknights Wrote:  UMASS will need strong alliances with BYU, Army, Idaho when they are kicked out of the SB, Buffalo regionally from the MAC, and scheduling arrangements with the AAC northern teams if it is going to survive as an independent. Typical scheduling as a long run independent:

FCS school

2 P-5 schools - one for the money and one with a return game at Gillette. Rutgers and BC could full fill the return game requirement if they can get them on the schedule regularly.

AAC - Temple and UConn regularly and three more schools with Navy slipping in there every few years. Hopefully with this arrangement UMASS can get in on their bowl arrangement as an opponent in Miami or get one of their lower end bowls with all of their future bowl commitments. They can also play a series of BB games in this arrangement.

An annual regional game with Buffalo.

The rest of the schedule made up with SB, MAC, and CUSA home and home's.

UMASS will also need a TV contract of some sort to survive as an independent. Try to hook on with Army, be a lead in game to ND when thy play later in the day, or hook on with a sports channel like the BE.

UMASS should have stayed in the MAC even if it meant bringing in their other sports. James Madison might have moved up then for a 14 school all sports conference. Good luck on your future though.

AD Ryan Bamford continues to adjust the schedule and we now have 6 home games for 2016 with two on campus. This article says his, Daniel Malone's recorder is acting up and there will be more details later. However this a very nice article from the Springfield Republican/Masslive.com

Quote:AMHERST – The soon-to-be-announced University of Massachusetts football scheduling deal tying together the UMass, Boston College and UConn is one that should please fans who have been clamoring for the Minutemen to get more involved with their New England rivals.

It should come as no surprise that the deal pleases UMass athletic director Ryan Bamford, too.

Tuesday, I spoke on the phone with Bamford – who said the deal will become official as soon as one of the other schools ties up some loose ends in its side – to get the first-year AD's take on the situation.

(Note: My audio recorder is acting up not allowing me to access the interview at the moment. Look for more details when I get that situation sorted out.)

First, here's a quick rundown of what to expect out of the deal:

UMass will drop its 2016 and 2017 games against UConn so that the Huskies and Boston College can start up a new series. In exchange, BC will now play its Sept. 17, 2016 game against the Minutemen on the road at Gillette Stadium instead of at Alumni Stadium in Chestnut Hill. The 2017 hole created by UConn will still have to be filled.

UMass will fill the Sept. 10 hole in its 2016 schedule vacated by UConn with another home game against Florida International at McGuirk Stadium. Additional FIU road games are set for 2018 (previously scheduled) and 2019 (new).

In the end, UMass winds up with four future games against BC (2017, 2018 and a home-and-home in the early 2020s) and four future games against UConn (2018-2021).

The background
Bamford said the framework for the deal started to come together about 3-4 weeks ago after he met with BC athletic director Brad Bates and UConn AD Warde Manuel at an athletics conference last month.

At that point, the two other schools had already been in communication about establishing more future games. What was needed was UMass' help in moving some things around schedule-wise to pull it off.

Bamford, despite telling reporters in August that he was done tinkering with the 2016 schedule after adding South Carolina and Wagner for next season, said he jumped at the opportunity to get involved with the two other New England schools.

On UMass' end, it required filling the newly-created 2016 opening with another FIU game. Bamford said additional negotiations with FIU athletic director Pete Garcia had already been in motion before the BC/UConn talks began and that he felt "really fortunate" about that part of the equation could be working out in everyone's favor.

Overall, Bamford said he was ok with giving up the 2016-17 UConn games if it meant ensuring the eight future matchups with the Eagles and Huskies. Flipping what had been a 5-7 home-road split for the Minutemen in 2016 to an even 6-6 is also something both he and coach Mark Whipple feel good about.


New England rivalry
Bamford views the opportunity to strengthen ties in the region as being important to the future of the football program. Thinking of it as a sort of "rising tide lifts all boats" scenario, Bamford wants to see college football grow in profile in New England and he thinks the intermingling of the three local FBS teams can help do that.

Bamford admitted that UMass is still "looking up" at Boston College and UConn because of the head start those programs have as FBS programs, but he hopes that establishing long-term rivalries through the new scheduling deals will help elevate UMass to that level in the near future.

Bamford also said he'd "love to see" UMass play the Huskies and Eagles more regularly in basketball and other sports.


The 4-2 split
Under Bamford's predecessor, John McCutcheon, it had been assumed that with a 6-game home schedule, the matchups must either be split down the middle with three games played at McGuirk Stadium and three played at Gillette Stadium or split 5-1 in favor of whichever location UMass deemed its home field. Not once did McCutcheon give reason to question that status.

But according to Bamford, UMass first received word via email as early as 2010 or 2011 that it could split games 4-2 like the team plans to do in 2016. That was confirmed in 2013, but never made public. Bamford said his compliance staff has assured him that the 4-2 split is doable.


2017: All home games at McGuirk?
Surprised that this hadn't been made into a bigger deal already, Bamford said the way the team's 2017 contracts are structured means that UMass could elect to play all of its home games for that season on campus at McGuirk Stadium. That would include Old Dominion (Sept. 9), Ohio (Sept. 30), Hawaii (Oct. 7), Georgia Southern (Oct. 21), Appalachian State (Oct. 28) and Maine (Nov. 11).

In general, Bamford said he's in favor of UMass eventually moving to play all its home games at McGuirk with the option of having Gillette available to host larger opponents when those opportunities come up.


Future McGuirk upgrades
To his point about campus games, Bamford said additional stadium upgrades to McGuirk are "near the top" of his to-do list. He believes that if UMass envisions itself alongside BC, UConn and comparable other FBS schools, the team's on-campus stadium "can't have (portable restrooms) and free-standing concession stands." Additionally, there are lingering issues concerning compliance for handicapped patrons he wants to address with the stadium.

While he didn't offer a specific timeline for any of those plans, Bamford said he's been looking hard at how to make additional renovations happen, whether that includes increasing seating capacity, improving fan amenities or both.

The recent additions of the Football Performance Center and press box complex are huge pieces to the puzzle, he said, and he wants to see more.


Other notes
Bamford said he probably wouldn't have done the South Carolina deal, which he held off on for as long as possible, had the BC/UConn opportunity come up sooner. Even so, he's pleased with the contract structure that nets UMass $1.5 million and a future home-and-home basketball deal with the Gamecocks.

Bamford re-iterated his point from March that conference independence "is not a death sentence." He feels much better about the situation now after re-working the schedules than he did when he first took over.

While the UConn series could ultimately help make UMass more attractive as a future conference addition for the AAC, Bamford said that wasn't on his mind in working out the deal. He said he was more concerned with getting additional games and, more importantly, getting additional games with an opponent close by.

Asked about other pending announcements, Bamford said there isn't anything else major coming down the immediate pipeline.

UMass AD Ryan Bamford talks BC/UConn deal, future McGuirk upgrades and playing more games in Amherst

I'm sure it's already been mentioned but what is the payout per team in the A-10?