(03-26-2014 03:01 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:58 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:56 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:50 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  You guys are worse than Karl.
Why would we want UMass? They ain't bringing basketball, and their football team is HORRIBLE! 2 wins in 2 years.

You do realize Presidents make these decisions if it happens right?

Yes, Presidents who will have to send women's softball teams to Mass.

Also, I would hope at least our President realizes that Southern school and New England school don't mix well.

Well UMASS would be football only... But they really offer very little to our "Southern" conference excepting possible tv viewership. Their money is in basketball and their basketball isn't moving.

They offer a 2016 meeting coming to your local airport Marriott...

(03-26-2014 02:58 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:56 PM)panama Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:50 PM)Fanof49ASU Wrote:  You guys are worse than Karl.
Why would we want UMass? They ain't bringing basketball, and their football team is HORRIBLE! 2 wins in 2 years.

You do realize Presidents make these decisions if it happens right?

Yes, Presidents who will have to send women's softball teams to Mass.

Also, I would hope at least our President realizes that Southern school and New England school don't mix well.

They didn't join the MAC all sports and they would be a football only add. We're talking 1 sport here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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.

Tweets from Matt Vautour of the GazetteUMAss:

UMass is leaving the MAC. Announcement coming within the next few minutes. No future conference announced

According to multiple sources, MAC invoked right to offer UMass a two-year term agreement or full all-sport membership. UMass chose to exit

UMass has been working with Carr Sports Associates to examine its conference affiliation. School must feel secure it will have options

UMass chose not to sacrifice competitive viability of basketball and financial viability of other sports to stay in MAC

Take note all - THIS IS NOT A MOVE TO LEAVE FBS

McCutcheon said UMass is committed to FBS football. I'll have early version of a story up shortly

According to A.D. John McCutcheon, men's basketball scheduling contract with MAC is done. MInutemen will not play MAC teams in 2014

UMass to the ACK makes more sense.

(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.

Indeed. Umass has a solid mbb program, and the Boston TV market would fit well with AAC profile.
I am not sure whether UConn would try to blosk UMass or not.

UMass would be a pretty terrible football addition. Football only additions should be schools that help your odds of being the best G5 conference, not hurt it. If added, the SBC would have 3 football only schools that drag down the conference.

I think they'll eventually get an invite to the AAC.

OK...just throwing this out there....but does this mean there might be a SBC or two looking at the MAC? ArkSt? ULL? and a JMU? Saw someone talking about that months ago.

(03-26-2014 03:14 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  OK...just throwing this out there....but does this mean there might be a SBC or two looking at the MAC? ArkSt? ULL? and a JMU? Saw someone talking about that months ago.

Nothing on our end. Though I have no doubt JMU is talking to the MAC.

(03-26-2014 03:07 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Because 13 is a pain in the a$$ to schedule requiring the MAC to annually seek a waiver to hold a conference title game because it doesn't comply with the rule requiring everyone in a division to play each other.

Because the MAC has re-opened its TV contract negotiations and figured out that UMass doesn't help them get any more money without basketball so why split the pot 13 ways when 12 works just fine.

Because that means no longer have to take a reduced share of CFP money per team.

Other than that no logical reasons the MAC would do that.

If 13 is a pain in the ass to schedule, why did the MAC just attempt to do that for all their sports instead of just the one by bringing in UMass for everything?

It's probably true that UMass doesn't bring in any money without basketball. That being said, the MAC didn't kick UMass out, they tried to make things permanent and UMass decided to walk.

The reduced share of CFP money is really chump change. Less than $100k per team. 1% of the football budget for each school. It's not that big of a hit.

I still think you have everything backwards. The MAC invited UMass last month in spite of everything you listed. They wanted UMass. UMass said no and now they have to leave because that's the contract. So why would the MAC want all of that unless they had another school coming in to make it 14?

Doesn't necessarily mean anything. Could be the MAC wanted to get back to their core 12.

(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.

(03-26-2014 03:14 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  OK...just throwing this out there....but does this mean there might be a SBC or two looking at the MAC? ArkSt? ULL? and a JMU? Saw someone talking about that months ago.

I think that the MAC stands pat unless it can get a top television market. That's why it went after Temple.

If UD is not in play then the MAC stays at 12

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.

(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.

(03-26-2014 03:18 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 03:14 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  OK...just throwing this out there....but does this mean there might be a SBC or two looking at the MAC? ArkSt? ULL? and a JMU? Saw someone talking about that months ago.

I think that the MAC stands pat unless it can get a top television market. That's why it went after Temple.

If UD is not in play then the MAC stays at 12

I agree. I think the only way MAC expands is a JMU/UD package. If UD says no I think MAC stays.

(03-26-2014 02:07 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:05 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  One would think this locks JMU out of the MAC. I don't see the MAC going to 14.

Why not? They were willing to go to 13 for all sports. They WANT to expand, and UMass had the first invite and declined.

UMass was a member only because temple was a football member. It was a good travel partner for temple and gave the league 14 football schools. After temple left having UMASS didn't make any sense for football but if they would've joined for all sports thier basketball program is really good and would have strengthen the MAC. UMASS had no interest in moving basketball out of the A-10 for the MAC and the MAC no longer needed UMASS football with Temple gone so the marriage is over. The MAC is back to 12 for good I would think.

(03-26-2014 02:09 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:07 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 02:05 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  One would think this locks JMU out of the MAC. I don't see the MAC going to 14.

Why not? They were willing to go to 13 for all sports. They WANT to expand, and UMass had the first invite and declined.

Can't say I blame them with where the rest of their sports are.

They expanded with UMASS because Temple was in the MAC. When Temple left, UMAss no longer fit...even though the didn't anyway.

There are several ways I can see this play out now.

Option 1: MAC sticks with 12. JMU has no option but to join the SBC. UMass goes to the AAC.
Option 2: MAC decides to go to 14 and brings in JMU and Delaware/Liberty.
Option 3: SBC decides to go after UMass, meaning JMU is no longer needed.

I tend to think the first option is what we will end up seeing happen. The MAC commissioner stated that the conference will stay at 12 and not back fill. That means that, even after his statements on the right group of schools joining, the MAC is done for now. When he said he would take the right group of schools, he meant a combination of UMass and JMU. Now that UMass is out of the picture for the MAC, I believe JMU is also out... for now.

If JMU wants a shot at the FBS, they realistically only have one option right now. They either take it and run with it, or they squander it, remain in the CAA, and watch UMass/MoSt/EKU/Liberty pass them by next year. Although the cards were once in JMU's hands, the tables have now turned and the Sun Belt can now make this all about them.

Just to add to all of this: UMass turned down the invitation a month ago, right around the time that the JMU/MoSt invite rumors started ramping up. Coincidence? Maybe, but I don't think so. Now, if we could just get rid of Idaho, this would be my ideal conference.

East
Appalachian State
Georgia State
Georgia Southern
USA
Troy
JMU

West
Arkansas State
ULL
ULM
Texas State
NMSU
Missouri State

UMass to the SBC? I'll believe that when I see it. We have absolutely nothing in common with them and I'm sure they'd be more than willing to agree. The Idaho and NMSU idea was nowhere near the stretch of the imagination that adding UMass would be. I also wonder why the MAC would want to expand to 14 when the magic number is 12. They have been stable up to this point so why feel the need?

One thing to consider is I don't think UMass is a replacement for a JMU or Missouri State. We still a desparate need for an all sports member close to App, and I doubt they want UMass as a travel partner.

However, lets say UMass agreed to play 4 OOC games per year against SBC teams in basketball (2 home 2 road) and the league could still pick up JMU, Missouri State, and NMSU...I think then the Presidents might listen.