(10-02-2021 10:36 AM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Is there really a need to expand? I just don't get this idea that because some schools are moving conferences and the big boys want to create alliances btw conferences, that we should jump on the crazy train and expand.

No, there absolutely is not. As a conference expands, the general benefits of adding schools fades, and the general downsides of adding schools increases. 12 is the sweet spot for a two division conference -- enough inventory, a likelihood that one or both divisions will have an interesting division race, and enough cross division games that it feels more like a conference and less like two separate mini-conferences with a scheduling agreement.

There are benefits in expanding to 14, but there are downsides as well ... not just the diluting the CFP payout with two more teams sharing, but also the increase in Olympic team sport traveling costs, since any addition will be further away for all or most schools than the current schools ...
... and all too often the approach is just to assume that it all nets out positive by starting, "this is how the MAC can get to 14" as if bigger is automatically better.

But back in the real world, expanding past 12 is not because "we benefit from getting bigger", it's because the teams you expand with bring positives that outweigh the overall net negative of expanding past 12.

There do not seem to be teams out there that are available that do that for the MAC.

Not to mention, your chances of a conference championship go down with 14 or 16 members. Some of the teams in the new 16 team SEC will NEVER win a conference championship. It's almost better to be a top tier G5 team than a bottom tier P5. The top G5 have much better chance at being ranked and going to New Years bowl.

(10-02-2021 10:36 AM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Is there really a need to expand? I just don't get this idea that because some schools are moving conferences and the big boys want to create alliances btw conferences, that we should jump on the crazy train and expand.

It depends a little on what everyone else is doing.

At the moment the MWC is 12, the SBC is planning to go to 12 and the AAC is probably going back to 12 (UAB, Charlotte, Rice, FAU). If that is the case it makes a lot of sense for the MAC to just hang back at 12.

Matt Brown says regionalism is a good thing when it comes to selling ads and the MAC has that as advantage.

Quote:Location may still be important, just in other ways. Girard pointed out that selling some ads and sponsorship packages can be easier for leagues in a more concentrated geographic footprint than with a conference that is more spread out. The MAC, for example, is almost exclusively in the Midwest, so potential sponsors and partners know exactly what they're getting. A league with spread out over a massive footprint, like say, the old WAC, might have a harder "story" to tell partners, especially since their audience wouldn't be massive in each market. The NFL is a national brand and can sell nationally. Your favorite mid-major college conference isn't.

https://www.extrapointsmb.com/mid-major-...streaming/

(10-05-2021 09:35 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Matt Brown says regionalism is a good thing when it comes to selling ads and the MAC has that as advantage.

Quote:Location may still be important, just in other ways. Girard pointed out that selling some ads and sponsorship packages can be easier for leagues in a more concentrated geographic footprint than with a conference that is more spread out. The MAC, for example, is almost exclusively in the Midwest, so potential sponsors and partners know exactly what they're getting. A league with spread out over a massive footprint, like say, the old WAC, might have a harder "story" to tell partners, especially since their audience wouldn't be massive in each market. The NFL is a national brand and can sell nationally. Your favorite mid-major college conference isn't.

https://www.extrapointsmb.com/mid-major-...streaming/

I thought this was a very interesting point by Matt Brown.

(10-05-2021 09:28 AM)GRBRONCO Wrote:  Not to mention, your chances of a conference championship go down with 14 or 16 members. Some of the teams in the new 16 team SEC will NEVER win a conference championship. It's almost better to be a top tier G5 team than a bottom tier P5. The top G5 have much better chance at being ranked and going to New Years bowl.

What's really pathetic is that a school like Vanderbilt can be blown out by 1-AA East Tennessee State, damn near lose at home to winless UConn, and then finish winless in the $EC without even remotely sniffing the postseason, and they'll still make more in College Football Playoff distributions than the Gang of 5 champion, who goes to the NY6 Access Bowl, just because of privilege as a member of the $EC.

(10-05-2021 10:42 AM)All4One Wrote:  

(10-05-2021 09:28 AM)GRBRONCO Wrote:  Not to mention, your chances of a conference championship go down with 14 or 16 members. Some of the teams in the new 16 team SEC will NEVER win a conference championship. It's almost better to be a top tier G5 team than a bottom tier P5. The top G5 have much better chance at being ranked and going to New Years bowl.

What's really pathetic is that a school like Vanderbilt can be blown out by 1-AA East Tennessee State, damn near lose at home to winless UConn, and then finish winless in the $EC without even remotely sniffing the postseason, and they'll still make more in College Football Playoff distributions than the Gang of 5 champion, who goes to the NY6 Access Bowl, just because of privilege as a member of the $EC.

The whole system is totally dysfunctional.

(10-05-2021 10:42 AM)All4One Wrote:  

(10-05-2021 09:28 AM)GRBRONCO Wrote:  Not to mention, your chances of a conference championship go down with 14 or 16 members. Some of the teams in the new 16 team SEC will NEVER win a conference championship. It's almost better to be a top tier G5 team than a bottom tier P5. The top G5 have much better chance at being ranked and going to New Years bowl.

What's really pathetic is that a school like Vanderbilt can be blown out by 1-AA East Tennessee State, damn near lose at home to winless UConn, and then finish winless in the $EC without even remotely sniffing the postseason, and they'll still make more in College Football Playoff distributions than the Gang of 5 champion, who goes to the NY6 Access Bowl, just because of privilege as a member of the $EC.

Thats their deal with the SEC... Be a good baseball and olympic sport school, get drubbed in football, have good academics, and deserve a cut of the playoff revenue for taking the L's.

Franklin had them winning. They can again... it starts with this new staff and new football facilities. Some schools ceiling is just 8 games. Thats okay. They know it. Wake Forest had the same ceiling and guess what, a big down turn in the ACC has them possibly competing for a title this year. Are we mad Akron gets a cut of the MAC revenue? They dont pull viewers. They didnt make WMU a Cotton Bowl team... we paid them?

I don't think the P5 teams at bottom of their conferences think the system is dysfunctional at all. It functions very well for them, as it does for the top ranked teams as well. They may quibble about playoff selection or whatever, but they are all fat and sassy. Just as the MAC doesn't want to dilute the payments it receives, neither does the P5 by giving more to G5 programs. What's in it for them to do that? Please don't bring up "fairness" and "equitability" because those are not concepts that have governed college football now or ever.

(10-05-2021 09:35 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(10-02-2021 10:36 AM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Is there really a need to expand? I just don't get this idea that because some schools are moving conferences and the big boys want to create alliances btw conferences, that we should jump on the crazy train and expand.

It depends a little on what everyone else is doing.

At the moment the MWC is 12, the SBC is planning to go to 12 and the AAC is probably going back to 12 (UAB, Charlotte, Rice, FAU). If that is the case it makes a lot of sense for the MAC to just hang back at 12.

Matt Brown says ...

The analysis from Matt Brown is certainly an important point, but the first point far less ...

... it doesn't actually depend on what everyone else is doing. If the SBC, AAC and MWC were all 14, like CUSA, that wouldn't change the sweet spot for the MAC.

Now, if they were all at 14 because of a shift in the benefits of having more members (possibly a change somehow influenced by catering to the size of the four Major conference), that would be different.

But if they were all at 14 under current conditions, that would be more a case of "if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?"

(10-05-2021 06:45 PM)axeme Wrote:  I don't think the P5 teams at bottom of their conferences think the system is dysfunctional at all. It functions very well for them, as it does for the top ranked teams as well. They may quibble about playoff selection or whatever, but they are all fat and sassy. Just as the MAC doesn't want to dilute the payments it receives, neither does the P5 by giving more to G5 programs. What's in it for them to do that? Please don't bring up "fairness" and "equitability" because those are not concepts that have governed college football now or ever.

Just because that's how it is now doesn't mean it isn't dysfunctional.

(10-05-2021 07:08 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(10-05-2021 09:35 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(10-02-2021 10:36 AM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Is there really a need to expand? I just don't get this idea that because some schools are moving conferences and the big boys want to create alliances btw conferences, that we should jump on the crazy train and expand.

It depends a little on what everyone else is doing.

At the moment the MWC is 12, the SBC is planning to go to 12 and the AAC is probably going back to 12 (UAB, Charlotte, Rice, FAU). If that is the case it makes a lot of sense for the MAC to just hang back at 12.

Matt Brown says ...

The analysis from Matt Brown is certainly an important point, but the first point far less ...

... it doesn't actually depend on what everyone else is doing. If the SBC, AAC and MWC were all 14, like CUSA, that wouldn't change the sweet spot for the MAC.

Now, if they were all at 14 because of a shift in the benefits of having more members (possibly a change somehow influenced by catering to the size of the four Major conference), that would be different.

But if they were all at 14 under current conditions, that would be more a case of "if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?"

You go to 14 and knock out CUSA.

AAC (UNT, Rice, UAB, Charlotte)
SBC (USM, Marshall, ODU, FAU)
MWC (UTEP, UTSA)

That leaves WKU, MT, FIU and LaTech. In that circumstance it makes sense for the MAC to go in and finish off CUSA but otherwise it more than likely doesn't.

Honestly, I would love to go back to the MAC if it wasn't for the Tues/Weds night games. I think most Marshall fans feel the same way.

I hated Mid-week Maction but I have to admit it's growing on me. As a father of very busy children (hockey, soccer, football), I rarely have free time on Saturday to watch football. The Wed night games are perfect for my schedule. I can disappear to the man cave with drink of choice and not be bothered.

(10-06-2021 10:54 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  Honestly, I would love to go back to the MAC if it wasn't for the Tues/Weds night games. I think most Marshall fans feel the same way.

Come on back and bring friends (WKU & MTSU)...

(10-06-2021 10:54 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  Honestly, I would love to go back to the MAC if it wasn't for the Tues/Weds night games. I think most Marshall fans feel the same way.

The question though is if Marshall did come to the MAC would it mean more Saturday games on national TV?

Running a quick scenario here:

AAC (UNT, Rice, UAB, Charlotte)
SBC (USM, UTSA)-UTSA might not have the $$$ for AAC

Then CUSA is down to 8 and Marshall could continue on with CUSA or package deal to the MAC. CUSA could offer JMU as the 9th school to keep ODU happy.

(10-06-2021 02:01 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(10-06-2021 10:54 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  Honestly, I would love to go back to the MAC if it wasn't for the Tues/Weds night games. I think most Marshall fans feel the same way.

The question though is if Marshall did come to the MAC would it mean more Saturday games on national TV?

Running a quick scenario here:

AAC (UNT, Rice, UAB, Charlotte)
SBC (USM, UTSA)-UTSA might not have the $$$ for AAC

Then CUSA is down to 8 and Marshall could continue on with CUSA or package deal to the MAC. CUSA could offer JMU as the 9th school to keep ODU happy.

Rice in the AAC? Doubt it….as very small.
It is super academically, but Rice has only about 3000+ undergrads and 2K grads. They are in large market AND they have ridiculous $$$$ though which would be only reasons it would be possible.

Best possible MAC adds would be:
MTSU, WKU, Marshall if going south + ????
Temple + UMASS all sports with ARMY (FB) + UCONN (FB) if going east

(10-06-2021 02:01 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(10-06-2021 10:54 AM)herdfan129 Wrote:  Honestly, I would love to go back to the MAC if it wasn't for the Tues/Weds night games. I think most Marshall fans feel the same way.

The question though is if Marshall did come to the MAC would it mean more Saturday games on national TV? ...

Not with any certainty.

One advantage of expanding with any pair of two would be more Saturday games in November, with the typical two games each on two midweek dates being the same whether there are five, six or seven games in the weekly inventory.

But OTOH, with most of the body bag games being over and a wealth of P5 "impact on the division race" games to choose from, there is not necessarily any additional openings for those games to get on TV.

The OP remains as wise as when first posted: it is, on balance, good news if the MAC coasts through this current P5-triggered Go5 wave of realignment without any changes at all.