(04-15-2018 03:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 02:25 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:56 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:17 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  Obviously being biased, I think Toledo is a better fit than UMASS for the AAC. Along with ODU or Marshall for that matter.

Who knows what the future holds, but who ever the AAC's targets are, facility improvements, market and fresh championship achievements will play a significant role in been chosen by Mike Aresco, imho.

IDK if Toledo's goal is to align themselves in a better conference and if so than perhaps facility improvements should be a priority.

50 million has been invested in facility upgrades within last ten years with more on the way. The Glass Bowl seats 26,240 but was designed to expand to 52,000. Savage Arena was downsized from 9,000 to 7,300 for the sole purpose of reconfiguring, adding luxury suites/loges.
That’s where the $$$ is. Toledo likes the MAC but is similar to Fresno State in the MW and would aspire to possibly upgrade their status. With the landscape of college football changing, I believe UT wants to be in the mix.

Upgrade the seating to at least say 38k - 40k with few nice bells n whistles, brighten up the arena and you guys are on to something.

The 6,000 seat upper on the side is old and outdated. Replacing it with a 12-15000 seat deck and wrap it around to the 1,100 seat press tower, then you are in the neighborhood of 40,000 capacity...
Agreed, even with the new suites, Savage Arena could use a new lighting setup...

(04-15-2018 03:13 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 03:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 02:25 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:56 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:17 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  Obviously being biased, I think Toledo is a better fit than UMASS for the AAC. Along with ODU or Marshall for that matter.

Who knows what the future holds, but who ever the AAC's targets are, facility improvements, market and fresh championship achievements will play a significant role in been chosen by Mike Aresco, imho.

IDK if Toledo's goal is to align themselves in a better conference and if so than perhaps facility improvements should be a priority.

50 million has been invested in facility upgrades within last ten years with more on the way. The Glass Bowl seats 26,240 but was designed to expand to 52,000. Savage Arena was downsized from 9,000 to 7,300 for the sole purpose of reconfiguring, adding luxury suites/loges.
That’s where the $$$ is. Toledo likes the MAC but is similar to Fresno State in the MW and would aspire to possibly upgrade their status. With the landscape of college football changing, I believe UT wants to be in the mix.

Upgrade the seating to at least say 38k - 40k with few nice bells n whistles, brighten up the arena and you guys are on to something.

The 6,000 seat upper on the side is old and outdated. Replacing it with a 12-15000 seat deck and wrap it around to the 1,100 seat press tower, then you are in the neighborhood of 40,000 capacity...
Agreed, even with the new suites, Savage Arena could use a new lighting setup...

Honestly--30K with the ability of expand to 40K is adequate. If you can regularly fill up a 30K venue--thats going to look really nice on TV. I'd rather them under build than over build. Full stadiums---regardless of size create a good atmosphere for tv. Besides, the trend in stadium building going forward is moving toward smaller---more luxurious--stadiums that offer great sight lines, lots of creature comforts, and an excellent atmosphere because they are easy to fill. Big giant 50-75K boxes are not what you want as HD TV continues to become more appealing than driving to the stadium and fighting the crowds for many football fans.

(04-15-2018 02:14 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:39 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  JMHO but if UMass really wants to 'position themselves' they need a deep NCAA run and to start winning some football games.

Not just that, UofMemphis... Their football stadium needs lots of improvement and while they're at it their basketball arena should be looked at as well.

If UMass does these things I don't see how they can be ignore.

they should have accepted the MAC all-sports offer IMHO.

(04-15-2018 01:51 PM)Lush Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:50 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  The only problem I have with Umass is I can’t spell massachuwshits worth a damn

just call em massholes

This is correct.

If D'Antoni wasn't so old, Marshall would be much higher on my list.

Kick USF out.

Invite UMass.

(04-15-2018 01:17 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  Obviously being biased, I think Toledo is a better fit than UMASS for the AAC. Along with ODU or Marshall for that matter.

I would agree except we never could beat Toledo.

(04-15-2018 07:31 PM)vick mike Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:17 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  Obviously being biased, I think Toledo is a better fit than UMASS for the AAC. Along with ODU or Marshall for that matter.

I would agree except we never could beat Toledo.

Yeah, but Temple fans were fun to tailgate with, especially before the 2005 game at the Linc ...

(04-15-2018 03:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 02:25 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:56 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:17 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  Obviously being biased, I think Toledo is a better fit than UMASS for the AAC. Along with ODU or Marshall for that matter.

Who knows what the future holds, but who ever the AAC's targets are, facility improvements, market and fresh championship achievements will play a significant role in been chosen by Mike Aresco, imho.

IDK if Toledo's goal is to align themselves in a better conference and if so than perhaps facility improvements should be a priority.

50 million has been invested in facility upgrades within last ten years with more on the way. The Glass Bowl seats 26,240 but was designed to expand to 52,000. Savage Arena was downsized from 9,000 to 7,300 for the sole purpose of reconfiguring, adding luxury suites/loges.
That’s where the $$$ is. Toledo likes the MAC but is similar to Fresno State in the MW and would aspire to possibly upgrade their status. With the landscape of college football changing, I believe UT wants to be in the mix.

Upgrade the seating to at least say 38k - 40k with few nice bells n whistles, brighten up the arena and you guys are on to something.

Though at 26,240 capacity Toledo is more than fine for the AAC when you have Tulane and Tulsa right around that number.

Play a few years at that. If attendance is good in the AAC go in for more.

(04-15-2018 11:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 03:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 02:25 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:56 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:17 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  Obviously being biased, I think Toledo is a better fit than UMASS for the AAC. Along with ODU or Marshall for that matter.

Who knows what the future holds, but who ever the AAC's targets are, facility improvements, market and fresh championship achievements will play a significant role in been chosen by Mike Aresco, imho.

IDK if Toledo's goal is to align themselves in a better conference and if so than perhaps facility improvements should be a priority.

50 million has been invested in facility upgrades within last ten years with more on the way. The Glass Bowl seats 26,240 but was designed to expand to 52,000. Savage Arena was downsized from 9,000 to 7,300 for the sole purpose of reconfiguring, adding luxury suites/loges.
That’s where the $$$ is. Toledo likes the MAC but is similar to Fresno State in the MW and would aspire to possibly upgrade their status. With the landscape of college football changing, I believe UT wants to be in the mix.

Upgrade the seating to at least say 38k - 40k with few nice bells n whistles, brighten up the arena and you guys are on to something.

Though at 26,240 capacity Toledo is more than fine for the AAC when you have Tulane and Tulsa right around that number.

Play a few years at that. If attendance is good in the AAC go in for more.

Years back, Toledo averaged 30,000+ in a 26,000 seat stadium...
I think we pulled in over 36,000 for both the Navy and Minnesota games. The fire marshall put a stop to the portable bleachers put up in the concourses and endzone ...
Also got 70,000 for Ohio State at Browns Stadium with Toledo getting the home gate in 2011, taking in 3.5 million...

A couple years back, Toledo played UMASS in (NFL Patriots) Gillette Stadium...
Hard pressed to have at least 15,000 there, with about 2,000 being Rocket fans...

Exceedingly long thread for something a football coach said on radio. I can tell you for a fact that their fan base would riot if he had inserted any other G5 conference in his answer because our fan base would have rioted if any other conference would have been mentioned.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(04-16-2018 12:17 AM)FMRocket Wrote:  A couple years back, Toledo played UMASS in (NFL Patriots) Gillette Stadium...
Hard pressed to have at least 15,000 there, with about 2,000 being Rocket fans...

Well the attraction was Toledo. How many do they get in Gillette when they play a P5 or UConn?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

BYU is the only P6 caliber program...maybe boise. Unless you get a combo it isn't worth it. Even adding Army is fading on me since they would want the army Navy money. Keep our P6 conference intact.

(04-16-2018 07:25 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  BYU is the only P6 caliber program...maybe boise. Unless you get a combo it isn't worth it. Even adding Army is fading on me since they would want the army Navy money. Keep our P6 conference intact.

I agree with the above.

But what UMass has going for it are the things that are difficult to change just happen to be their strengths. A top-100 school in the USNWR rankings. A state flagship. Those are things that would be attractive to our school presidents when considering expansion options.

If, and only if, UMass can upgrade their facilities, put a winning basketball program on the court, and put a decent FB product on the field, they very quickly could become a top option. It also doesn't hurt that two conference schools - UConn and Temple - could evolve into nice rivals over time.

So while BYU is probably the only team out there that adds to our value immediately, I could see a scenario where UMass adds to this conference if they take the right steps in the coming years. But they need to make those steps on their own and not wait for the AAC to help them get there.

(04-16-2018 07:19 AM)panama Wrote:  Exceedingly long thread for something a football coach said on radio. I can tell you for a fact that their fan base would riot if he had inserted any other G5 conference in his answer because our fan base would have rioted if any other conference would have been mentioned.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I'll give Panama a nod on this one... Even Georgia State would be a better "add" than UMass. And I don't say that lightly.

(04-16-2018 08:36 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 07:19 AM)panama Wrote:  Exceedingly long thread for something a football coach said on radio. I can tell you for a fact that their fan base would riot if he had inserted any other G5 conference in his answer because our fan base would have rioted if any other conference would have been mentioned.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I'll give Panama a nod on this one... Even Georgia State would be a better "add" than UMass. And I don't say that lightly.

They play in Turner stadium with a current capacity of 24,333 which is higher than the UMASS stadium. They play in a major metropolitan area and add a team close to UCF and USF while cutting the distance on the east coast between NC and ECU. Not a bad geographical add. Food for thought if the AAC ever expands or needs to replace a school in the conference in the next realignment phase, if one takes place even though there are stronger candidates out there.

no to any additions unless we lose someone and even then FAU, ODU, UTSA, WKU are much higher in the ranking than umass.

The stall in conference realignment is a benefit to us, as I agree we have work to do. Things move so slow at UMass. Very disappointed the IPF construction did not happen this year. This quote sums up but is not exactly what I heard. The Mt Ida purchase is using up a lot of political capital but should go through and has slowed down the process for this year. Did hear the higher dollar amount a little above mid 20's, which is an issue.

Quote:The timing of the Mt Ida acquisition could hurt us. Looks like the debt that it will cause is putting a crimp on the more optimistic $25M number for the IPF.

https://247sports.com/college/massachuse...116?Page=3

(04-16-2018 12:07 AM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 11:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 03:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 02:25 PM)FMRocket Wrote:  

(04-15-2018 01:56 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Who knows what the future holds, but who ever the AAC's targets are, facility improvements, market and fresh championship achievements will play a significant role in been chosen by Mike Aresco, imho.

IDK if Toledo's goal is to align themselves in a better conference and if so than perhaps facility improvements should be a priority.

50 million has been invested in facility upgrades within last ten years with more on the way. The Glass Bowl seats 26,240 but was designed to expand to 52,000. Savage Arena was downsized from 9,000 to 7,300 for the sole purpose of reconfiguring, adding luxury suites/loges.
That’s where the $$$ is. Toledo likes the MAC but is similar to Fresno State in the MW and would aspire to possibly upgrade their status. With the landscape of college football changing, I believe UT wants to be in the mix.

Upgrade the seating to at least say 38k - 40k with few nice bells n whistles, brighten up the arena and you guys are on to something.

Though at 26,240 capacity Toledo is more than fine for the AAC when you have Tulane and Tulsa right around that number.

Play a few years at that. If attendance is good in the AAC go in for more.

Years back, Toledo averaged 30,000+ in a 26,000 seat stadium...
I think we pulled in over 36,000 for both the Navy and Minnesota games. The fire marshall put a stop to the portable bleachers put up in the concourses and endzone ...
Also got 70,000 for Ohio State at Browns Stadium with Toledo getting the home gate in 2011, taking in 3.5 million...

I do remember all of that.

From that perspective there looks to be a business case for going to 35,000-40,000 seats as part of a deal for an AAC invite.

Toledo can still play BG every year as a non-conference game and on a Saturday since it won't be part of the MAC package.