http://www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/696..._id=878183

(09-12-2016 06:33 AM)SylvaniaRocket Wrote:  http://www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/696..._id=878183

The MAC really needs to look at realignment. They should move Toledo to the East and move Miami to the West. Pretty sure Miami is geographically further West than Toledo anyhow. It would allow for natural UT/BG rivalry for East Championship. The BiG10 was smart enough not to split up UM/OSU/MSU in separate divisions. It is actually an unfair competitive disadvantage to have your rival in a different division, because you have to play them in a crossover every year. Could you imagine if UM was in a different division than OSU and had to play OSU every year, yet the rest of the division UM was didn't have to?? That is kind of what UT has had to deal with BG. Fortunately, UT has won 6 straight. But since the East is so weak, BG has been fortunate that those 6 losses to UT have really not effected BG's MACC hopes. Those 6 losses to UT would have mattered much more if BG/UT played in the same division. More than likely they don't have 2 MACC over the past 6 years. Those 6 losses would have crippled BG's seasons, just like the the NIU losses have crippled UT's over that same period. But that is how it is supposed to be... beating your rival should be a major stepping stone to winning a Championship. The current division format clearly benefits BG in a big way. I miss the old days when "everybody had to played everybody" in the Conference. There was no annual scheduling advantages.

(09-12-2016 09:49 AM)BDV27 Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 06:33 AM)SylvaniaRocket Wrote:  http://www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/696..._id=878183

The MAC really needs to look at realignment. They should move Toledo to the East and move Miami to the West. Pretty sure Miami is geographically further West than Toledo anyhow. It would allow for natural UT/BG rivalry for East Championship. The BiG10 was smart enough not to split up UM/OSU/MSU in separate divisions. It is actually an unfair competitive disadvantage to have your rival in a different division, because you have to play them in a crossover every year. Could you imagine if UM was in a different division than OSU and had to play OSU every year, yet the rest of the division UM was didn't have to?? That is kind of what UT has had to deal with BG. Fortunately, UT has won 6 straight. But since the East is so weak, BG has been fortunate that those 6 losses to UT have really not effected BG's MACC hopes. Those 6 losses to UT would have mattered much more if BG/UT played in the same division. More than likely they don't have 2 MACC over the past 6 years. Those 6 losses would have crippled BG's seasons, just like the the NIU losses have crippled UT's over that same period. But that is how it is supposed to be... beating your rival should be a major stepping stone to winning a Championship. The current division format clearly benefits BG in a big way. I miss the old days when "everybody had to played everybody" in the Conference. There was no annual scheduling advantages.

The Miami/Ohio crowds are still some of the better attended MAC games in the Glass Bowl.

Why not just drop teams like Kent, Ball State, Miami, and Eastern Michigan from the football conference and add more quality out-of conference games? If you can't compete for a league title anymore that once every 20 years, why bother.

(09-12-2016 09:53 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 09:49 AM)BDV27 Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 06:33 AM)SylvaniaRocket Wrote:  http://www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/696..._id=878183

The MAC really needs to look at realignment. They should move Toledo to the East and move Miami to the West. Pretty sure Miami is geographically further West than Toledo anyhow. It would allow for natural UT/BG rivalry for East Championship. The BiG10 was smart enough not to split up UM/OSU/MSU in separate divisions. It is actually an unfair competitive disadvantage to have your rival in a different division, because you have to play them in a crossover every year. Could you imagine if UM was in a different division than OSU and had to play OSU every year, yet the rest of the division UM was didn't have to?? That is kind of what UT has had to deal with BG. Fortunately, UT has won 6 straight. But since the East is so weak, BG has been fortunate that those 6 losses to UT have really not effected BG's MACC hopes. Those 6 losses to UT would have mattered much more if BG/UT played in the same division. More than likely they don't have 2 MACC over the past 6 years. Those 6 losses would have crippled BG's seasons, just like the the NIU losses have crippled UT's over that same period. But that is how it is supposed to be... beating your rival should be a major stepping stone to winning a Championship. The current division format clearly benefits BG in a big way. I miss the old days when "everybody had to played everybody" in the Conference. There was no annual scheduling advantages.

The Miami/Ohio crowds are still some of the better attended MAC games in the Glass Bowl.

Some leagues have protected rivalries set up so teams in opposite divisions still play yearly. If we move to the east, it will have a significant negative effect on our strength of schedule. So, let's just move to the American Conference.