https://twitter.com/brett_mcmurphy/statu...90594?s=21

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisVannini/...1963292675

(11-10-2021 06:12 PM)Blue Raider Dave Wrote:  https://twitter.com/brett_mcmurphy/statu...90594?s=21

Thanks to your pathetic university leadership.

Thanks to every poster here! Keep WKU in mind for the future. Thank you.

Bummer. Frustrating since it’s clear out administration and most of our fans wanted to join.

(11-10-2021 06:31 PM)GlueStix Wrote:  Bummer. Frustrating since it’s clear out administration and most of our fans wanted to join.

For the record, most of our fans wanted to join as well. Just the administration didn't.

This can come back around.

8 years and we are on to AAC 2.0. 26 years and its CUSA 4.0.

(11-10-2021 06:37 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  This can come back around.

8 years and we are on to AAC 2.0. 26 years and its CUSA 4.0.

If MTSU wasn't willing to jump now I don't know when they will. C-USA was looking about as bad as it can get with 9/14 programs leaving. If WKU eventually ends up in the MAC I seriously doubt it will be with MTSU as a partner.

Sorry WKU fans. I think you would have made a good addition. Maybe once the MAC TV contract is a couple years out. I'm sure realignment is not done. Memphis and SMU seem to want nothing to do with new AAC.

(11-10-2021 06:39 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(11-10-2021 06:37 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  This can come back around.

8 years and we are on to AAC 2.0. 26 years and its CUSA 4.0.

If MTSU wasn't willing to jump now I don't know when they will. C-USA was looking about as bad as it can get with 9/14 programs leaving. If WKU eventually ends up in the MAC I seriously doubt it will be with MTSU as a partner.

You are probably right on the WKU/MT combo being dead. CUSA might be comparable in strength to the other G5 leagues in FB/BB but then again it might not. There could be some more realignment but I highly doubt it will be as dramatic as going from 14 teams down to 5 in the course of a couple of weeks.

One of the interesting factoids that came out over the discussion is the MAC would consider a 20 year GOR. Could a GOR be something the MAC will try during its next TV negotiations? I believe the Big East has one with their Fox TV deal and that is how they were able to get so much money without FB.

(11-10-2021 06:39 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(11-10-2021 06:37 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  This can come back around.

8 years and we are on to AAC 2.0. 26 years and its CUSA 4.0.

If MTSU wasn't willing to jump now I don't know when they will. C-USA was looking about as bad as it can get with 9/14 programs leaving. If WKU eventually ends up in the MAC I seriously doubt it will be with MTSU as a partner.

If another school is needed for WKU to join, now would be a good time to give ol' Illinois State a call.

Well....I'm a WKU alumni from the midwest and I wanted this to happen.

(11-10-2021 06:39 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(11-10-2021 06:37 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  This can come back around.

8 years and we are on to AAC 2.0. 26 years and its CUSA 4.0.

If MTSU wasn't willing to jump now I don't know when they will. C-USA was looking about as bad as it can get with 9/14 programs leaving. If WKU eventually ends up in the MAC I seriously doubt it will be with MTSU as a partner.

If CUSA 4.0 doles out it's exit fees like CUSA 3.0 did, one wonders whether MTSU will change their mind when the CUSA exit fee pool runs dry.

When UMass is rejected for a football only CUSA seat, they will re-evaluate and see the light before MTSU collects a single exit fee dollar.

(11-10-2021 06:54 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  One of the interesting factoids that came out over the discussion is the MAC would consider a 20 year GOR. Could a GOR be something the MAC will try during its next TV negotiations? I believe the Big East has one with their Fox TV deal and that is how they were able to get so much money without FB.

We kept hearing about "the MAC wants a commitment of X years", but that could easily be because the conversation between the MAC and ESPN (via the MAC's media consultant) was not leaky and the conversation between MAC and WKU/MTSU was leaky. That is, it could easily have been the MAC passing on a GOR request coming from ESPN.

OTOH, if the incumbent members were willing to accept one for a contract bump with an expansion with WKU/MTSU ... then if ESPN offers more money contingent on a GOR, when new contract time rolls around, maybe the MAC accepts it.

(11-11-2021 07:24 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(11-10-2021 06:54 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  One of the interesting factoids that came out over the discussion is the MAC would consider a 20 year GOR. Could a GOR be something the MAC will try during its next TV negotiations? I believe the Big East has one with their Fox TV deal and that is how they were able to get so much money without FB.

We kept hearing about "the MAC wants a commitment of X years", but that could easily be because the conversation between the MAC and ESPN (via the MAC's media consultant) was not leaky and the conversation between MAC and WKU/MTSU was leaky. That is, it could easily have been the MAC passing on a GOR request coming from ESPN.

OTOH, if the incumbent members were willing to accept one for a contract bump with an expansion with WKU/MTSU ... then if ESPN offers more money contingent on a GOR, when new contract time rolls around, maybe the MAC accepts it.

Yep and with the AAC withering in its one instability the opportunity might be there to match MWC/BE money with a GOR.

What would the MAC do with that money however? Buy more expensive coaches are reduce the reliance on institutional subsidies?

(11-12-2021 08:53 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(11-11-2021 07:24 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(11-10-2021 06:54 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  One of the interesting factoids that came out over the discussion is the MAC would consider a 20 year GOR. Could a GOR be something the MAC will try during its next TV negotiations? I believe the Big East has one with their Fox TV deal and that is how they were able to get so much money without FB.

We kept hearing about "the MAC wants a commitment of X years", but that could easily be because the conversation between the MAC and ESPN (via the MAC's media consultant) was not leaky and the conversation between MAC and WKU/MTSU was leaky. That is, it could easily have been the MAC passing on a GOR request coming from ESPN.

OTOH, if the incumbent members were willing to accept one for a contract bump with an expansion with WKU/MTSU ... then if ESPN offers more money contingent on a GOR, when new contract time rolls around, maybe the MAC accepts it.

Yep and with the AAC withering in its one instability the opportunity might be there to match MWC/BE money with a GOR.

What would the MAC do with that money however? Buy more expensive coaches are reduce the reliance on institutional subsidies?

Yes. Those would be the two main places it would go at most schools.

I might wish Kent State would put it to reducing buy games from three to one per year and pursue OOC Go5 H/H contracts, but it'd be more likely spent on holding onto a MBB coach if we get one who experiences enough success to attract offers and on reducing the institutional subsidy.

Not happy with UMass pitching itself to CUSA as want to be a full member of the MAC. In the thread voted for Missouri State as think they would be the best add for CUSA and want UMass to reconsider the football only stance. Needs to be the MAC not CUSA football only.

my post.
UMass pitches itself to CUSA.
Let me clear, do not like football only unless we are eventually bring in all sports. Football only is a poor short term fix, that generally ends badly.
Do love UMass Football and will always support it, not so much with general fund donations, which supports the A10 that we have to LEAVE!

https://www.underdogdynasty.com/2021/11/...ce=twitter

Quote:That leads into the next slide, which is probably the most important in the entire presentation. It’s a breakdown of the football budget. The total football budget listed is $10.5 million. It’s not an apples to apples comparison, but that’s approximately what Middle Tennessee football generates on an annual basis. There are seven places where UMass spends money within their football budget:

Scholarships and Cost of Attendance=$4.1 million
Staff Compensation=$2.45 million ($650,000 to the head coach, $1.8 million to the assistant coach pool. These numbers will need to go up, particularly with the news that UConn is paying their new head coach, Jim Mora $1.5-1.7 million annually)
Team Travel=$1.2 million
Game Guarantees=$1.1 million
Recruiting and Marketing=$925 thousand (They must spend more here)
Misc. Expenses=$650 thousand
Equipment (Adidas)=$400 thousand
From there, the presentation brags about the deals between UMass and NESN and FloSports. It also points out that UMass is the third most valuable property for NESN, behind the Boston Red Sox and Boston Bruins.

After this, it points out major FBS victories, which were all during Mark Whipple’s second tenure. It also points to UMass players who have made their way to the NFL. The best known of these players today is likely Victor Cruz. Either way, the point is to brag about what success UMass has actually had in recent years. Again, trying to imply potential.

The pitch culminates with an overview of UMass’ football facilities, when they were built, and how much was spent on them. In total, that’s around $65 million in the last seven years invested in facilities. That includes $40 million on the football performance center, $4 million on a new press box, $6 million on other stadium enhancements, $500 thousand in various branding upgrades, and $14 million on a bubble indoor practice facility. Then, the pitch ends with some photos of McGuirk Alumni Stadium. All of this is designed to show that UMass invests in and has the facilities to compete going forward.

It’s still up in the air whether this pitch will work for UMass or not. It makes you wonder if the investments in football have been enough to overcome their reputation and geography during conference realignment.