Bottom line is nobody should be mad at UMass or Temple, they should be upset at how stupid the MAC office is. Temple and UMass was given an opportunity to take full advantage of the MAC by terrible incompetant MAC decisions and they took it. Both should have been offered only full sports invitations to begin with (like CUSA did with Charlotte and made them leave A10 and commit). Had we did that, Temple and UMass would have maybe said no, BUT then Temple would have dropped football all together and UMass would still be FCS. Now they are both competition to the MAC and that region. Further, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both are in talks to form their own conference in the NE and mid-atlantic and pull Buffalo along with them.

Truly stupid MAC leadership and the MAC deserves any fallout in the next years because of it. MAC is their own worst enemy. Complete fools.

(03-29-2014 09:53 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Bottom line is nobody should be mad at UMass or Temple, they should be upset at how stupid the MAC office is. Temple and UMass was given an opportunity to take full advantage of the MAC by terrible incompetant MAC decisions and they took it. Both should have been offered only full sports invitations to begin with (like CUSA did with Charlotte and made them leave A10 and commit). Had we did that, Temple and UMass would have maybe said no, BUT then Temple would have dropped football all together and UMass would still be FCS. Now they are both competition to the MAC and that region. Further, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both are in talks to form their own conference in the NE and mid-atlantic and pull Buffalo along with them.

Truly stupid MAC leadership and the MAC deserves any fallout in the next years because of it. MAC is their own worst enemy. Complete fools.

Being a little harsh here, but the more I think about it, the more I see the logic of your points.

(03-29-2014 09:53 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Bottom line is nobody should be mad at UMass or Temple, they should be upset at how stupid the MAC office is. Temple and UMass was given an opportunity to take full advantage of the MAC by terrible incompetant MAC decisions and they took it. Both should have been offered only full sports invitations to begin with (like CUSA did with Charlotte and made them leave A10 and commit). Had we did that, Temple and UMass would have maybe said no, BUT then Temple would have dropped football all together and UMass would still be FCS. Now they are both competition to the MAC and that region. Further, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both are in talks to form their own conference in the NE and mid-atlantic and pull Buffalo along with them.

Truly stupid MAC leadership and the MAC deserves any fallout in the next years because of it. MAC is their own worst enemy. Complete fools.

Well said... Except I really don's see a new conference in the NE...

There is a very outside chance that down the line the AAC takes Buffalo but that might have been *more* likely without two more teams in the NE. In other words if the AAC was looking for members and could not have temple/umass then UB might be the choice..

In any even the MAC hd all the cards and decided to fold like they had a weak hnd.

The good news is that it seems like the presidents have woken up to that fact.

(03-30-2014 08:47 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Temple and UMass was given an opportunity to take full advantage of the MAC by terrible incompetant MAC decisions and they took it. Both should have been offered only full sports invitations to begin with (like CUSA did with Charlotte and made them leave A10 and commit). Had we did that, Temple and UMass would have maybe said no, BUT then Temple would have dropped football all together and UMass would still be FCS.

And we would be no better off than we are now. Had conference realignment at the top level shaken out differently, Temple and UMass would still be in our FB conference and the MAC would be expecting an even higher media payout upgrade than they are expecting at present.

Quote: Now they are both competition to the MAC and that region. Further, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both are in talks to form their own conference in the NE and mid-atlantic and pull Buffalo along with them.

Now if the MAC took scary ghost stories into account in their decision making, then they would be truly stupid MAC leadership.

The MAC can either be opportunistic, or not. A small player in a market dominated by much bigger players is always facing a risk that the big players will do something that knocks their plans awry. When that happens, instead of freaking out, the small player has to dust themselves off and go back to work.

Look at the way that the plans of the WAC, the America, CUSA or the Sunbelt have been knocked around. If the worst thing that the MAC does is have a pair of FB-only eastern teams knocked out by realignment, collecting $5m in the process while now looking forward to a couple million in additional conference payout per school in a conference that is now counting its distribution in the hundreds of thousands ... against that background, the MAC is the second most successful in six Group of Five schools in riding out the latest P5 conference realignment storm.

Remember, when putting the range of possible outcomes in context, that its second out of six rather than second out of five because one FBS conference got knocked out of the FBS completely.

Well done Tardledo, Well done!

Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

(03-30-2014 02:46 PM)Campbell4President Wrote:  Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

No reason to think the AAC has changed their mind from when they passed over UMass to pick Tulsa instead. They'll be at 12 for FB in 2015 when Navy joins, with no pressing need to expand to 14, and look like they prefer an 11 team BBall competition (similar to the MWC with Hawaii).

And CUSA has 14 and even less reason to expand than the American.

UMass can see if the Sunbelt wants them FB-only to make it 12 and a CCG ... that could easily be the Sunbelt's second pick behind JMU all-sports, and JMU might not move up if it means moving up to the Sunbelt.

And other than that, there's playing as an independent.

Of course, Jimmy Kelley at Hustlebelt has a piece up about UMass's future which concludes that UMass would be a "natural fit" for the AAC, without ever considering whether or not the AAC wants UMass. And treats the Sunbelt option as if it refers to UMass all-sports into the Sunbelt. Because ...
... I dunno, I guess if you are a big UMass supporter, you pay a lot more attention to details when it comes to BBall than for FB.

(03-30-2014 03:47 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:46 PM)Campbell4President Wrote:  Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

No reason to think the AAC has changed their mind from when they passed over UMass to pick Tulsa instead. They'll be at 12 for FB in 2015 when Navy joins, with no pressing need to expand to 14, and look like they prefer an 11 team BBall competition (similar to the MWC with Hawaii).

And CUSA has 14 and even less reason to expand than the American.

UMass can see if the Sunbelt wants them FB-only to make it 12 and a CCG ... that could easily be the Sunbelt's second pick behind JMU all-sports, and JMU might not move up if it means moving up to the Sunbelt.

And other than that, there's playing as an independent.

Of course, Jimmy Kelley at Hustlebelt has a piece up about UMass's future which concludes that UMass would be a "natural fit" for the AAC, without ever considering whether or not the AAC wants UMass. And treats the Sunbelt option as if it refers to UMass all-sports into the Sunbelt. Because ...
... I dunno, I guess if you are a big UMass supporter, you pay a lot more attention to details when it comes to BBall than for FB.

Short of losing an AAC team or Army out of the blue making a decision to join the AAC, I don't think the AAC is an option for UMass.

(03-30-2014 04:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Short of losing an AAC team or Army out of the blue making a decision to join the AAC, I don't think the AAC is an option for UMass.

And if Army decided they wanted to be in Navy's division, lose the Army/Navy game as an OOC made for TV event the week after championship week, and face the ignominy of being constantly below Navy on the conference standings ... its no guarantee that UMass is the first pick by the American. There could well be a CUSA team they'd rather have.

(03-30-2014 04:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:47 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:46 PM)Campbell4President Wrote:  Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

No reason to think the AAC has changed their mind from when they passed over UMass to pick Tulsa instead. They'll be at 12 for FB in 2015 when Navy joins, with no pressing need to expand to 14, and look like they prefer an 11 team BBall competition (similar to the MWC with Hawaii).

And CUSA has 14 and even less reason to expand than the American.

UMass can see if the Sunbelt wants them FB-only to make it 12 and a CCG ... that could easily be the Sunbelt's second pick behind JMU all-sports, and JMU might not move up if it means moving up to the Sunbelt.

And other than that, there's playing as an independent.

Of course, Jimmy Kelley at Hustlebelt has a piece up about UMass's future which concludes that UMass would be a "natural fit" for the AAC, without ever considering whether or not the AAC wants UMass. And treats the Sunbelt option as if it refers to UMass all-sports into the Sunbelt. Because ...
... I dunno, I guess if you are a big UMass supporter, you pay a lot more attention to details when it comes to BBall than for FB.

Short of losing an AAC team or Army out of the blue making a decision to join the AAC, I don't think the AAC is an option for UMass.

Agreed.
The AAC isn't going to expand for the sake of expanding. It will need to lose a program(s).

What will probably set all of this off is the Big 12; and THAT won't happen until AFTER the 2014 season at the earliest. If the Big 12 thinks that it is getting screwed in the playoff selection process, it will add two programs.
Almost certainly Cincinnati will be one of them because it is probably the best non P5 available AND it is the best option for the much needed travel partner for West Virginia.

The second program is not as clear. I have seen speculation that it might be one of the AAC Florida teams, but that would make it a geographic outlier. UConn is looking better and better because of basketball, but it too would be at a geographic disadvantage. CUSA and the SBC have programs within the Big 12 footprint as well.

In any event, there will be no AAC opening for UMass for at least 2 years, and even then it probably will need UConn to leave as well.

(03-30-2014 09:38 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 04:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:47 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:46 PM)Campbell4President Wrote:  Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

No reason to think the AAC has changed their mind from when they passed over UMass to pick Tulsa instead. They'll be at 12 for FB in 2015 when Navy joins, with no pressing need to expand to 14, and look like they prefer an 11 team BBall competition (similar to the MWC with Hawaii).

And CUSA has 14 and even less reason to expand than the American.

UMass can see if the Sunbelt wants them FB-only to make it 12 and a CCG ... that could easily be the Sunbelt's second pick behind JMU all-sports, and JMU might not move up if it means moving up to the Sunbelt.

And other than that, there's playing as an independent.

Of course, Jimmy Kelley at Hustlebelt has a piece up about UMass's future which concludes that UMass would be a "natural fit" for the AAC, without ever considering whether or not the AAC wants UMass. And treats the Sunbelt option as if it refers to UMass all-sports into the Sunbelt. Because ...
... I dunno, I guess if you are a big UMass supporter, you pay a lot more attention to details when it comes to BBall than for FB.

Short of losing an AAC team or Army out of the blue making a decision to join the AAC, I don't think the AAC is an option for UMass.

Agreed.
The AAC isn't going to expand for the sake of expanding. It will need to lose a program(s).

What will probably set all of this off is the Big 12; and THAT won't happen until AFTER the 2014 season at the earliest. If the Big 12 thinks that it is getting screwed in the playoff selection process, it will add two programs.
Almost certainly Cincinnati will be one of them because it is probably the best non P5 available AND it is the best option for the much needed travel partner for West Virginia.

The second program is not as clear. I have seen speculation that it might be one of the AAC Florida teams, but that would make it a geographic outlier. UConn is looking better and better because of basketball, but it too would be at a geographic disadvantage. CUSA and the SBC have programs within the Big 12 footprint as well.

In any event, there will be no AAC opening for UMass for at least 2 years, and even then it probably will need UConn to leave as well.

UConn would be an outlier and it would in reality suck for them but for the Big12 it would ahve a number of advantages as it would make their sports relevent in the NE, provide even more basketball power, and effectively kill the AAC for anything resembling a good basketball conference (assuming they took Cincy as well). Taking the Florida schools bring you better football talent pool (though frankly I don't think they need it as I think the Big 12 gets plenty of recurits from Florida if they want them heck even we get them) and exposure down south BUT they will be the lesser teams in the state to your other big conference rivals whereas UConn would be on much more equal footing with the other big name programs in the area. And while the Florida schools are nice for the AAC in many ways losing one of them would not be as bad as losing UConn.

Without Cincy and UConn the AAC looks a like a slightly better than the most recent non-current version of CUSA which as been a 1-2 bid league and what is left out there cannot fill the void left by UConn in particular.

(03-28-2014 09:30 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-28-2014 08:50 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  Sorry for trolling but didn't everyone say this was going to happen three years ago when the announcement was made. Back then (before the ground moved) it was clear UMass was using the MAC as a stepping stone to the Big East. Why the shock and indignation now?

The trolling part of it being to pretend that there is either shock or indignation.

There is surely little shock, since UMass staying in the A10 in the event of the option being exercised was widely predicted, and its not indignation to say that the MAC should expect UMass to live up to its agreements.

(03-30-2014 03:47 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:46 PM)Campbell4President Wrote:  Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

No reason to think the AAC has changed their mind from when they passed over UMass to pick Tulsa instead. They'll be at 12 for FB in 2015 when Navy joins, with no pressing need to expand to 14, and look like they prefer an 11 team BBall competition (similar to the MWC with Hawaii).

And CUSA has 14 and even less reason to expand than the American.

UMass can see if the Sunbelt wants them FB-only to make it 12 and a CCG ... that could easily be the Sunbelt's second pick behind JMU all-sports, and JMU might not move up if it means moving up to the Sunbelt.

And other than that, there's playing as an independent.

Of course, Jimmy Kelley at Hustlebelt has a piece up about UMass's future which concludes that UMass would be a "natural fit" for the AAC, without ever considering whether or not the AAC wants UMass. And treats the Sunbelt option as if it refers to UMass all-sports into the Sunbelt. Because ...
... I dunno, I guess if you are a big UMass supporter, you pay a lot more attention to details when it comes to BBall than for FB.

Guess again.

(03-31-2014 08:23 PM)jjmc85 Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:47 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 02:46 PM)Campbell4President Wrote:  Does UMass want in the AAC all sports? If so, I would guess the AAC would jump on it, right? Or am I wrong?

No reason to think the AAC has changed their mind from when they passed over UMass to pick Tulsa instead. ...

Guess again.

Ah, so you're saying you have inside info that there's a move coming with the American?

If this was already posted, I apologize as I tried to scan much of the thread...been gone on vacation so am behind on the UMASS exit but here is an article on the issue (not positive re: MAC hoops) on rationale as posted over at Hawktalk:

http://www.hustlebelt.com/mac-basketball...-it-stinks

(04-01-2014 11:41 AM)exCincy Kid1 Wrote:  If this was already posted, I apologize as I tried to scan much of the thread...been gone on vacation so am behind on the UMASS exit but here is an article on the issue (not positive re: MAC hoops) on rationale as posted over at Hawktalk:

http://www.hustlebelt.com/mac-basketball...-it-stinks

I think that article was raised in the later (post-tourney-exit) discussion of the Bobcats getting to the CIT Quarters.

Note that the "MAC BBall stinks" position in the article is relative to MAC BBall over a decade ago, and since MAC BBall stunk substantially worse four years ago, there's an optimist/pessimist dispute baked into the numbers they cite ... there's no difference in the numbers between MAC BBall being caught in waves of mediocrity, ranging from the abysmal side of mediocre (eg, 20th conference RPI in 2010), to the respectable side of mediocre (eg, 12th conference RPI this year) ... and the MAC building to get back to being a better BBall conference ... except what happens next.

In the "waves of mediocrity" view, 12th/11th is the ceiling, and after possibly another year or two "up" here, the slide back down toward the trough will begin.

In the "building toward respectability" view, the move from 20th, through 17th/18th, to 12th is a trend, and while the next steps are hard, the MAC keeps improving.

And the difference between the two are future events that haven't happened yet. And its quite possible that the actions by the conference and by the individual teams in the conference that decide which of the two it is haven't all been taken yet.

(04-01-2014 11:41 AM)exCincy Kid1 Wrote:  If this was already posted, I apologize as I tried to scan much of the thread...been gone on vacation so am behind on the UMASS exit but here is an article on the issue (not positive re: MAC hoops) on rationale as posted over at Hawktalk:

http://www.hustlebelt.com/mac-basketball...-it-stinks

Great article. Crappy scheduling, funding and lack of talent continue to plague the league. I don't really see it getting any better top to bottom any time soon either. MAC schools seems very content coasting along in obscurity while the supposed peer conferences continue to build up their programs. The winner of the league will continue to pound their chest like they won something relevant only to be exposed in the post season. The CBI and CIT are flooded with supposed peer programs and the MAC showed poorly in both yet teams like Siena, VMI, Murray State and Fresno State are still playing. The uphill climb back to even mid-major relevancy is very steep it would seem.

(04-01-2014 12:04 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(04-01-2014 11:41 AM)exCincy Kid1 Wrote:  If this was already posted, I apologize as I tried to scan much of the thread...been gone on vacation so am behind on the UMASS exit but here is an article on the issue (not positive re: MAC hoops) on rationale as posted over at Hawktalk:

http://www.hustlebelt.com/mac-basketball...-it-stinks

Great article. Crappy scheduling, funding and lack of talent continue to plague the league. I don't really see it getting any better top to bottom any time soon either. MAC schools seems very content coasting along in obscurity while the supposed peer conferences continue to build up their programs. The winner of the league will continue to pound their chest like they won something relevant only to be exposed in the post season. The CBI and CIT are flooded with supposed peer programs and the MAC showed poorly in both yet teams like Siena, VMI, Murray State and Fresno State are still playing. The uphill climb back to even mid-major relevancy is very steep it would seem.

The MAC may be playing the long game of "FBS conferences will eventuall all become better hoops conferences.

Most of the D4 talk has centered around the entire FBS + The Big East moving to a new division. If that is true than the FBS aspect of our existence is far more important to our future than basketball..

(04-01-2014 01:20 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(04-01-2014 12:04 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(04-01-2014 11:41 AM)exCincy Kid1 Wrote:  If this was already posted, I apologize as I tried to scan much of the thread...been gone on vacation so am behind on the UMASS exit but here is an article on the issue (not positive re: MAC hoops) on rationale as posted over at Hawktalk:

http://www.hustlebelt.com/mac-basketball...-it-stinks

Great article. Crappy scheduling, funding and lack of talent continue to plague the league. I don't really see it getting any better top to bottom any time soon either. MAC schools seems very content coasting along in obscurity while the supposed peer conferences continue to build up their programs. The winner of the league will continue to pound their chest like they won something relevant only to be exposed in the post season. The CBI and CIT are flooded with supposed peer programs and the MAC showed poorly in both yet teams like Siena, VMI, Murray State and Fresno State are still playing. The uphill climb back to even mid-major relevancy is very steep it would seem.

The MAC may be playing the long game of "FBS conferences will eventuall all become better hoops conferences.

Most of the D4 talk has centered around the entire FBS + The Big East moving to a new division. If that is true than the FBS aspect of our existence is far more important to our future than basketball..

Second that thought.