The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Harsh but very true WW42.

(10-09-2014 06:31 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 07:37 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 05:29 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  Is the AAC even considering expansion? 11 is an odd number, so it would make some sense if they were. I'd still be surprised if any MAC schools would be serious candidates...

I don't know why anybody would think that moving to the AAC would be a good idea. Travel costs would be enormous - this for a school that can't even maintain working scoreboards at several of our venues. Besides, I'm not enamored with any of the schools in that conference and I suspect that our students wouldn't be excited about a home game against Memphis, USF or Tulane or any other team in that league. They at least understand and know where CMU, Toledo, NIU, EMU etc. are located.

The MAC, for better or worse, is our best bet at least for now. Stable, consisting of like state schools, all in the same general range regarding enrollment and with a history as a conference. The worst thing a school could do right now is jump quickly to a new conference with no guarantee that things will work out in the changing landscape of college sports and conference realignments.

Agreed. I roll my eyes and laugh every time a thread turns into, "WMU should go to this conference". Why would any of those conferences want us to come? We aren't on the same level as most of the schools mentioned previously and honestly, we just aren't that attractive to other conferences. We are a directional Michigan mid major that has a higher opinion of ourselves than anyone else across the country does.

Please find me a school anywhere that is so humble that it doesn't have a higher perception of itself than others do of it. We have some academic things working for us and we are an institution of considerable size. Geographically though we aren't in a spot where any conference is really looking to get into, and our programs aren't terribly attractive in terms of accomplishments on the field or in having big fan bases.

I have always believed we should judge ourselves relative to our peer institutions and have a plan in place for sustained growth. I think its important to strive for improvement and not just accept that we're the same as CMU, EMU and NMU. But its also important we know where we are in that process.

(10-09-2014 07:04 AM)BCBronco Wrote:  

Quote:We are a directional Michigan mid major that has a higher opinion of ourselves than anyone else across the country does.

OUCH

Location - in the north, declining population, small-ish market - is what ultimately hurts us the most (and almost all other MAC schools too).

UCF was a "directional Florida mid major" just a few years ago and ended their MAC tenure in last place. Back in the 90s they were a no-name Div 1-AA program. But they lie on fertile ground.

And I agree with Liam that every fanbase tends to have a higher self-opinion of their school and often introduces (pipe) dreams into conversations.

Quote:We aren't on the same level as most of the schools mentioned previously and honestly, we just aren't that attractive to other conferences.

I totally disagree with the first part, if you're referring to AAC. We are on the same level (or better over time) as Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, and Temple. And we have kicked Temple's arse in football, too (even though Temple's having a good year this year). And who beat UConn in the last UConn vs WMU game? Buffalo doesn't seem to have a problem with them, either. :)

We wouldn't be some "big addition", no. NIU would, and Toledo would be a Good addition. So why not WMU, Toledo, or even NIU? Fan Attendance + basketball performance.

The only reason a conference is going to want to expand beyond 12 (for a divisional championship) is for TV ratings. Fans, fans, fans. People showing up reflects people watching it in their homes. If Ohio got 45k instead of 20k a game, they'd be eye-balling them. That's what really matters + having a good MAC bball team that has the ability to grow.

Quote:We are a directional Michigan mid major that has a higher opinion of ourselves than anyone else across the country does.

I disagree with you strongly there. Higher Opinion of Ourselves than ANYONE else across the country? WMU? Really? LOL. So Michigan over time doesn't have a higher opinion of their football program than WMU?

WMU does not stick out or come anywhere near taking the cake in arrogance/high-expectations of their football team compared to others. Come on. :)

(10-09-2014 06:31 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  I roll my eyes and laugh every time a thread turns into, "WMU should go to this conference".

I agree, as do most posting on this thread. I think it will be fascinating to see what the MAC decides to do going forward.

With UMass departing after next season, I really hope the MAC is done adding "football-only" members.

Here are three possible scenarios for the commissioner's office to consider going forward:

Scenario 1: Contraction to 10 (or 11?) full-time members

I'm probably in the minority, but I would love to see a MAC where we play every other MAC school in football every season and where we play every other MAC school twice - both home and away - in basketball, much like the Big XII does now Obviously, this will never happen with 12 schools.

I think most of us can agree on one member school that could - and arguably should - be removed. Contracting a second one would be much tougher, though, and I have a hard time making a case for why we would remove a second school. (Maybe one of you can...)

I have no opposition to a ten-game MAC football schedule with 11 members (and a 20-game MAC basketball schedule), but I don't think a reduction to two non-conference football games would be financially acceptable or desired.

Realistically, this scenario isn't going to happen. I highly doubt the MAC wants to not have a MACC in football, and with the new ESPN deal, I don't see the MAC booting anybody.

Scenario 2: Staying put at 12 full-time members

Not much explanation needed here - and it makes sense in a lot of ways. The stability would be good for the conference and for all members, especially with the new ESPN deal kicking in.

(One interesting twist on this scenario is if the MAC decided to boot a member and add one new member. Probably extremely unlikely to happen, but an interesting idea nonetheless...)

Scenario 3: Expanding to 14 full-time members

Adding two new full-time members is self-explanatory. The question would be, who?

My personal preferences against: Don't add any current FBS members (with one possible exception I may revisit later), and don't add anyone that's not a good geographic fit (UCF, UMass, etc.)

Who would I go after? I would love to see us bring back Marshall. They're a great geographic fit, which is not the case for them now in the "new" C-USA. As Todd pointed out, that conference is also severely watered down now (as Marshall may find out the hard way if they run the table and are still begging for Top 25 votes, much less a major bowl spot).

Count me among the Marshall haters, but the conference was never stronger than when they were in it. Bringing them back could be mutually beneficial to both parties. (Just tell them they aren't allowed to host any more MAC title games...)

The second school I would consider adding would be Army. Nick and Todd said Navy is going to the AAC. Would Army be looking for a conference home of their own? Geographically, it makes some sense (Buffalo could have an in-state rival!), and Army could be instantly competitive (just ask Ball State...)

Your thoughts on any of these scenarios?

Scenario 1:

Quote:I think most of us can agree on one member school that could - and arguably should - be removed. Contracting a second one would be much tougher, though, and I have a hard time making a case for why we would remove a second school. (Maybe one of you can...)

The Emoos? :) UMass is leaving after next year, btw. We'll be down to 12. I think we'd have to get down to 10 to play every MAC team each year. So we'd need to weed out EMU to get to 11, but Akron & Kent are good in bball, while Akron has a newer stadium w/ Bowden as coach and doing better in football now. Buffalo? Always mediocre in both sports. Miami? OK. Sucked recently, but they're historic and will be good again relatively soon. BSU? They won 10 last year and Lembo's still there. It'd take more time.

Order of Removal from the 13-team MAC to 10:
- UMass (is leaving starting in 2016)
- EMU (Charlie Batch left the building in the 90s; so did that super-short guard)
- Buffalo (You're not bad, you're mediocre, have good attendance, but you're a newcomer; Kent & Akron are good at bball; BSU is historic here)

Now, with all that said -- I don't like a 9-game IN-CONF, and a 3-game OOC -- unless we ditch D1AAs. If only 3 OOC, I'd like to see:
- 2 G5s comparable to us + 1 obviously-stronger-than-us P5 (MSU/UM/OSU/VT)
- 1 G5 comparable to us + 2 lower-tier P5s (Indiana/Purdue/Wake Forrest/Pitt)

Scenario 2:
I'm not happy with it, but besides UMass leaving, which is going to make it 12 again, and the EMoos who hold things down -- teams are all really comparable in both FBall & BBall. I could remain even 13 if we kick EMU & UMass out and bring in 2 good CUSA teams -- OK, I'm all for that. Which bleeds into #3...

Scenario 3:

Quote:Don't add any current FBS [FCS] members (with one possible exception I may revisit later), and don't add anyone that's not a good geographic fit (UCF, UMass, etc.)

I agree. No FCS teams, except ND State -- but also not comfortably within our geographic realm. Now, ND State would be like UMass-distance (not UCF)... but I think ND State would have to dominate FCS for another couple years straight for me to consider -- but that's when UMass is leaving. They are within a long BIKE RIDE to Minnesota State (that's where "Coach" lives!). But aside from them -- yes, no Florida teams or way-out teams unless they are P5 & Shockingly wanting to join the MAC ("Oh, hi Miami-FL, meet Miami-OH - you're redheaded step sister") and would Improve the conference.

Quote:Who would I go after? I would love to see us bring back Marshall. They're a great geographic fit, which is not the case for them now in the "new" C-USA.

Yep. Marshall. I think they'd go with it if: (a) The AAC isn't hiring any more teams, and (b) The MAC brings in other worthy teams and kicks out EMU

Army's also a good choice.

From 13 -to- 14
EAST:
Marshall*
Bowling Green
Ohio
Akron
Miami-OH
Buffalo
Army*

WEST:
Northern Illinois
Toledo
North Dakota State
Western Michigan
Central Michigan
Western Kentucky*
Ball State

Most MAC programs would do fine in the American Conferebce, and would do better than many of the CUSA teams.

If Marshall were smart they'd leave CUSA and come back to the MAC. Their best years were in the MAC.

(10-08-2014 04:28 PM)WesternSkillet Wrote:  Actually, you might be surprised by our market rankings. Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, and B.Crk are considered one unit. This unit ranks 39th (Link 1 & Link 2). I think it is cool that we are in a top 40 market.
WMU has campuses in all three cities. I think we could be a nice contributor to a conferences' TV markets.

How often are TV markets "redistricted" and when will that happen next?

(10-08-2014 05:56 PM)bronconick Wrote:  They're adding Navy next year.

Navy is in a lot of trouble.

(10-09-2014 06:31 AM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 07:37 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 05:29 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  Is the AAC even considering expansion? 11 is an odd number, so it would make some sense if they were. I'd still be surprised if any MAC schools would be serious candidates...

I don't know why anybody would think that moving to the AAC would be a good idea. Travel costs would be enormous - this for a school that can't even maintain working scoreboards at several of our venues. Besides, I'm not enamored with any of the schools in that conference and I suspect that our students wouldn't be excited about a home game against Memphis, USF or Tulane or any other team in that league. They at least understand and know where CMU, Toledo, NIU, EMU etc. are located.

The MAC, for better or worse, is our best bet at least for now. Stable, consisting of like state schools, all in the same general range regarding enrollment and with a history as a conference. The worst thing a school could do right now is jump quickly to a new conference with no guarantee that things will work out in the changing landscape of college sports and conference realignments.

Agreed. I roll my eyes and laugh every time a thread turns into, "WMU should go to this conference". Why would any of those conferences want us to come? We aren't on the same level as most of the schools mentioned previously and honestly, we just aren't that attractive to other conferences. We are a directional Michigan mid major that has a higher opinion of ourselves than anyone else across the country does.

Not looking for a fight, but as a proud alum and a resident of Kazoo who sees WMU first hand every day I have to disagree with you about the opinion part. There is more to a school than simple where your teams stand in the weekly poll. We have a very goor reputation academicaly. There has to be some reason that students from more than 100 countries attend here decade after decade. Now with the new medical school it will only improve. If you get the alumni newletter you would know how well we are thought of around the country.

(10-09-2014 08:04 AM)Liam9903 Wrote:  We have some academic things working for us and we are an institution of considerable size...I have always believed we should judge ourselves relative to our peer institutions...its also important we know where we are in that process.

From the most recent U.S. News and World Report's Top 200:

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...ities/data

How the MAC fared in these ratings:
#76: Miami
#103: Buffalo
#129: Ohio
#173: (tie) Ball State, BG, WMU
#194: (tie) CMU, Kent State, NIU
Rank Not Published: Akron, EMU, Toledo

(10-08-2014 10:00 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 06:19 PM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 03:42 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 03:04 PM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  I honestly don't think that most people give a rats @$$ about WMU or their athletic programs. Now I am a fan and I follow the teams (as to the rest of you on this board). But I would venture to guess that the average person either has no interest or idea. Or MOST consider themselves fans of UofM, MSU or ND.

I just think that is the reality of where WMU falls on the pecking order in its own home town. Very low. Unfortunately, I don't know exactly what they could do to change that. As I recall back in the hay day of the Gary Darnell area, there was a buzz like none I ever remember. But those days are long gone in terms of interest.

Great post. I agree this is very true.

What could change this? Winning, big and often - those Darnell teams had that buzz because they were entertaining offensively and playing in MAC championship games. If bowl berths were handed out back then the way they are today, those Darnell teams would have gone to four straight bowls.

I consider myself fortunate to have been a WMU student during Darnell's prime. I'd like to believe those days are not gone for good, but until I see evidence to the contrary...

Very true about the bowls. Molde(my 4 years) would have went to bowl games each year under this system. Sucks so bad that we never got the chance. I remember one year bowl reps were at our last game of the year but we ended up losing.

Which school knocked you out of bowl contention that year, Kimbo?

I can imagine it would be tough, watching all these 6-6 teams go to bowls now. It's only a matter of time - maybe this year - before we end up with teams with losing records in bowls as the number of bowls continues to ridiculously grow...

I went back and looked I believe it was the last home game of 94 against which we lost 37-34. We were 7-2 going into that game with an earlier win at Iowa state. The Mac was a one bid league but some bowl was considering us if we were to have finished 9-2. That season ended with us being 7-4. We lost 3 games by 3 points and the other was to the chimps by 7. We had a guy drop the game tying TD late in that game. We were very good that year just couldn't catch a break. Chimps ended up with the leagues lone bowl bid and they got blown out by UNLV whom they had beaten earlier that season.

(10-09-2014 06:56 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  Don't add any current FBS [FCS] members (with one possible exception I may revisit later), and don't add anyone that's not a good geographic fit (UCF, UMass, etc.) I agree. No FCS teams, except ND State -- but also not comfortably within our geographic realm. Now, ND State would be like UMass-distance (not UCF)... but I think ND State would have to dominate FCS for another couple years straight for me to consider

Western Kentucky*

Thanks, Todd - I meant to say, don't add any other current FCS members (not FBS). Glad you caught that.

North Dakota State was my one possible exception. They've dominated FCS for a number of years now and have knocked off a number of FBS teams. They would be competitive in the MAC right away - I'd even go a step further and say they'd have a chance to contend for the MAC right away. Geographically, I agree they're not a great fit, so I don't really like the idea just from that standpoint alone. Their fans do travel really well, though.

Western Kentucky is an interesting option. They would definitely strengthen the MAC as a basketball conference, and they have been respectable in football since moving up to FCS. Geographically, it works. Maybe it's the Bronco in me, but I don't like the idea of two "Westerns" in the MAC (especially two in the MAC West). If that's the best logic I can come up with against them, though, it's fairly weak logic...

(10-09-2014 11:49 PM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 10:00 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 06:19 PM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 03:42 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 03:04 PM)WheresWaldo42 Wrote:  I honestly don't think that most people give a rats @$$ about WMU or their athletic programs. Now I am a fan and I follow the teams (as to the rest of you on this board). But I would venture to guess that the average person either has no interest or idea. Or MOST consider themselves fans of UofM, MSU or ND.

I just think that is the reality of where WMU falls on the pecking order in its own home town. Very low. Unfortunately, I don't know exactly what they could do to change that. As I recall back in the hay day of the Gary Darnell area, there was a buzz like none I ever remember. But those days are long gone in terms of interest.

Great post. I agree this is very true.

What could change this? Winning, big and often - those Darnell teams had that buzz because they were entertaining offensively and playing in MAC championship games. If bowl berths were handed out back then the way they are today, those Darnell teams would have gone to four straight bowls.

I consider myself fortunate to have been a WMU student during Darnell's prime. I'd like to believe those days are not gone for good, but until I see evidence to the contrary...

Very true about the bowls. Molde(my 4 years) would have went to bowl games each year under this system. Sucks so bad that we never got the chance. I remember one year bowl reps were at our last game of the year but we ended up losing.

Which school knocked you out of bowl contention that year, Kimbo?

I can imagine it would be tough, watching all these 6-6 teams go to bowls now. It's only a matter of time - maybe this year - before we end up with teams with losing records in bowls as the number of bowls continues to ridiculously grow...

I went back and looked I believe it was the last home game of 94 against which we lost 37-34. We were 7-2 going into that game with an earlier win at Iowa state. The Mac was a one bid league but some bowl was considering us if we were to have finished 9-2. That season ended with us being 7-4. We lost 3 games by 3 points and the other was to the chimps by 7. We had a guy drop the game tying TD late in that game. We were very good that year just couldn't catch a break. Chimps ended up with the leagues lone bowl bid and they got blown out by UNLV whom they had beaten earlier that season.

I remember watching UNLV blow out the Chips in the bowl game - one of my earliest memories of MAC football. I must have been about a sophomore in high school then.

Your time on the field must have been a couple of years before I became a Bronco - wish I knew more about Bronco football during that time period. I know Molde had a really good run during your time there. I can't fairly judge him since my freshman year as a Bronco student was his last season in '96, when everything that could go wrong did...

I will never be in favor of WMU leaving the MAC, but I'd always be in favor of expanding to 14-16 teams. I'd like to see Western Kentucky, James Madison, NDSU, Northern Iowa, Southern Illinois, or Illinois State. Getting Marshall back is probably a pipe dream that will never happen.

(10-08-2014 06:19 PM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  Very true about the bowls. Molde(my 4 years) would have went to bowl games each year under this system. Sucks so bad that we never got the chance. I remember one year bowl reps were at our last game of the year but we ended up losing.

Yep, I was there the same timeframe you played. Didn't we go something like 7-4 for three or four consecutive years? I think there was a tie in there... TCU?

The only player I remember knowing pretty well was Andre Wallace (WR) from my Communications class. Really good guy, from what I remember.

(10-10-2014 05:51 AM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  I will never be in favor of WMU leaving the MAC, but I'd always be in favor of expanding to 14-16 teams. I'd like to see Western Kentucky, James Madison, NDSU, Northern Iowa, Southern Illinois, or Illinois State. Getting Marshall back is probably a pipe dream that will never happen.

What he said although I would LOVE to add Army.

(10-09-2014 06:56 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  Scenario 1:
- Buffalo (You're not bad, you're mediocre, have good attendance, but you're a newcomer; Kent & Akron are good at bball; BSU is historic here)

You're right... for the MAC to stay relevant they need to be a 10 team conference with 60% of the teams in Ohio and 20% in Michigan..

(10-10-2014 08:07 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 06:19 PM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  Very true about the bowls. Molde(my 4 years) would have went to bowl games each year under this system. Sucks so bad that we never got the chance. I remember one year bowl reps were at our last game of the year but we ended up losing.

Yep, I was there the same timeframe you played. Didn't we go something like 7-4 for three or four consecutive years? I think there was a tie in there... TCU?

The only player I remember knowing pretty well was Andre Wallace (WR) from my Communications class. Really good guy, from what I remember.

7-4 twice and 7-3-1 twice. Tied BY and TCU. Andre was a good guy. One year he dropped the game tying td against the chimps and the next he caught the game winning td.

Quote:Geographically, I agree they're [ND State] not a great fit, so I don't really like the idea just from that standpoint alone. Their fans do travel really well, though.

I see them about the same distance from the West teams as UMass is. Since UMass is leaving, I find it OK to have *1* team that's a bit out there in distance (but not too far), especially if there's 14 teams. When you have 14-16 teams, one can't expect them all to be close neighbors, so overall I think it's OK.

Quote:They would be competitive in the MAC right away - I'd even go a step further and say they'd have a chance to contend for the MAC right away.

Yep -- another Marshall.

Quote:Maybe it's the Bronco in me, but I don't like the idea of two "Westerns" in the MAC (especially two in the MAC West)

Yeah, I know. But, they're the closest mid-major, and they're on their way up in football (and as you pointed out, basketball's good on their part). We could ask them to change their name to "West Kentucky".

Quote:I'd always be in favor of expanding to 14-16 teams. I'd like to see Western Kentucky, James Madison, NDSU, Northern Iowa, Southern Illinois, or Illinois State.

I'm not a fan of bringing in FCS teams. ND State sticks out, but others? They're good FCS teams (Ill teams more recently), so I would say what about attendance and room to grow, ya know? It'd be like a P5 conference taking in a G5. Ya don't want to bring in a G5 if they've had a good year or two that can compete in your conference decently, but little fan/attendance base. Otherwise, what's the point of expanding?

Quote:Getting Marshall back is probably a pipe dream that will never happen.

I don't agree that it's a Pipe Dream. Would be low % chance of the pieces falling into place of course. But it's sort of like starting a party. If you tell a set of people that another set of people are coming and vice versa, they're more apt to show up. If we tell Marshall "Hey, we're getting W Kentucky and Army. AND we're dropping EMU, and UMass is leaving. You want in? The MAC *will* be SOLIDLY better than CUSA which is now an improved Sun Belt. We'll also pay the same amount $$ as CUSA." -- I'd see the ONLY reason them NOT coming is because it'd "look weird" going back to the MAC and/or a fear of going back but having a LOWER chance of winning the MAC than CUSA.

Quote:You're right... for the MAC to stay relevant they need to be a 10 team conference with 60% of the teams in Ohio and 20% in Michigan..

Yeah, there is too high % of Ohio teams. Making it a OH vs MI conference isn't the best, I agree. After thinking about it though, I think dropping EMU (thus only 2 MI teams), and letting UMass go (which they are anyway) would be enough dropping required.