(03-26-2014 03:20 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:16 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:10 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I can see the case being made for UMass to the AAC, mostly because of basketball. If it happened the AAC could just add Army in football only and have themselves one of the premier TV events every season. Twelve all sports programs and two divisions of seven for football. The numbers work out nicely.

I see this as more likely than the Sun Belt.

AAC is trying to become a Big"6" conference and UMass as it is today doesn't get them there.

Nobody that they can add gets them there. In the meantime, it helps them re-claim that much more of the old Big East basketball history, and gets them a good market. The problem will be that UConn probably doesn't want them.

If UConn keeps up with history, then they'll try to block UMass from going to the AAC. They've never before wanted us in the same conference as them.

Also, note that UMass will be playing 3 games ON CAMPUS this year, and 3 games at Gillette.

So expect maybe 1 or 2 games to be at Gillette after this year. The rest will be back on campus.

I am not sure many SB presidents would choose to remain at 11 than take UMass as a football only.

(03-26-2014 03:31 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:20 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:16 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:10 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I can see the case being made for UMass to the AAC, mostly because of basketball. If it happened the AAC could just add Army in football only and have themselves one of the premier TV events every season. Twelve all sports programs and two divisions of seven for football. The numbers work out nicely.

I see this as more likely than the Sun Belt.

AAC is trying to become a Big"6" conference and UMass as it is today doesn't get them there.

Nobody that they can add gets them there. In the meantime, it helps them re-claim that much more of the old Big East basketball history, and gets them a good market. The problem will be that UConn probably doesn't want them.

Aresco's public statements would lead you to beleve that UMass doesnt get in now especially with their foorball situation. And lest face it, AAC basketball is just fine. They had 5 teams in the Top 25 earlier this year and 4 are coming back. UMass playing 95 miles from home is a huge issue for them right now.

(03-26-2014 03:20 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  I just read a comment somewhere by the MAC commissioner where he talks of remaining at 12 after UMass leaves.Does not sound like anyone else is going to the MAC.

I agree. The payout from the playoff is capped at 12 schools. No need for those Presidents to give away $'s.

(03-26-2014 03:34 PM)EmeryZach Wrote:  If UConn keeps up with history, then they'll try to block UMass from going to the AAC. They've never before wanted us in the same conference as them.

Also, note that UMass will be playing 3 games ON CAMPUS this year, and 3 games at Gillette.

So expect maybe 1 or 2 games to be at Gillette after this year. The rest will be back on campus.

Has the stadium been expanded?

UMass just became a huge bargaining chip for the Sun Belt if the MAC tells JMU they're set at 12. The Dukes may be on the clock for good.

(03-26-2014 03:37 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:34 PM)EmeryZach Wrote:  If UConn keeps up with history, then they'll try to block UMass from going to the AAC. They've never before wanted us in the same conference as them.

Also, note that UMass will be playing 3 games ON CAMPUS this year, and 3 games at Gillette.

So expect maybe 1 or 2 games to be at Gillette after this year. The rest will be back on campus.

Has the stadium been expanded?

New football training facility, offices, luxury suites in the North endzone and a new Press Box with suites as well, but no general seating expansion yet. But it's been rumored that new seating in the South endzone might possibly happen in the next few years.

This is what it will look like this season.

(03-26-2014 03:39 PM)JTApps1 Wrote:  UMass just became a huge bargaining chip for the Sun Belt if the MAC tells JMU they're set at 12. The Dukes may be on the clock for good.

I am getting this strange feeling that JMU may voluntarily choose to stay behind the fence.

(03-26-2014 03:43 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:39 PM)JTApps1 Wrote:  UMass just became a huge bargaining chip for the Sun Belt if the MAC tells JMU they're set at 12. The Dukes may be on the clock for good.

I am getting this strange feeling that JMU may voluntarily choose to stay behind the fence.

I hope your feeling is right

The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

So now the Belt ould possibly go to 14 with UMASS as a football only. That would mean Liberty, MSU and NMSU as all sports. As long as the West schools only play one game every 5 years at UMASS then I could live with this.

(03-26-2014 03:34 PM)EmeryZach Wrote:  If UConn keeps up with history, then they'll try to block UMass from going to the AAC. They've never before wanted us in the same conference as them.

Also, note that UMass will be playing 3 games ON CAMPUS this year, and 3 games at Gillette.

So expect maybe 1 or 2 games to be at Gillette after this year. The rest will be back on campus.

NMSU fans know how that feels.

(03-26-2014 03:47 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

What if they had 2 additions all lined up who were willing to join for all sports?

(03-26-2014 03:50 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:47 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

What if they had 2 additions all lined up who were willing to join for all sports?

Doesn't matter if their commissioner said the MAC was staying at 12.
Wish that poster had provided a link.

(03-26-2014 03:50 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:47 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

What if they had 2 additions all lined up who were willing to join for all sports?

Why would they not have already added one? If you know you want to have 14 and you have 13 then you get ahead of the game and grab your top choice of the available schools and wait to see what UMASS does. If UMASS declines and leaves later then you go and ask the next best available. Why wait for the UMASS decision?

Staying at 12 seems to make all the sense in the world. UMASS basketball given the fact that you don't want to kick someone out is understandable. They went to 14 the first time before the decision about playoff money being capped was a consideration.

(03-26-2014 03:53 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:50 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:47 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

What if they had 2 additions all lined up who were willing to join for all sports?

Doesn't matter if their commissioner said the MAC was staying at 12.
Wish that poster had provided a link.

The commissioner said they were satisfied with current membership. "Sources" say they will stay at 12.

(03-26-2014 03:53 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:50 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:47 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

What if they had 2 additions all lined up who were willing to join for all sports?

Doesn't matter if their commissioner said the MAC was staying at 12.
Wish that poster had provided a link.

I believe he is referencing the sources in this link

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...er-sources

Would JMU be more willing to join if UMass came along as a football only member? The are about 10 different scenarios at play now. It's going to be interesting to see how it unfolds.

(03-26-2014 03:50 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:47 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  The scenario that seems off to me is that the MAC would want to add 2 to go to 14 and diminish their playoff money as well. If they wanted 14 why didn't they add someone already before UMASS ultimately said they were not willing to move thier olympics? I don't see the logic in that.

What if they had 2 additions all lined up who were willing to join for all sports?

Its an interesting though because the MAC had to know that UMass would reject an all sports invite.

This is going to take some time to work out I think. the big worry for JMU has to be, what if the SBC at some point decides to stop waiting on JMU, and then the MAC sits at 12?

As long as the MAC Had UMass JMU could effectively argue they had a chance to make 14. Now that they are gone...that argument is out the door, and it becomes can they pare with Delaware fast enough.