Not exactly what you guys want to hear about the Carr Report.

Quote:In July, UMass hired the firm, which provides a variety of services to Division I athletic departments, to evaluate the school’s standing in regards to conference alignment. After dismissing head football coach Charley Molnar on Thursday, UMass athletic director John McCutcheon said the school will also be employing Carr Associates as a search firm to aid in hiring his replacement.

Carr Associates, which is run by former Houston athletic director and NCAA Division I Management Council member Bill Carr, is receiving $60,000 for the conference alignment review, $6,000 for a Title IX review and approximately $30,000 for consulting on the search. UMass will also pay for travel expenses.

According to the Carr website , former clients include Duke, Texas, LSU, North Carolina, Florida, three Mid-American Conference schools and several conferences, including the Atlantic 10.

McCutcheon said that while Carr may suggest candidates to replace Molnar, its most important function will be vetting them.

“Candidates will emerge from a number of different places. Either they’ll reach out to me or through Carr or there will be people that (Carr Associates) know of that they’ll bring to the conversation,” he said. “Their primary role is to help us manage through the evaluation of that total pool and help us with background checks and things like that. They have resources that we, working in-house, wouldn’t have. That’s one of the advantages of having them involved.”

Carr’s other UMass evaluations are expected to extend into January. UMass has long been considered a potential candidate for the American Athletic Conference, which was formed this year with former Big East and Conference USA schools. Any alignment evaluation at UMass would certainly involve looking at the AAC, although McCutcheon declined to mention specific conferences.

“We’re evaluating all of our options with our current alignment and any and all possible alternate alignments. It’s a due diligence kind of thing. Not that there’s anything pending,” he said. “We want to make sure we have all the facts, all the alternatives evaluated to make the best informed decision when and if something arises. It’s a comprehensive top-to-bottom athletic department evaluation.”

U may need to create a login for 5 free views a month

(12-27-2013 10:10 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Not exactly what you guys want to hear about the Carr Report.

What do you mean? Nothing in there is problematic.

(12-27-2013 10:19 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 10:10 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Not exactly what you guys want to hear about the Carr Report.

What do you mean? Nothing in there is problematic.

I think Steve is referring to this:

"In July, UMass hired the firm, which provides a variety of services to Division I athletic departments, to evaluate the school’s standing in regards to conference alignment."

Why pay a lot of money to a consulting firm for an obvious answer. Miami didn't need to pay a firm to realize Miami would be BEST aligned with the Big Ten conference. Only problem is we have been waiting 60 years for the invite and its no where in site.
Maybe the Carr Report will tell UMass they are best to be aligned with the Big Ten or the ACC.

However, this could also be interpreted as UMass needs a consulting firm and political cover to make their move to the MAC for all-sports oddly the same as James Madison hired Carr Sports around the same exact time frame to consult them and provide political cover for them to suggest their move to FBS.

Hmmmm.

Are you sure this isn't the comment that stands out?

"UMass has long been considered a potential candidate for the American Athletic Conference, which was formed this year with former Big East and Conference USA schools. Any alignment evaluation at UMass would certainly involve looking at the AAC, although McCutcheon declined to mention specific conferences."

(12-27-2013 10:40 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 10:19 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 10:10 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Not exactly what you guys want to hear about the Carr Report.

What do you mean? Nothing in there is problematic.

I think Steve is referring to this:

"In July, UMass hired the firm, which provides a variety of services to Division I athletic departments, to evaluate the school’s standing in regards to conference alignment."

Why pay a lot of money to a consulting firm for an obvious answer. Miami didn't need to pay a firm to realize Miami would be BEST aligned with the Big Ten conference. Only problem is we have been waiting 60 years for the invite and its no where in site.
Maybe the Carr Report will tell UMass they are best to be aligned with the Big Ten or the ACC.

However, this could also be interpreted as UMass needs a consulting firm and political cover to make their move to the MAC for all-sports oddly the same as James Madison hired Carr Sports around the same exact time frame to consult them and provide political cover for them to suggest their move to FBS.

Hmmmm.

Aha. Moving to the MAC. Indeed, I do not want to hear that.

(12-27-2013 10:53 AM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  Are you sure this isn't the comment that stands out?

"UMass has long been considered a potential candidate for the American Athletic Conference, which was formed this year with former Big East and Conference USA schools. Any alignment evaluation at UMass would certainly involve looking at the AAC, although McCutcheon declined to mention specific conferences."

It could be that too, but they'd need an invite.

Wasn't July around the time the rumors of the MAC asking UMass to get all-in or all-out starting to surface?

http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=7396

.

The AAC is the ideal fit for UMass now that the AAC is locked in as a secondary football conference. It makes sense in term of geography, rivals, and competition. As soon as UC finds its exit papers, which may not be soon, UMass is the next logical option for them.

(12-27-2013 11:17 AM)axeme Wrote:  The AAC is the ideal fit for UMass now that the AAC is locked in as a secondary football conference. It makes sense in term of geography, rivals, and competition. As soon as UC finds its exit papers, which may not be soon, UMass is the next logical option for them.

I would not be amazed to see Navy back out as well... I can see the AAC trying to poach a MAC school or three in the next few years. I won't begin to speculate as two who but UMass would be pretty high up.

(12-27-2013 10:58 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 10:53 AM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  Are you sure this isn't the comment that stands out?

"UMass has long been considered a potential candidate for the American Athletic Conference, which was formed this year with former Big East and Conference USA schools. Any alignment evaluation at UMass would certainly involve looking at the AAC, although McCutcheon declined to mention specific conferences."

It could be that too, but they'd need an invite.

With UMass hoops starting to show signs of swinging back up, an invite to the AAC might not be that big of a stretch. If they can find a good replacement of Molnar, football should become at least respectable and that with solid hoops and the northeast presence should make them very attractive to the AAC. Once they get back on campus for football the program will take a big step. I just don't see them coming to the MAC at any point all in as they much like many of the teams that have joined this league over the last decade seem to be positioning for something bigger.

(12-27-2013 11:20 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 11:17 AM)axeme Wrote:  The AAC is the ideal fit for UMass now that the AAC is locked in as a secondary football conference. It makes sense in term of geography, rivals, and competition. As soon as UC finds its exit papers, which may not be soon, UMass is the next logical option for them.

I would not be amazed to see Navy back out as well... I can see the AAC trying to poach a MAC school or three in the next few years. I won't begin to speculate as two who but UMass would be pretty high up.

If UMass gets a serious look from the AAC you have to think Buffalo would be in the mix as well.

UMass is making its move soon. They will be leaving the A10 for either AAC or MAC depending on if AAC wants them now or not.

(12-27-2013 11:27 AM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 11:20 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 11:17 AM)axeme Wrote:  The AAC is the ideal fit for UMass now that the AAC is locked in as a secondary football conference. It makes sense in term of geography, rivals, and competition. As soon as UC finds its exit papers, which may not be soon, UMass is the next logical option for them.

I would not be amazed to see Navy back out as well... I can see the AAC trying to poach a MAC school or three in the next few years. I won't begin to speculate as two who but UMass would be pretty high up.

If UMass gets a serious look from the AAC you have to think Buffalo would be in the mix as well.

I don't know... UB has a lot of baggage athletically speaking. Our facilities are sub par and we've not won a lot. UMass may be a dumpster fire on the grid iron but that can point to decent hoops.

It's basically UB's academic profile (size / endowment) and the Alumni Base (NYC/Buffalo) trying to compensate for not really getting started on Athletics until the 90's. (damn you for shutting down UB football in 1970.... We had one of the most promising freshman teams in the nation)

If White get's the east club up and the funding pipelines opened up before the AAC moves then *MAYBE* they look at UB. But I honestly don't know if UB looks back if the MAC's TV deal is in line with the other G5 confs.

I would guess the schools that get a look would be UMass, NIU, Ohio, Buffalo, Toledo and *maybe* Akron..

UMass is the first to go after that I just don't know.

I would put the Ohio schools ahead of NIU for moving. Hopefully we do NOT move. The only reason to move would be an either or situation between D1 and FCS. I am fine with the MAC.

(12-27-2013 12:03 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  I would put the Ohio schools ahead of NIU for moving. Hopefully we do NOT move. The only reason to move would be an either or situation between D1 and FCS. I am fine with the MAC.

I don't think many will debate that the AAC is currently a better league. The reasons to consider a move become much more compelling if a group of MAC schools go together. It brings a level of continuity but also beats what could potentially be left behind. I like the MAC but if four teams bolt this league the league profile changes significantly.

(12-27-2013 12:03 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  I am fine with the MAC.

Hey, you can't just fling around crazy opinions like that around here!

(12-27-2013 02:04 PM)JSF Wrote:  

(12-27-2013 12:03 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  I am fine with the MAC.

Hey, you can't just fling around crazy opinions like that around here!

I think for most schools in the MAC the conference is clearly a better fit than any of the G5 conferences.

The only reason I think Buffalo *MIGHT* want the AAC would be to get more games into Conn and Philly which are right near very large Alumni bases (and the Alumni with money). If it was Buffalo and UMass to move I think playing UMass (Boston), UConn (NY), and Temple (Philly) would be way too tempting for our boosters.

If our Alumni were centered in Cleveland, and Buffalo instead of NYC and Buffalo the calculus would be very different.

One thing I think would be appealing for an Ohio school to leave would be the idea of differentiation. Separating themselves from the pack, even if it's in a worse conference, might have benefits. The MAC schools in Ohio are tightly grouped together in the minds of Ohioans, for better or worse, and so are subject to any local MAC biases as a group, even if it doesn't reflect reality.

I like the MAC/A10 deal UMass has now.

Who the heck knows what's going to happen though.

(12-27-2013 02:44 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  One thing I think would be appealing for an Ohio school to leave would be the idea of differentiation. Separating themselves from the pack, even if it's in a worse conference, might have benefits. The MAC schools in Ohio are tightly grouped together in the minds of Ohioans, for better or worse, and so are subject to any local MAC biases as a group, even if it doesn't reflect reality.

I think splitting them up could be beneficial. But the Ohio media would have to treat them better.