Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: You are the MAC Commissioner. You would… (ONLY for MAC fans and schools mentioned in poll)
Give UMass two-year notice; go back to 12 members (12)
Keep UMass football-only; add JMU & GMU as full members (14/14)
Make UMass full member; add JMU as a full member (14)
Make UMass full member; add JMU, GMU & Drexel as full members (14/16)
Make UMass full member; add JMU, GMU & VCU as full members (14/16)
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Post Reply 
UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Campbell4President Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,210
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 27
I Root For: Toledo
Location:
Post: #21
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 04:51 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Looking forward to the schedule and the basketball line ups. The MAC is being good to us and the MAC has learn that despite everything, there is a business side to sports. The MAC has already made 6.5M by this arrangement, we pay 100k dues next year and receive zero TV or Bowl money. This will always be a two way street, benefits to the MAC and UMass.

Don't worry...our tv and bowl monies are peanuts...well, maybe cashews. lol
03-15-2012 08:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Louis Kitton Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,000
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 27
I Root For: High Fashion
Location: Paris Online
Post: #22
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 08:30 PM)Beckman4President Wrote:  It will be annoying though to see another FCS program move up to FBS and in a couple years be looking down on all of us from their position in a power 6 conference while we are all stagnating. But that's just envy on my part.

Are we stagnating by staying in the MAC? I don't know if that is necessarily true because things are changing.

There is talk about putting all the bowl under management of the BCS and MAC schools based on finish would have access to the mid tier bowl games along with significant BCS money (8-10 million). How this impacts recruiting will be interesting.

If you go back now 3 years, Ohio, NIU and Toledo have made steady progress in MAC football and are not looking back. Who says they couldn't continue to get better and become like TCU and Boise State? Regularly appear in the top 25.

The MAC for the past decade has been the 10th rated football conference. With the WAC falling apart that raises the MAC to the 9 position. With CUSA and the MWC combining the MAC is at least 8 maybe the 7th best conference. The gap between MAC and alliance football is negligible and the gap between the MAC and the Big East is narrowing.

There is no reason anymore to think a MAC school couldn't finish in the top 5 after watching MWC and WAC schools do it in recent years.
03-15-2012 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wleakr Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 679
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Eastern Mich
Location:
Post: #23
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 09:18 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  The MAC for the past decade has been the 10th rated football conference. With the WAC falling apart that raises the MAC to the 9 position. With CUSA and the MWC combining the MAC is at least 8 maybe the 7th best conference. The gap between MAC and alliance football is negligible and the gap between the MAC and the Big East is narrowing.

Right now there are 11 conferences in D1 football, with the MAC being ranked normally at 10 of 11...

If the Alliance does what it appears to be doing, based on the short list of schools, there will no longer be a WAC...essentially the Alliance will be what's left of MWC/C-USA/WAC and possibly a few SB pieces...

So D1 will have 9 conferences in D1 football, with the MAC being most likely ranked 8 of 9...

So, yes, you are correct the MAC ranking will move up, but somehow I don't view this as necessarily an improvement...
03-15-2012 09:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LastMinuteman Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,129
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 88
I Root For: UMass
Location:
Post: #24
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 07:56 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  
(03-15-2012 05:49 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  The only realistic additions to the MAC that would impact UMass would be Delaware for travel and ODU for basketball, but neither is that big a help. And I have a lot of respect for what they're building down in Harrisonburg, but adding JMU doesn't do anything more for UMass than Northern Iowa in travel/basketball. San Jose State for football-only sounds as good as anything else.

That is a great point that I think is missed...just how far UMass is away from almost any addition to the MAC.

The answer may be just to let UMass go in 2 years and add Delaware, ODU, JMU all sports. Delaware is an acceptable replacement for UMass, IMO and they have an adequate on campus football stadium.

MAC in Mini-Playoff format:

MAC Atlantic: Buffalo, Ohio, Delaware, JMU, Old Dominion
MAC East: Akron, Kent, Toledo, Bowling Green, EMU
MAC West: WMU, CMU, Ball State, Miami, Northern Illinois

Most everybody would be with their core rivals. The East schools would have extremely low travel. Ohio can maximize its recruiting in the Atlantic, Miami can maximize its recruiting in the West.

The MAC made a mistake with UMass and should have gone after Delaware instead.

UMass's remoteness cuts both ways though. The further south (or west) the MAC goes, the more likely the MAC is to lose any member they bring in to CUSA/the Alliance as soon as that team becomes valuable.

The Temple/UMass arrangement was a good gamble for the MAC. Those were two programs geographically distant from CUSA in a good all-sports affiliation in the A10 that they wouldn't leave easily, and who would be blocked from Big East admission by Villanova and UConn respectively. If West Virginia hadn't surprisingly gone way out to the Big 12 on less than a year's notice (thus requiring an immediate replacement) it probably would have worked out for the MAC and Nova would have kept being able to blackball Temple forever. Instead, the MAC cashed in their chips for a $6 million payment. I wish my bad bets resulted in me receiving $6 million.

That basic strategy is still sound, despite the fact that Temple left. If the MAC still wants to expand, it should continue to look for gambles like that. ODU/JMU ain't it, especially as all-sports members. It's a sure bet they'd move to the Alliance vs. MAC all-sports. The only way the MAC would hang on to them is if the Alliance didn't want them. Nobody is blocking them from the Big East either. That's a gamble the MAC only "wins" if ODU and JMU turn out not to be desirable members. Losing the bet on Temple and getting $6 million seems better to me.
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2012 02:34 AM by LastMinuteman.)
03-16-2012 02:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,241
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #25
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-16-2012 02:33 AM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  
(03-15-2012 07:56 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  
(03-15-2012 05:49 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  The only realistic additions to the MAC that would impact UMass would be Delaware for travel and ODU for basketball, but neither is that big a help. And I have a lot of respect for what they're building down in Harrisonburg, but adding JMU doesn't do anything more for UMass than Northern Iowa in travel/basketball. San Jose State for football-only sounds as good as anything else.

That is a great point that I think is missed...just how far UMass is away from almost any addition to the MAC.

The answer may be just to let UMass go in 2 years and add Delaware, ODU, JMU all sports. Delaware is an acceptable replacement for UMass, IMO and they have an adequate on campus football stadium.

MAC in Mini-Playoff format:

MAC Atlantic: Buffalo, Ohio, Delaware, JMU, Old Dominion
MAC East: Akron, Kent, Toledo, Bowling Green, EMU
MAC West: WMU, CMU, Ball State, Miami, Northern Illinois

Most everybody would be with their core rivals. The East schools would have extremely low travel. Ohio can maximize its recruiting in the Atlantic, Miami can maximize its recruiting in the West.

The MAC made a mistake with UMass and should have gone after Delaware instead.

UMass's remoteness cuts both ways though. The further south (or west) the MAC goes, the more likely the MAC is to lose any member they bring in to CUSA/the Alliance as soon as that team becomes valuable.

The Temple/UMass arrangement was a good gamble for the MAC. Those were two programs geographically distant from CUSA in a good all-sports affiliation in the A10 that they wouldn't leave easily, and who would be blocked from Big East admission by Villanova and UConn respectively. If West Virginia hadn't surprisingly gone way out to the Big 12 on less than a year's notice (thus requiring an immediate replacement) it probably would have worked out for the MAC and Nova would have kept being able to blackball Temple forever. Instead, the MAC cashed in their chips for a $6 million payment. I wish my bad bets resulted in me receiving $6 million.

That basic strategy is still sound, despite the fact that Temple left. If the MAC still wants to expand, it should continue to look for gambles like that. ODU/JMU ain't it, especially as all-sports members. It's a sure bet they'd move to the Alliance vs. MAC all-sports. The only way the MAC would hang on to them is if the Alliance didn't want them. Nobody is blocking them from the Big East either. That's a gamble the MAC only "wins" if ODU and JMU turn out not to be desirable members. Losing the bet on Temple and getting $6 million seems better to me.

Is there a better way for the MAC to get back to balanced divisions in football, than by adding JMU or somebody like that? Especially if we could get them for all-sports?
03-16-2012 08:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EA3 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,984
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 134
I Root For: WMU
Location: Kalamazoo
Post: #26
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
"If you go back now 3 years, Ohio, NIU and Toledo have made steady progress in MAC football and are not looking back. Who says they couldn't continue to get better and become like TCU and Boise State? Regularly appear in the top 25." -LK


CMU said the same thing 4-5 years ago. It's worked out real well for them.
Miami said the same thing after 2003. It's worked out real well for them.
Ball St. said the same thing in 2008. It's worked out real well for them.
WMU said the same thing in 1999. It's worked out real well for us.
Bowling Green said the same thing in 2003. It's worked out real well for them.
Toledo said the same thing in 2004. 8 years later...it's worked out real well for them.

A little perspective is needed here.

And yes, I'm putting you on blast because of all the garbage you spew. Ohio is 4-4 against the West in the last 3 years. Saying they belong in the same breath as NIU (or Toledo right now), is no different than saying a West bball team is a top 4 team in the conference. Ohio lost to Ball St. in 2011 in Athens! Ball St. finished 4th in the West. Do the math.
03-16-2012 09:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Howl-n-Prowl Away
Three SDs above the mean

Posts: 5,636
Joined: Sep 2011
I Root For: Los NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Territory
Post: #27
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 08:30 PM)Beckman4President Wrote:  I honestly don't see the point in letting UMASS go in two years...it doesn't make sense. We would be kicking them out because we are afraid of them leaving? What's done is done and we should just keep them now until the Big East calls them up in a couple of years. But, we should have learned our lesson for no more football onlies. They won't hurt us by being in the conference until then so I see no point in kicking them out.

It will be annoying though to see another FCS program move up to FBS and in a couple years be looking down on all of us from their position in a power 6 conference while we are all stagnating. But that's just envy on my part.

The more I think about it (thanks again to LastMinuteman for the contract clarification) the more it makes sense for the MAC to exercise the “terminate football-only” clause.

Perhaps I was a bit hard on the MAC attorneys. While technically UMass has the right of refusal to join as an all sports member, the contract term is essentially and “all in or you are gone” condition and the MAC would not have included it if it wasn’t okay with either walking away or retaining UMass as a full member. The latter, I think, is the MAC’s end game.

With all the shuffling going on and the Big East’s declaration that it wants to go to 14 football playing members, there is a chance that if the first 2-3 years go smoothly, UMass can receive an invitation to the Big East after that relatively short “probation” period. So, it could be a net "wash" for UMass. UMass isn't looking for football-only membership in the Big East, if things go well for them, they would be moving their Olympic sports out of the A-10 in 2-3 years anyway.

But also, with the Big 12 landing its monumental TV deal, it may not be in a rush (if at all) to expand and that maybe the linchpin that keeps the realignment carousel inert for the next 5-10 years. And this is what the MAC should focus on. There is a chance that if it can get UMass now, it may be able to keep it in the conference for the next decade and grow the northeast brand as it wants to.

If the MAC gives UMass this ultimatum, what are the REAL options for UMass after the two-year period?

If UMass insists on keeping it’s Olympic sports in the A-10, joining the “merger” (if it’s still viable) as a football only will probably NOT be an option. Also doubtful is that the Sun Belt allows for a football-only arrangement. So that leaves…

• Leave and place its (new) football program in the FBS independent ranks.
• Joining the WAC (if it’s still around as an FBS conference) as a football only.

IF circumstances turn so that the Big East is looking for additional member(s) those two options would probably not help UMass make a case. I seriously doubt that Temple would have received a Big East invitation had it gone the football independent route. There is PRECEDENT, a program CAN and HAS made the jump from the MAC to the Big East, that is a REALITY.

So if UMass is forced to abandon the A-10 for an all sports conference, does jumping to the “merger” after the two years make more sense than staying in the MAC? That is the question that UMass will have to answer. I think the answer is now and would be still be in two years, NO. There is no telling what that conglomeration will look like in two years, hell, they themselves don’t have a clue what it will look like next week.

If UMass can build a solid program and take care of business at home the difference between having an attractive football program (in the eyes of the Big East) could be up to how successful UMass plays on the road, and having to take cross-country 5+hr. flights to away games can make winning on the road more difficult. Why not pad the record with road games against the soft and easier-to-travel-to MAC East, the formula worked for Temple.

There is NO reason to have that clause in the contract if you are not ready to enact it the second that the opportunity presents itself. This will show just how competent (or incompetent) the MAC leadership is. It’s unfortunate that it has to be like this but the MAC needs to terminate the football-only aspect of the contract.

UMass: The ball is in your court.
(This post was last modified: 03-21-2012 11:49 AM by Howl-n-Prowl.)
03-16-2012 09:31 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Louis Kitton Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,000
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 27
I Root For: High Fashion
Location: Paris Online
Post: #28
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 09:55 PM)wleakr Wrote:  
(03-15-2012 09:18 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  The MAC for the past decade has been the 10th rated football conference. With the WAC falling apart that raises the MAC to the 9 position. With CUSA and the MWC combining the MAC is at least 8 maybe the 7th best conference. The gap between MAC and alliance football is negligible and the gap between the MAC and the Big East is narrowing.

Right now there are 11 conferences in D1 football, with the MAC being ranked normally at 10 of 11...

If the Alliance does what it appears to be doing, based on the short list of schools, there will no longer be a WAC...essentially the Alliance will be what's left of MWC/C-USA/WAC and possibly a few SB pieces...

So D1 will have 9 conferences in D1 football, with the MAC being most likely ranked 8 of 9...

So, yes, you are correct the MAC ranking will move up, but somehow I don't view this as necessarily an improvement...

A few things:

-Expect the WAC to somehow survive. The alliance will likely go to just 20 teams taking a mixture of SBC/WAC/FCS. The SBC will expand by taking a mixture of WAC/FCS. The WAC will have at least 4 football playing members remaining to build around for plenty of room to expand with Montana, Montana State, Portland State, Lamar ect.

-You can't look at the MAC and say well because you are 8 out of 10 that means that its a bad conference. Is the Big East then below average at 6 out of 10? Fans think of it as the 6th best football conference in the country. The MAC is very capable of finishing 7th in the power rankings and at the top could be as strong as the Big East.

-The positive impact to the MAC in basketball may be even more dramatic. CUSA and MWC combining equals 1 less automatic bid and 1 more at large. That can't be anything but a good thing for the MAC. It automatically bumps the MAC up one position in the RPI rankings. Butler moving from the Horizon to the A10 bumps the MAC up yet another position. This is not even factoring in natural improvement among the MAC West in men's basketball.

All of the above could make the MAC a 2 NCAA bid conference soon.
(This post was last modified: 03-17-2012 10:54 AM by Louis Kitton.)
03-17-2012 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bull_In_Exile Offline
Eternal Pessimist
*

Posts: 21,809
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 461
I Root For: The Underdog
Location:
Post: #29
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-16-2012 09:27 AM)EA3 Wrote:  "If you go back now 3 years, Ohio, NIU and Toledo have made steady progress in MAC football and are not looking back. Who says they couldn't continue to get better and become like TCU and Boise State? Regularly appear in the top 25." -LK


CMU said the same thing 4-5 years ago. It's worked out real well for them. (CMU got there backs of *two* players)
Miami said the same thing after 2003. It's worked out real well for them. (Miami got there on the back of one)
Ball St. said the same thing in 2008. It's worked out real well for them.
WMU said the same thing in 1999. It's worked out real well for us. BSU had a blip year because of talent. There were no institutional shifts that made your program better
...

A little perspective is needed here.

And yes, I'm putting you on blast because of all the garbage you spew. Ohio is 4-4 against the West in the last 3 years. Saying they belong in the same breath as NIU (or Toledo right now), is no different than saying a West bball team is a top 4 team in the conference. Ohio lost to Ball St. in 2011 in Athens! Ball St. finished 4th in the West. Do the math.

Ohio, and Toledo have each made *institutional strides* to be better. I can't speak to NIU but I think they have improved their spending and facilities.
03-17-2012 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Louis Kitton Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,000
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 27
I Root For: High Fashion
Location: Paris Online
Post: #30
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-17-2012 11:43 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(03-16-2012 09:27 AM)EA3 Wrote:  "If you go back now 3 years, Ohio, NIU and Toledo have made steady progress in MAC football and are not looking back. Who says they couldn't continue to get better and become like TCU and Boise State? Regularly appear in the top 25." -LK


CMU said the same thing 4-5 years ago. It's worked out real well for them. (CMU got there backs of *two* players)
Miami said the same thing after 2003. It's worked out real well for them. (Miami got there on the back of one)
Ball St. said the same thing in 2008. It's worked out real well for them.
WMU said the same thing in 1999. It's worked out real well for us. BSU had a blip year because of talent. There were no institutional shifts that made your program better
...

A little perspective is needed here.

And yes, I'm putting you on blast because of all the garbage you spew. Ohio is 4-4 against the West in the last 3 years. Saying they belong in the same breath as NIU (or Toledo right now), is no different than saying a West bball team is a top 4 team in the conference. Ohio lost to Ball St. in 2011 in Athens! Ball St. finished 4th in the West. Do the math.

Ohio, and Toledo have each made *institutional strides* to be better. I can't speak to NIU but I think they have improved their spending and facilities.

No. Illinois has become one of those programs like So. Miss that is now chronically very good with its recruiting advantages and football culture in place.

Now that Boise (BE), TCU (Big XII) and Utah (PAC) have moved onto BCS conferences who is going to be there to take the torch for the non-AQ?

Toledo=Boise
NIU=TCU
Ohio=Utah

04-rock
03-17-2012 11:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Howl-n-Prowl Away
Three SDs above the mean

Posts: 5,636
Joined: Sep 2011
I Root For: Los NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Territory
Post: #31
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 06:31 AM)axeme Wrote:  Nothing in the contract mentions any sports but football. The MAC did not put in a sneaky clause that allows them to force UMass into the conference for all-sports for a season on a technicality when Temple leaves. That is silly. It means full member for football only. Sheesh. The poll makes no sense.

It's not sneaky and UMass has the right of refusal, but it IS there.
03-17-2012 12:06 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 20,022
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #32
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-17-2012 12:06 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  
(03-15-2012 06:31 AM)axeme Wrote:  Nothing in the contract mentions any sports but football. The MAC did not put in a sneaky clause that allows them to force UMass into the conference for all-sports for a season on a technicality when Temple leaves. That is silly. It means full member for football only. Sheesh. The poll makes no sense.

It's not sneaky and UMass has the right of refusal, but it IS there.

No, you said the MAC had the option of adding UMass as a full member if Temple left. The option is not the MAC's, it is UMass's option to join if it chooses. The MAC can't force the issue. Huge difference. See your first post.
03-17-2012 01:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Howl-n-Prowl Away
Three SDs above the mean

Posts: 5,636
Joined: Sep 2011
I Root For: Los NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Territory
Post: #33
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-17-2012 01:21 PM)axeme Wrote:  
(03-17-2012 12:06 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  
(03-15-2012 06:31 AM)axeme Wrote:  Nothing in the contract mentions any sports but football. The MAC did not put in a sneaky clause that allows them to force UMass into the conference for all-sports for a season on a technicality when Temple leaves. That is silly. It means full member for football only. Sheesh. The poll makes no sense.

It's not sneaky and UMass has the right of refusal, but it IS there.

No, you said the MAC had the option of adding UMass as a full member if Temple left. The option is not the MAC's, it is UMass's option to join if it chooses. The MAC can't force the issue. Huge difference. See your first post.

Hence the "right of refusal" for UMass, but the MAC has the prerogative to "force" the issue.

I fully admitted that I misinterpreted the letter of the contract, but the the spirit of the contract remains; the MAC can basically give UMass an "all in or you are out" ultimatum.

You said no such condition existed, see your first post.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2012 08:11 AM by Howl-n-Prowl.)
03-17-2012 01:34 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 20,022
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #34
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
Again, the MAC cannot force UMass into the conference for all-sports, which is what I said. It has contracted to give them the option of joining, which has probably always been the case. Like Temple, UMass has the control to do what suits them best. The MAC does not have that choice.
03-17-2012 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Howl-n-Prowl Away
Three SDs above the mean

Posts: 5,636
Joined: Sep 2011
I Root For: Los NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Territory
Post: #35
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-17-2012 02:07 PM)axeme Wrote:  Again, the MAC cannot force UMass into the conference for all-sports, which is what I said. It has contracted to give them the option of joining, which has probably always been the case. Like Temple, UMass has the control to do what suits them best. The MAC does not have that choice.

Not disputing that, I addressed that in follow-up posts.

The MAC does have the choice to make UMass make the decision though, which is all that I'm saying (now).
03-17-2012 02:10 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
emu steve Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,475
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 83
I Root For: EMU / MAC
Location: DMV - D.C. area
Post: #36
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
(03-15-2012 07:43 AM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  The way it works is that, if the MAC gives UMass the 2+ year notice to end the arrangement, UMass has the right to join the MAC as a full (aka all-sports) member. The MAC cannot refuse to admit UMass. That's the distinction. UMass can self-invite itself. All the MAC can do is terminate the football-only aspect.

I like the idea of potentially exercising the 2+ year notice to 'force' UMass to join as a full member.

I'd like to lock up UMass and then go after #14 using the same 'ground rules'.
03-18-2012 06:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
hburg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 9,973
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 263
I Root For: James Madison
Location: Make An Impact...
Post: #37
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
I personally think that JMU in the MAC would be a good fit, they fit very well with Ohio and Miami. I am sure that MAC would like to add UMASS as a full member and they probably should try. I still think adding JMU/ODU/UD would be your best option and would help the MAC and ease the transition of the schools involved. If you really want UMASS a full member maybe adding a VCU or GMU would be the way to go. I can tell you though, breaking up the Virginia schools will be tough. With the A10, I don't see GMU or VCU jumping to another conference because of the strong pact with the other Virginia schools, but maybe so, if you bring some of them in as pact.
03-20-2012 09:06 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
onlinepole Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,196
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 18
I Root For: NU & NIU
Location:
Post: #38
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
Adding JMU as a full member #14 give the MAC the largest D1 football playing university in New England (UMASS), the largest in New York St (Buffalo) and the 2nd largest in the fast growing state of VA( JMU's undergrad enrollement is 2K larger than UVA's). That's a significant presence in the Eastern US for a "Midwestern" conference. Programs with larger enrollments mean a higher ceiling when they get good and popular. I also doubt that when the Big East expands again that it will be in the northeastern US. Much more likely in the West (Hawaii, Fresno, Nevada) to make it easier and more attractive for AFA to join the BE football only, or adding the remaining B12 teams (Kansas, KSU, IA ST, Baylor) after the Texahoma schools join the 12 PAC.
03-21-2012 10:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dukes09 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,386
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 59
I Root For: James Madison
Location: Richmond, VA
Post: #39
UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
Hi I'm a jmu fan here and someone said Mac fans were curious about our opinion.
Obviously I want our program to advance to the next level because our support is outgrowing the Fcs. Although i desire either a CAA conference move up (highly unlikely) or joining ecu and Marshall in their conference, I do respect that Mac fans do seem to be the only FBS fans to be taking CAA teams serious and that grabs my respect. I think aside from the two mentioned teams and the higher exposure level, the big east and cusa conferences are quickly becoming a joke.
They would rather add schools in idaho and San diego than consider any more local schools right in their backyard.
With that being said, if you all really want some of the fcs's best teams, we probably wont join a nonregional conference without some of our local rivals coming with us in a package deal. Other teams worth considering are Delaware, old dominion (va) and appalachian state (nc). I know geography is an issue for everyone and it is just as much for us. The closest school is Ohio at 5h15m away from the beautiful harrisonburg.
I think the midatlantic region will only help the mac and odu is even a good basketball add too.
(This post was last modified: 03-22-2012 05:01 PM by Dukes09.)
03-22-2012 03:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Howl-n-Prowl Away
Three SDs above the mean

Posts: 5,636
Joined: Sep 2011
I Root For: Los NIU Huskies
Location: Huskie Territory
Post: #40
RE: UNOFFICIAL “What the MAC should do” thread
Thanks to the JMU fans for chiming in.

It's interesting (to me) that the two of the three JMU fans who voted (at this time), voted for JMU's inclusion without bringing in any of their basketball mates from the CAA. I thought that those teams may provide additional (needed) incentive to join, but it appears that moving up to FBS is incentive enough. That's encouraging, I hope the JMU administration feels the same.

I'd like to see UMass & JMU become full members.

Regarding the geographical concerns expressed by some JMU posters (not just on this thread), if you accept the premise that JMU will not be able to jump up to the FBS straight into the ACC or other AQ league, there really is not a non-AQ conference more regional for JMU than the MAC.

The two mentioned CUSA schools plus Ohio are within 300 miles of JMU. But if you were to use the time/distance between JMU and UAB (the 3rd closest CUSA school to JMU) as a radius, 10 of the 13 schools in the MAC that JMU would be playing fit inside of that circle. Only NIU, WMU, and CMU are farther but they would not be in JMU's division. Plus (I didn't verify this but), I think that the remaining three MAC schools are closer to JMU than the 4th closest CUSA school.

If you compare that to the Sun Belt, I think only MTSU and WKU are closer to JMU than UAB.

And neither of those conferences (CUSA/SBC) have a team in the Sweet 16!

Thanks again for voting/your perspective.
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2012 10:33 AM by Howl-n-Prowl.)
03-23-2012 10:04 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.