(06-28-2020 10:37 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(06-28-2020 08:52 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  It's getting harder with the old Big East splitting into two multi-bid conferences for those at-large bids.

Yes, the timeline of those A-10 bids has the tale of the tape on that front as well.

It's not an easy climb ... finding that first coach that can recruit and game day coach up a program and wants to stay and build rather than take the bigger money offer when it comes along, that is stumbling across a winning lottery ticket lying on the street.

But building up the basketball side of the conference offers a more workable goal to work to than hoping to land a basketball school that on it's own will upgrade conference basketball while also for some mysterious reason wish to leave it's current, likely stronger, basketball conference.

100% agree and thought Jon Steinbrecher's BB plan from around 8 years ago was very good, even-thou seen some post not liking it and remember parts of it. Schedule more home games and games that help the RPI. The later really forget what he exactly said and was more complicated along with an incentive of a slightly un-equal distribution of NCAA Credits.

(06-28-2020 02:33 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  

(06-28-2020 10:37 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(06-28-2020 08:52 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  It's getting harder with the old Big East splitting into two multi-bid conferences for those at-large bids.

Yes, the timeline of those A-10 bids has the tale of the tape on that front as well.

It's not an easy climb ... finding that first coach that can recruit and game day coach up a program and wants to stay and build rather than take the bigger money offer when it comes along, that is stumbling across a winning lottery ticket lying on the street.

But building up the basketball side of the conference offers a more workable goal to work to than hoping to land a basketball school that on it's own will upgrade conference basketball while also for some mysterious reason wish to leave it's current, likely stronger, basketball conference.

100% agree and thought Jon Steinbrecher's BB plan from around 8 years ago was very good, even-thou seen some post not liking it and remember parts of it. Schedule more home games and games that help the RPI. The later really forget what he exactly said and was more complicated along with an incentive of a slightly un-equal distribution of NCAA Credits.

MAC distribution is fairly unequal but the bottom teams at least get 1/3rd of the annual basketball fund payout.

A10 is really unequal to the point where only the top teams play each other from the prior year. For that reason its almost like its 2 conferences in one. Talking to SLU fans that is one of the reasons why they feel "fat dumb and happy" in the A10 because of that inequality.

The WCC did have equal distribution until quite recently when Gonzaga threatened a move to the MWC if they didn't make it an unequal distribution.

With the unequal distribution on basketball money what mid major conference you play in means less than what it ever did before since you could dominate it and take on the basketball revenue for yourself.

I'm pretty sure the MAC has an equal distribution, at least for the auto-bid tourney credit. Teams that earn additional credits by winning a game or 2 should IMO receive 25%-50% of those credits with the conference splitting the remainder. Not doing that just promotes freeloading. You saw that in the WCC for years. Schools like Portland, Loyola Marymount, and Pacific pocketed the money Gonzaga brought in without reinvesting in their program.

All I could find from a quick good search was an announcement in 2018 of a modestly unequal payment, paying 30% of the units earned from NCAA tourney wins to the schools that earned it for the two years after the win. There are also NET oriented bonuses for Q1 and Q2 wins, which I assume are taken out of the NCAA unit revenue, which replace the previous RPI oriented bonuses for out of conference winning percentage.

30% on two years per win nets out as 0% per appearance for a one and out and 5% per appearance for a 1-1 performance. I'd crank that bonus for winning appearances up to more like 50% the first three years, 25% the last three years, for 37.5% overall per winning appearance, and still give bonuses out of the autobid, maybe 15% to tournament champion and 10% to regular season champion.

(06-30-2020 12:28 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I'm pretty sure the MAC has an equal distribution, at least for the auto-bid tourney credit.

No it was adjusted after Ohio's sweet 16 to provide more incentive.

(06-17-2020 12:17 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Highly unlikely MAC expansion would include a mix of one all-sports addition (Marshall) and one football affiliate (Army West Point).

It would more likely be either two football affiliates (Army and UConn or UMass), or two all-sports members (Marshall and JMU or ODU).

And yes, regardless, BGSU would move to the MAC West.

FIRE UP CHIPS! :)

BeatWestern, agree with this, but in regard one would include all three, one as a Notre Dame, 6 game style commitment.

Looking at Army's schedule this year, it's almost their currently scheduled season with 5 teams, for one specific affiliation you mentioned. It would have to be down the road, only after UConn and UMass get their sh-t together and is financially positive. The real carrot is getting Army.

Timing is important, the MAC showing some love to Army for any schedule issues would be nice.

Army 2020 from fbschedules.com

09/04 - Bucknell
09/12 - at Rice
09/26 - Oklahoma
10/03 - at Miami (Ohio)
10/10 - Princeton (Canceled)
10/17 - Eastern Michigan
10/24 - Buffalo
11/07 - Air Force
11/14 - at Tulane
11/21 - at UMass
11/28 - at UConn
12/12 - vs Navy (in Philadelphia, PA)

Or, and please forgive me as been pro-MAC and will start sounding like DavidSt and Kit-Cat.

Perhaps show some love to UConn as well and possible after 2023 and UMass got it's sh-t together offer both UConn and Army that 6 game Notre Dame type associations. Then UMass would make the other pairing.

UMass is ok but UConn went after P5 games is hurting.

2020 schedule from fbschedules.com

09/03 - UMass
09/12 - at Illinois (Canceled)
09/19 - at Virginia (Canceled)
09/26 - Indiana (Canceled)
10/03 - Old Dominion
10/10 - Maine (Canceled)
10/24 - at Ole Miss
10/31 - Liberty
11/07 - at North Carolina (Canceled)
11/14 - at San Jose State
11/21 - Middle Tennessee
11/28 - Army

(07-30-2020 09:54 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  

(06-17-2020 12:17 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Highly unlikely MAC expansion would include a mix of one all-sports addition (Marshall) and one football affiliate (Army West Point).

It would more likely be either two football affiliates (Army and UConn or UMass), or two all-sports members (Marshall and JMU or ODU).

And yes, regardless, BGSU would move to the MAC West.

FIRE UP CHIPS! :)

BeatWestern, agree with this, but in regard one would include all three, one as a Notre Dame, 6 game style commitment.

Looking at Army's schedule this year, it's almost their currently scheduled season with 5 teams, for one specific affiliation you mentioned. It would have to be down the road, only after UConn and UMass get their sh-t together and is financially positive. The real carrot is getting Army.

Timing is important, the MAC showing some love to Army for any schedule issues would be nice.

Army 2020 from fbschedules.com

09/04 - Bucknell
09/12 - at Rice
09/26 - Oklahoma
10/03 - at Miami (Ohio)
10/10 - Princeton (Canceled)
10/17 - Eastern Michigan
10/24 - Buffalo
11/07 - Air Force
11/14 - at Tulane
11/21 - at UMass
11/28 - at UConn
12/12 - vs Navy (in Philadelphia, PA)

Or, and please forgive me as been pro-MAC and will start sounding like DavidSt and Kit-Cat.

Perhaps show some love to UConn as well and possible after 2023 and UMass got it's sh-t together offer both UConn and Army that 6 game Notre Dame type associations. Then UMass would make the other pairing.

UMass is ok but UConn went after P5 games is hurting.

2020 schedule from fbschedules.com

09/03 - UMass
09/12 - at Illinois (Canceled)
09/19 - at Virginia (Canceled)
09/26 - Indiana (Canceled)
10/03 - Old Dominion
10/10 - Maine (Canceled)
10/24 - at Ole Miss
10/31 - Liberty
11/07 - at North Carolina (Canceled)
11/14 - at San Jose State
11/21 - Middle Tennessee
11/28 - Army

Sounds like UConn has an every man for himself type attitude toward other football independents. They've got a leg up on UMass with more time in FBS and facilities.

I am not of the opinion that a lot of league options exist these days. AAC schools for example are stuck where they are with a decent TV deal. Its not like they would consider CUSA, even a regional split. MAC is too built up with championship arrangements, travel savings, cost model, bowls, TV ect to want to do anything else.

(07-30-2020 10:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Sounds like UConn has an every man for himself type attitude toward other football independents. They've got a leg up on UMass with more time in FBS and facilities. ....

??? Where are you getting that?

UConn needed to buy their way into both sides of existing contracts for 2020 in order to meet the five FBS home games requirement. There's nothing to glean about UConn's "attitude" from their 2020 schedule, it's a picture of what deals were available.

Indeed, two of five cancelled games were games that were scheduled while they were still in the AAC.

(07-31-2020 02:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-30-2020 10:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Sounds like UConn has an every man for himself type attitude toward other football independents. They've got a leg up on UMass with more time in FBS and facilities. ....

??? Where are you getting that?

UConn needed to buy their way into both sides of existing contracts for 2020 in order to meet the five FBS home games requirement. There's nothing to glean about UConn's "attitude" from their 2020 schedule, it's a picture of what deals were available.

Indeed, two of five cancelled games were games that were scheduled while they were still in the AAC.

Agree with BruceMcF but not Kit-Cat. Not sure how having a nicer facility 23 miles away from campus is better than on campus stadium. UMass has spent over 50 million on football facilities, including the full size IPF, which can be used by all sports. The pictures of UConn football complex does not look anything like a full size IPF.

Remember the prize in my wet dream, is Army. Know it is extremely unlikely. But that tight 3 team pod in distance is nice for those three teams. Perhaps if the MAC got more bowl tie-ins, it would be more feasible for those three teams to do something with the MAC with little financial benefits.

Again the benefit to the MAC is Army and perhaps some media dollars for the additional region games with Army and rivalry game of two state flagships. UMass leads the all-time series 37-35–2.

Kit-Cat you have not kept up with out facility improvements and will provide a link and two pictures. Yes the IPF has a ten year life and not a steel structure, but is full size.



https://csnbbs.com/thread-849975.html

Is there any truth to the MAC being in talks with JMU again?

(07-31-2020 04:15 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  Is there any truth to the MAC being in talks with JMU again?

No there isn’t.

(07-31-2020 04:15 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  Is there any truth to the MAC being in talks with JMU again?

JMU was the #14 last time. Who would be the #13 driving it?

I don't have any inside info, but utpotts' answer is certainly the most plausible one.

I can’t see the MAC making any realignment moves any time in the near future. No one is leaving and there is no incentive to grow past 12.

(08-03-2020 02:08 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-31-2020 04:15 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  Is there any truth to the MAC being in talks with JMU again?

JMU was the #14 last time. Who would be the #13 driving it?

I don't have any inside info, but utpotts' answer is certainly the most plausible one.

I was just trying to see if anything was in the wind on the MAC side. I was reading over on the JMU board that one poster got an email from JMU Alumni Relations that was asking people’s views of the MAC. It’s in the “Newest Conference Rumor” thread page 1187 post 23735.

JMU would only add to the MAC if it could increase our TV contact and I can’t see that happening soon without another possibly more impressive university like ARMY as a full sports school,
TV revenue expansions are likely limited especially with pandemic plus JMU’s BBall team was terrible last year at 9-21.
UCONN, UMASS, Marshall or WKU would be only others somewhat interesting adds, but still need increased bowl connections and TV revenue to make it worthwhile to current members.
UCONN and UMASS have really bad football. Maybe we take Rutgers when they get the boot from the BIG10?
(Then we connect NY and NJ with the MAC.)

(07-31-2020 02:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-30-2020 10:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Sounds like UConn has an every man for himself type attitude toward other football independents. They've got a leg up on UMass with more time in FBS and facilities. ....

??? Where are you getting that?

UConn needed to buy their way into both sides of existing contracts for 2020 in order to meet the five FBS home games requirement. There's nothing to glean about UConn's "attitude" from their 2020 schedule, it's a picture of what deals were available.

My comment is about Steve saying UConn loaded up on P5 games.

If you look at UMass future schedules it doesn't include UConn, therefore one can assume the Huskies aren't eager to play an annual series.

UConn has won 104 football games since transitioning up to FBS while UMass has won only 19 games. UMass from what Steve is saying put 50 million into its facilities in the past decade. While good by MAC standards UConn has spent $91.2 million on a new 40,000 seat football stadium just by itself.

UConn has been an independent 1 year and already has its own TV deal with CBS Sports while UMass doesn't have a deal with a TV network.

I can go on and on making comparisons but its clear by almost any metric UConn FB is further ahead of UMass FB.

(08-03-2020 07:19 PM)JHVMU19 Wrote:  JMU would only add to the MAC if it could increase our TV contact and I can’t see that happening soon without another possibly more impressive university like ARMY as a full sports school,
TV revenue expansions are likely limited especially with pandemic plus JMU’s BBall team was terrible last year at 9-21.
UCONN, UMASS, Marshall or WKU would be only others somewhat interesting adds, but still need increased bowl connections and TV revenue to make it worthwhile to current members.
UCONN and UMASS have really bad football. Maybe we take Rutgers when they get the boot from the BIG10?
(Then we connect NY and NJ with the MAC.)

-Army is not going to leave the Patriot for Olympic sports.

-TV is not going to be out front dangling money to make changes happen.

-MAC no longer needs to expand to improve its bowl opportunities. They come organically now as other G5 conferences need schools to play.

-Villanova almost moved to FBS before. They would get the MAC back into Pennsylvania and connect with Ohio and New York.

(08-03-2020 06:14 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 02:08 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-31-2020 04:15 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  Is there any truth to the MAC being in talks with JMU again?

JMU was the #14 last time. Who would be the #13 driving it?

I don't have any inside info, but utpotts' answer is certainly the most plausible one.

I was just trying to see if anything was in the wind on the MAC side. I was reading over on the JMU board that one poster got an email from JMU Alumni Relations that was asking people’s views of the MAC. It’s in the “Newest Conference Rumor” thread page 1187 post 23735.

I don't see why when the MAC could gain more by raiding the MVC for teams than the Colonial in its regional power struggle.

I would also think that if the MAC had 1 and only 1 opening it would consider filing it with an existing FBS school in the east before a FCS call up. Something like revisiting UMass FB only just to get back to 12. Leadership can change attitudes.

(08-03-2020 09:37 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-31-2020 02:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-30-2020 10:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Sounds like UConn has an every man for himself type attitude toward other football independents. They've got a leg up on UMass with more time in FBS and facilities. ....

??? Where are you getting that?

UConn needed to buy their way into both sides of existing contracts for 2020 in order to meet the five FBS home games requirement. There's nothing to glean about UConn's "attitude" from their 2020 schedule, it's a picture of what deals were available.

My comment is about Steve saying UConn loaded up on P5 games.

If you look at UMass future schedules it doesn't include UConn, therefore one can assume the Huskies aren't eager to play an annual series.

I know what your comment was about, I was querying what the basis for the comment was. As it turns out, it's on a very shaky basis indeed.

When you look at UConn future schedules, they are only scheduled out to this year (and now with six cancellations), and aren't even scheduled out in 2021, and they have UMass scheduled for 2020 and 2021, and have plenty of openings in 2023 on out, so if you are seeing UMass scheduled out further in the future without UConn in the schedule, concluding that the lack of UMass/UConn games in 2022 on out is due to UConn's "attitude" since becoming a FB independent is drawing too much out of the available evidence.

(08-04-2020 06:07 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 09:37 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-31-2020 02:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-30-2020 10:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Sounds like UConn has an every man for himself type attitude toward other football independents. They've got a leg up on UMass with more time in FBS and facilities. ....

??? Where are you getting that?

UConn needed to buy their way into both sides of existing contracts for 2020 in order to meet the five FBS home games requirement. There's nothing to glean about UConn's "attitude" from their 2020 schedule, it's a picture of what deals were available.

My comment is about Steve saying UConn loaded up on P5 games.

If you look at UMass future schedules it doesn't include UConn, therefore one can assume the Huskies aren't eager to play an annual series.

I know what your comment was about, I was querying what the basis for the comment was. As it turns out, it's on a very shaky basis indeed.

When you look at UConn future schedules, they are only scheduled out to this year (and now with six cancellations), and aren't even scheduled out in 2021, and they have UMass scheduled for 2020 and 2021, and have plenty of openings in 2023 on out, so if you are seeing UMass scheduled out further in the future without UConn in the schedule, concluding that the lack of UMass/UConn games in 2022 on out is due to UConn's "attitude" since becoming a FB independent is drawing too much out of the available evidence.

They haven't signed an extended series with UMass when they've had plenty of time to do so at this point.

And I used the words "sounds like" because we haven't seen the snobbery in action for an extended period of time to confirm it.