(03-30-2014 03:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I wonder if UMass really thought it through before turning down the MAC's full membership offer. They seem to have very limited options now. Go independent, which they probably can't afford to do, or move back to the FCS. I can't see either the AAC or C-USA extending them an offer, and I can't see UMASS considering an offer from the Sun Belt.

A Sunbelt offer is actually a pretty good deal for UMass when compared to full membership as a MAC school. Full membership as a MAC schools would yield UMass maybe 2 million (supposedly 1 million from the new ESPN contract, 857K from BCS, and 107K in NCAA credit income). UMass will receive around 400K in media dollars from the A10, another 1.2 million in NCAA credit income from the A-10, plus, 1 million from the BCS money in the Sunbelt. There is no Sunbelt media money to speak of. That's 2.6 million for UMass in a Sunbelt/A-10 configuration. Add in that the A-10 has lower travel costs and I would expect UMass to push hard for a Sunbelt football-only membership.

(03-30-2014 04:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I wonder if UMass really thought it through before turning down the MAC's full membership offer. They seem to have very limited options now. Go independent, which they probably can't afford to do, or move back to the FCS. I can't see either the AAC or C-USA extending them an offer, and I can't see UMASS considering an offer from the Sun Belt.

A Sunbelt offer is actually a pretty good deal for UMass when compared to full membership as a MAC school. Full membership as a MAC schools would yield UMass maybe 2 million (supposedly 1 million from the new ESPN contract, 857K from BCS, and 107K in NCAA credit income). UMass will receive around 400K in media dollars from the A10, another 1.2 million in NCAA credit income from the A-10, plus, 1 million from the BCS money in the Sunbelt. There is no Sunbelt media money to speak of. That's 2.6 million for UMass in a Sunbelt/A-10 configuration. Add in that the A-10 has lower travel costs and I would expect UMass to push hard for a Sunbelt football-only membership.

You do realize UMass is in Massachusetts? I can't believe UMass wants to be the eastern equivalent of New Mexico State for the Sun Belt. UMass' closest conference-mate would be Appalachian State. It just doesn't seem like a good fit.

I would be satisfied with a similar deal as UMass had with the MAC. Full football membership, and play at least half of your non conference games against CUSA competition in men's and women's hoops. That would help our RPI across the board most seasons, and provide a somewhat marquee game and gate receipts for us on a rotating basis.

(03-30-2014 04:49 PM)monarx Wrote:  I would be satisfied with a similar deal as UMass had with the MAC. Full football membership, and play at least half of your non conference games against CUSA competition in men's and women's hoops. That would help our RPI across the board most seasons, and provide a somewhat marquee game and gate receipts for us on a rotating basis.

That's pretty thin gruel, but it's better than nothing.

(03-30-2014 04:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I wonder if UMass really thought it through before turning down the MAC's full membership offer. They seem to have very limited options now. Go independent, which they probably can't afford to do, or move back to the FCS. I can't see either the AAC or C-USA extending them an offer, and I can't see UMASS considering an offer from the Sun Belt.

A Sunbelt offer is actually a pretty good deal for UMass when compared to full membership as a MAC school. Full membership as a MAC schools would yield UMass maybe 2 million (supposedly 1 million from the new ESPN contract, 857K from BCS, and 107K in NCAA credit income). UMass will receive around 400K in media dollars from the A10, another 1.2 million in NCAA credit income from the A-10, plus, 1 million from the BCS money in the Sunbelt. There is no Sunbelt media money to speak of. That's 2.6 million for UMass in a Sunbelt/A-10 configuration. Add in that the A-10 has lower travel costs and I would expect UMass to push hard for a Sunbelt football-only membership.

Agreed.
All sports for UMass in the MAC was not a financial option, just as it would not be in the SBC.
I think that only the AAC, of all of the G5, would offer enough in financial return and travel expense mitigation to pull UMass from the A10.

Football only would benefit both the UMass and the SBC, at least in the short term.

For Umass it would allow it to have a conference for it's football and allow it time to build it's program and facilities.

For the SBC, it would provide a twelfth team for the revenue producing ccg, and thus time to evaluate better it's future options; including time for EKU (and M State)to get more ready for FBS. IMO EKU is ultimately the best eastern add in the long run.

This is predicated on UMass leaving the MAC early, but I think the benefit to both would enough that the SBC could help with MAC exit expenses.
There has even been talk that the MAC would waive any fees for UMass after the 2014 season.

Likely not a long term relationship as there are a lot of possibilities a few years down the road; with M State, JMU/Liberty/EKU and Idaho; and UMass with the AAC or even a drop to FCS, but in the short term I think UMass football makes great sense for the both, IF they come in in 2015.

Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.

Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

(03-30-2014 09:08 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.

Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

I bet Tech would be interested in scheduling you in basketball.

All of the SBC talk presupposes that USA, Arkansas State, Idaho, etc. would be willing to make trips to and from Amherst.

The lower you are on the food chain, the more travel costs matter. There's also the issue of wearing out your team. Fans don't always think about these things, but coaches and ADs do.

I'm wary of USM heading to CUSA-West for these same reasons. I haven't done the math, but I don't think Marshall and ECU were as far away as San Antonio and El Paso are.

Maybe that's a factor in all the Banowsky-bashing coming out of Hattiesburg. His expansion choices don't really leave a spot for us in CUSA-East.

(03-31-2014 01:37 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  I'm wary of USM heading to CUSA-West for these same reasons. I haven't done the math, but I don't think Marshall and ECU were as far away as San Antonio and El Paso are.

You should do the math and compare Miami and Boca Raton to San Antonio and El Paso. I think distances might be less for USM in the West.

I feel sick every time I see a north-south alignment suggested with the Texas and Florida schools together.

(03-31-2014 07:22 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  You should do the math and compare Miami and Boca Raton to San Antonio and El Paso. I think distances might be less for USM in the West.

I feel sick every time I see a north-south alignment suggested with the Texas and Florida schools together.

That's why alignments are always done east/west; for some reason travel seems easier when you stay in your own time-zone (as much as possible).

(03-30-2014 09:08 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.

Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

Our current AD was once the head football coach at UMass before he then became our head fb coach. I don't know if he has any ties at UMass any longer, its been a long time. But I can see the benefit of offering UMass fb some games in exchange for some ooc basketball games. We benefit from the UMass rpi and they benefit with help filling out their fb schedule while indy.

(03-30-2014 04:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 03:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I wonder if UMass really thought it through before turning down the MAC's full membership offer. They seem to have very limited options now. Go independent, which they probably can't afford to do, or move back to the FCS. I can't see either the AAC or C-USA extending them an offer, and I can't see UMASS considering an offer from the Sun Belt.

A Sunbelt offer is actually a pretty good deal for UMass when compared to full membership as a MAC school. Full membership as a MAC schools would yield UMass maybe 2 million (supposedly 1 million from the new ESPN contract, 857K from BCS, and 107K in NCAA credit income). UMass will receive around 400K in media dollars from the A10, another 1.2 million in NCAA credit income from the A-10, plus, 1 million from the BCS money in the Sunbelt. There is no Sunbelt media money to speak of. That's 2.6 million for UMass in a Sunbelt/A-10 configuration. Add in that the A-10 has lower travel costs and I would expect UMass to push hard for a Sunbelt football-only membership.

I'll be quite surprised if the MAC gets a $1 million per school offer from espn during this look-in on their contract. What incentive does espn have to offer that? Are networks clamoring to take the MAC away from them? Don't think so. They may get a raise, and I hope they do, but $1 million would be surprising.

(03-30-2014 09:08 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.
Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

You'll be able to manage something but it's very hard to recruit as an unaffliated indy. You've got no conference championship to play for and no bowl tie-ins; imagine playing out the string from week one, nobodies going to show-up to games, so scheduling will become harder and harder. No, you need to get into a conference a.s.a.p.

I sure don't think that UMass is going to get 75% of the vote from the AAC (unless it has already been prearranged). C-USA is alrady full-up with similar programs to UMass (Charlotte and ODU come to mind). So your admin has two choices; hat in hand to the Sun Belt or dropping back down to FCS and giving up on any FBS plans you may have.

I'd be shocked if the currently streaking AAC has/had a backroom deal with UMass.

(03-31-2014 09:00 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 09:08 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.
Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

You'll be able to manage something but it's very hard to recruit as an unaffliated indy. You've got no conference championship to play for and no bowl tie-ins; imagine playing out the string from week one, nobodies going to show-up to games, so scheduling will become harder and harder. No, you need to get into a conference a.s.a.p.

I sure don't think that UMass is going to get 75% of the vote from the AAC (unless it has already been prearranged). C-USA is alrady full-up with similar programs to UMass (Charlotte and ODU come to mind). So your admin has two choices; hat in hand to the Sun Belt or dropping back down to FCS and giving up on any FBS plans you may have.

I'd be shocked if the currently streaking AAC has/had a backroom deal with UMass.

Aresco is basically saying that UMass will not be invited to the AAC.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-to-expand

(03-31-2014 09:00 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 09:08 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.
Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

You'll be able to manage something but it's very hard to recruit as an unaffliated indy. You've got no conference championship to play for and no bowl tie-ins; imagine playing out the string from week one, nobodies going to show-up to games, so scheduling will become harder and harder. No, you need to get into a conference a.s.a.p.

I sure don't think that UMass is going to get 75% of the vote from the AAC (unless it has already been prearranged). C-USA is alrady full-up with similar programs to UMass (Charlotte and ODU come to mind). So your admin has two choices; hat in hand to the Sun Belt or dropping back down to FCS and giving up on any FBS plans you may have.

I'd be shocked if the currently streaking AAC has/had a backroom deal with UMass.

Thanks for this and should have thought of it. There is almost no chance of us going back to fcs.

(03-31-2014 09:07 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 09:00 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 09:08 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hopefully will hear some kind of news/rumors after the final four. Have no idea what will happen but have a question for you fans.
Is there any benefit for you guys to have a scheduling alliance with us if we needed to be independent for a year or more. Thinking of a half conference schedule of 4 games with a couple in November and 2 bb games. That way say we could do the same with the AAC it would equal a conference schedule and equal the 4 bb that we had with the MAC.

You'll be able to manage something but it's very hard to recruit as an unaffliated indy. You've got no conference championship to play for and no bowl tie-ins; imagine playing out the string from week one, nobodies going to show-up to games, so scheduling will become harder and harder. No, you need to get into a conference a.s.a.p.

I sure don't think that UMass is going to get 75% of the vote from the AAC (unless it has already been prearranged). C-USA is alrady full-up with similar programs to UMass (Charlotte and ODU come to mind). So your admin has two choices; hat in hand to the Sun Belt or dropping back down to FCS and giving up on any FBS plans you may have.

I'd be shocked if the currently streaking AAC has/had a backroom deal with UMass.

Aresco is basically saying that UMass will not be invited to the AAC.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-to-expand

Yeah, and based on the large quantity of spittle and day-old veal that flew out of his mouth when he said that, I think he's pretty serious.