(06-23-2019 07:35 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:18 PM)Bogg Wrote:  Football will either go entirely or move to independent. I've long suspected that if/when UConn moved to the Big East some sort of premium payment by Fox in the form of a TV contract for football would be involved. We'll see.

Bogg, you covered two of the many choices. The most obvious choice is the first one, but it is getting very little discussion: drop football altogether.
Thinking of ways to save the UConn football program is being discussed, here, as though it were the same as saving the whales or the California condor. College football is not an endangered species, but occasionally one of the programs dies.
The UConn administrators will not start a Go Fund Me campaign. They will examine the history of the program's revenue and attendance, examine the forecasts for those same two elements, and do what responsible stewards are required to do.

They have a stadium the state poured money into and owns, they’re not dropping football.

(06-23-2019 09:47 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 09:44 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 03:38 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:49 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 05:53 AM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Scheduling is also much easier with two 7-team divisions in an 8-game conference slate.

... How?

Currently the MAC has two 6-team divisions, each school playing eight conference games, including its five division opponents every year, plus three cross-divisional games.
One year a school will host 3 of 5 divisional rivals and 1 of 3 cross-divisional opponents; the following year that same school will host 2 of 5 divisional rivals and 2 of 3 cross-divisional opponents. This makes conference scheduling difficult, but not impossible.

With two 7-team divisions, what the MAC prefers, it's much easier. Every season you play your six divisional rivals, alternating three each home and away, and play two crossover games, one each home and away. This format is much easier to schedule due to each school playing an even number of divisional games (6) and an even number of cross-divisional games (2).

FIRE UP CHIPS! :)

Again, how? Have you ever worked out such a schedule?

Over the years the crossover scheduling issue has been brought up by commissioners.

The problem is not in 12 teams vs. 14 teams, but in having just one logical protected crossover (Toledo vs. BGSU). If you're going to have one protected crossover, you need at least another to make scheduling less complicated. They manufactured a rivalry between Ball State and Miami-OH for this reason.

(06-23-2019 07:08 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Dennis Dodd Reports that MAC and CUSA Have No Interests In UConn.

Well, the UConn/UMass to the MAC is out of the question.

David nothing is known yet to the outside world.

-Is UConn going to be a plan of 11 for the BE or 12? That would change where the openings are if there is one in the A10.

-What is the ultimate timeline with the move? UConn may just say it will give independence a shot for a couple of years for the time being at the press conference.

Quite a few variables here that could impact the BE, AAC, A10, CUSA yet and maybe the MAC.

(06-23-2019 09:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:35 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:18 PM)Bogg Wrote:  Football will either go entirely or move to independent. I've long suspected that if/when UConn moved to the Big East some sort of premium payment by Fox in the form of a TV contract for football would be involved. We'll see.

Bogg, you covered two of the many choices. The most obvious choice is the first one, but it is getting very little discussion: drop football altogether.
Thinking of ways to save the UConn football program is being discussed, here, as though it were the same as saving the whales or the California condor. College football is not an endangered species, but occasionally one of the programs dies.
The UConn administrators will not start a Go Fund Me campaign. They will examine the history of the program's revenue and attendance, examine the forecasts for those same two elements, and do what responsible stewards are required to do.

They have a stadium the state poured money into and owns, they’re not dropping football.

For the record, you could buy a new one of those stadiums every decade for the same net cost of opening the doors to the football facility over the same time period.

(06-23-2019 09:53 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 09:47 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 09:44 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 03:38 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:49 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  ... How?

Currently the MAC has two 6-team divisions, each school playing eight conference games, including its five division opponents every year, plus three cross-divisional games.
One year a school will host 3 of 5 divisional rivals and 1 of 3 cross-divisional opponents; the following year that same school will host 2 of 5 divisional rivals and 2 of 3 cross-divisional opponents. This makes conference scheduling difficult, but not impossible.

With two 7-team divisions, what the MAC prefers, it's much easier. Every season you play your six divisional rivals, alternating three each home and away, and play two crossover games, one each home and away. This format is much easier to schedule due to each school playing an even number of divisional games (6) and an even number of cross-divisional games (2).

FIRE UP CHIPS! :)

Again, how? Have you ever worked out such a schedule?

Over the years the crossover scheduling issue has been brought up by commissioners.

The problem is not in 12 teams vs. 14 teams, but in having just one logical protected crossover (Toledo vs. BGSU). If you're going to have one protected crossover, you need at least another to make scheduling less complicated. They manufactured a rivalry between Ball State and Miami-OH for this reason.

Ball St and Miami aren't a manufactured rivalry. It was a big basketball rivalry for years so their is common familiarity.

If the MAC could press on with 4 eastern teams it could also move Miami to the west and be effectively a two conference league with regional identities. Marshall, UMass, UConn, ODU would split the Ohio schools 3-3 cleanly into west/east divisions.

I voted MAC because that is probably best case scenario for UConn with UMass and Buffalo in a division. The last MAC eastern front never got off the ground because the Owls flew south.

(06-23-2019 07:08 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Dennis Dodd Reports that MAC and CUSA Have No Interests In UConn.

Well, the UConn/UMass to the MAC is out of the question.

We have yet another confirmation that DavidSt cannot actually READ what is in front of him. What Dodd said was:

Quote: By the way, no immediate interest from @MACSports or @ConferenceUSA in UConn in football.

"no immediate interest" simply is not the same as "absolutely out of the question". That's not how English works.

"No immediate interest" includes, in the range of specific things it may mean, "well, we aren't chasing them, but if they make an offer we'll hear them out".

That would be compatible with UConn applying and the MAC accepting, as the reasons the MAC would have for accepting are not dominant reasons, and they'd drive a hard bargain on the terms of the affiliation contract, including the exit fee.

Obviously UConn is not going to take any such bargaining up until and unless they have been rejected as a FB-only member by the AAC.

Indeed, if that move were to happen, it would not be a big hit with most existing MAC fans, so any sensible MAC official would disclaim interest in an offer from UConn that may never come just to avoid the headache of sports fans contacting them to lobby against it.

Also to the above, neither probably has much interest in UConn as team number 13. However if they are to become team number 12, that likely immediately changes the calculation.

(06-23-2019 10:34 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Also to the above, neither probably has much interest in UConn as team number 13. However if they are to become team number 12, that likely immediately changes the calculation.

There would be some interest from the MAC BBall schools in actually getting the 4 home games per year from the two FB-only schools that was part of the structure of the Temple/UMass system, obvious interest in Buffalo in having them in their FB division, interest in Toledo and Bowling Green in moving the rivalry game in conference ... but after the previous experience, it wouldn't be a lead pipe cinch, the deal would have to be a good deal and ... obviously ... UMass would have to be willing to sign up for the same deal, since one attractive OOC BBall home game every six years is a lot less interesting than one every three years.

As far as the idea of the AAC raiding the MAC to join a conference with its center of gravity being somewhere between Texas and Alabama, that seems like a very low risk, so a FB-only affiliate to cope with a conference raid is not something I'm worried about.

UConn has proven they can be successful at the FBS level. I remember their teams with Orlovsky and Donald Brown (?) maybe. Could have been the BCS membership? They hosted Notre Dame, didn’t they?

It’s one thing to dangle Temple and UMass in front of MAC basketball crowds, but three or four time champ (too late for fact checking) UConn is a different story. I’d include their women’s team as well.

If the MAC is out, then maybe a scheduling alliance can form with Army, UMass, and Liberty. Maybe a few BYU games as well.

(06-23-2019 10:42 PM)esayem Wrote:  It’s one thing to dangle Temple and UMass in front of MAC basketball crowds, but three or four time champ (too late for fact checking) UConn is a different story. I’d include their women’s team as well.

If the MAC is out, then maybe a scheduling alliance can form with Army, UMass, and Liberty. Maybe a few BYU games as well.

The MAC is certainly not "out" based on the mis-characterized Dodd tweet ... but they aren't "in" either.

And September and early October is going to be OK for UConn finding games. A two game last-half-of-October scheduling agreement with UConn along the same lines as the old Army agreement ... if a conference school signs the game, the conference will respect it when they work out their schedule ... might be worked out.

Of course, Army is Army ... for UConn, the agreement might be, "if you do a 2+2 FB & BBall H/H contract, we'll let one away FB trip to Connecticut be scheduled between October 14 and 31 in any given year".

Between the various Indy schools and the FCS buy game, UConn would be able to have two home games in November, add an ability to schedule one MAC school at home in late October, and they'd be OK.

(06-22-2019 03:13 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  The "Reason" behind this move is that UConn athletics is hemorrhaging $$$.

The ONLY logical answer then is to follow the example of the majority of the BE member schools and discontinue FB operations. Only two BE members sponsor FB at a varsity level: Villanova, which is established at the FCS level, and Georgetown, which plays non-scholarship FCS football. All the other BE programs have no varsity FB.

As for "keeping" football in the AAC? Nope. Don't see it happening. We don't need UConn more than UConn "needs" the AAC.

'Bye Felicia.

KARMA - UConn once voted to kick Temple out of the BE for FB because Temple invested the FB money into their BB program while the FB program fell on hard times and was almost eliminated from the university. Now Temple gets to repay UConn and vote their FB out of the AAC while they invest in their men's and women's BB and let their FB program fall into oblivion.

Indy, MAC or FCS...

Would UConn offering to play 4 nonconference basketball games a year against MAC schools be carrot enough?

(06-22-2019 03:13 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  As for "keeping" football in the AAC? Nope. Don't see it happening. We don't need UConn football more than UConn basketball "needs" the AAC.

Added words in bold.

(06-23-2019 05:53 AM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  I have to believe that Dr. Steinbrecher and the MAC Presidents would be interested in adding UConn with Army West Point or possibly UMass due to the academic profile of those schools.

UConn along with West Point in particular would also boost the MAC TV contract with ESPN and add a national brand to the conference. Scheduling is also much easier with two 7-team divisions in an 8-game conference slate.

If it were to happen, BGSU would return to the MAC West for football and the divisions would look like this:

MAC East
Army (or UMass)
UConn
Akron
Buffalo
Kent State
Ohio
Miami

MAC West
BGSU
Toledo
Central Michigan
Eastern Michigan
Western Michigan
Ball State
Northern Illinois

As for the AAC, they could certainly look to Army as a backfill for UConn, but this would present a problem with the Army/Navy game since Navy is already in the AAC. IMHO, the AAC will move its footprint south by adding either ODU or UAB from C-USA. These schools have comparable athletic budgets, are in major markets and have respectable football and basketball brands.

If C-USA loses either ODU or UAB to the AAC, they could add James Madison as a replacement.

FIRE UP CHIPS! :)

Seems like the most realistic option, but what do they have to fork over (UConn and UMass) besides the academic leverage? Do they take 1/2 price for a few years on whatever TV deal they can negotiate? Longer term it makes sense for MAC football, plus the East coast exposure to go along with Buffalo. But I think the MAC will need some serious incentives to consider this.

(06-24-2019 04:53 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  Indy, MAC or FCS...

Would UConn offering to play 4 nonconference basketball games a year against MAC schools be carrot enough?

Yeah, I wouldn't think so. Not that valuable a package if you are talking early bird non conference games. Honestly the women's programs could offer more in the short run. It's a good thought though. UConn is too cash strapped to come up with money out front. I think they need some revenue sharing based on whatever TV deal they can work out with Fox. If the Big East gets a raise, some of UConn's money needs to get distributed to the MAC schools over a long, long time.

I would really like to see UConn have success as an independent. I'm not from Connecticut, but I think it would be good to see a state get a good return on their investment.

(06-22-2019 06:15 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-22-2019 03:13 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  The "Reason" behind this move is that UConn athletics is hemorrhaging $$$.

The ONLY logical answer then is to follow the example of the majority of the BE member schools and discontinue FB operations. Only two BE members sponsor FB at a varsity level: Villanova, which is established at the FCS level, and Georgetown, which plays non-scholarship FCS football. All the other BE programs have no varsity FB.

As for "keeping" football in the AAC? Nope. Don't see it happening. We don't need UConn more than UConn "needs" the AAC.

'Bye Felicia.

I have a problem making sense of UConn's athletics reporting when it comes to finances. I'm skeptical that an athletic department that's only losing $8.7 million on football can have a $41 million annual deficit. If those numbers are legit, dropping football may not help all that much.

I don't understand this either.

(06-23-2019 09:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 07:35 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(06-23-2019 02:18 PM)Bogg Wrote:  Football will either go entirely or move to independent. I've long suspected that if/when UConn moved to the Big East some sort of premium payment by Fox in the form of a TV contract for football would be involved. We'll see.

Bogg, you covered two of the many choices. The most obvious choice is the first one, but it is getting very little discussion: drop football altogether.
Thinking of ways to save the UConn football program is being discussed, here, as though it were the same as saving the whales or the California condor. College football is not an endangered species, but occasionally one of the programs dies.
The UConn administrators will not start a Go Fund Me campaign. They will examine the history of the program's revenue and attendance, examine the forecasts for those same two elements, and do what responsible stewards are required to do.

They have a stadium the state poured money into and owns, they’re not dropping football.

The stadium is almost 20 years old, is expected to need a major facelift in the next 10 years. If UConn football looks like UMass football, where is that money supposed to come from?

It will be independent at first for a few years, but I suspect they end up within a decade in FCS or disbanding the program completely. My guess is secretly they've internally decided to kill FBS football already, but don't want to just announce that for fear of an internal backlash that could scuttle the whole back to the Big East movement.