menu
Logo
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Where goest the MAC?
Page: 1 of 1
Pataskala
General User
P
Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,465
person
mail
Pataskala
mail
Posted: 4/23/2012 1:49 PM
Interesting article by Michael Weinreb on MAC football in general and Akron in particular:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7834061/terry-bowden-...

For most of us, I thought this was the most significant part of the article:

"Akron is a member of the Mid-American Conference, a collection of mid-major programs that exists both within the power structure of big-time college football and yet stands entirely outside of it. The MAC plays nationally televised games on Tuesday night in order to attract attention, and each of its teams schedules at least one early-season cash-grab contest, usually at a Big Ten school, in order to cover its athletic department budget. And yet if a MAC team — say, Bowling Green — were to beat a Big Ten school and go undefeated, virtually no one outside the Toledo metropolitan area would consider Bowling Green worthy of a BCS berth, let alone a shot at the national championship.

There is no conceivable way for a MAC team to win a national title in college football's current structure, and with the rise of the superconference and the growing potential of a four-team playoff (perhaps comprised of major conference champions), that doesn't seem likely to change anytime soon. It is difficult to think of any group of teams, in any American sport, that begins each season without clinging to even the slimmest possibility of winning a national championship. Which begs the question: What is the purpose of 'mid-major' football supposed to be? Is it enough to subsist in the gray area between small-time and big-time, or do these schools eventually have to choose a direction?"

We've debated this often, but this is maybe the first time I've seen it in print somewhere else. 

Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 4/23/2012 3:56 PM
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
Interesting article by Michael Weinreb on MAC football in general and Akron in particular:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7834061/terry-bowden-...

 Which begs the question: What is the purpose of 'mid-major' football supposed to be? Is it enough to subsist in the gray area between small-time and big-time, or do these schools eventually have to choose a direction?"

We've debated this often, but this is maybe the first time I've seen it in print somewhere else. 



Very well stated.  The MAC exists in a no man's land between major college football and FCS football.  We are not big enough for major football but we're too big for FCS.

What are we to do?  
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
person
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 4/23/2012 4:16 PM
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
It is difficult to think of any group of teams, in any American sport, that begins each season without clinging to even the slimmest possibility of winning a national championship.

Cleveland Browns? Indians?
Robert Fox
General User
RF
Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039
person
mail
Robert Fox
mail
Posted: 4/23/2012 4:55 PM
Jeff McKinney wrote:expand_more
Interesting article by Michael Weinreb on MAC football in general and Akron in particular:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7834061/terry-bowden-...

 Which begs the question: What is the purpose of 'mid-major' football supposed to be? Is it enough to subsist in the gray area between small-time and big-time, or do these schools eventually have to choose a direction?"

We've debated this often, but this is maybe the first time I've seen it in print somewhere else. 



Very well stated.  The MAC exists in a no man's land between major college football and FCS football.  We are not big enough for major football but we're too big for FCS.

What are we to do?  

  • Put more pressure on the NCAA to fix the problem? That pressure should come from a consortium of "mid-majors." Fixing the problem might include a guaranteed position in a playoff system, much like basketball.
  • Emulate the Ivy League, that is, play in the MAC Conference in D1, but make it understood for all MAC participants that the ultimate goal is the MAC Championship. Thumb your noses at "big" programs by maintaining higher collective GPAs and graduation rates.
DelBobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/27/2010
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,135
mail
DelBobcat
mail
Posted: 4/23/2012 7:02 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Interesting article by Michael Weinreb on MAC football in general and Akron in particular:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7834061/terry-bowden-...

 Which begs the question: What is the purpose of 'mid-major' football supposed to be? Is it enough to subsist in the gray area between small-time and big-time, or do these schools eventually have to choose a direction?"

We've debated this often, but this is maybe the first time I've seen it in print somewhere else. 



Very well stated.  The MAC exists in a no man's land between major college football and FCS football.  We are not big enough for major football but we're too big for FCS.

What are we to do?  

  • Put more pressure on the NCAA to fix the problem? That pressure should come from a consortium of "mid-majors." Fixing the problem might include a guaranteed position in a playoff system, much like basketball.
  • Emulate the Ivy League, that is, play in the MAC Conference in D1, but make it understood for all MAC participants that the ultimate goal is the MAC Championship. Thumb your noses at "big" programs by maintaining higher collective GPAs and graduation rates.


While I like this idea, it is definitely not possible with the current collection of underwhelming academic institutions.
Athens
General User
A
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,454
person
mail
Athens
mail
Posted: 4/23/2012 9:22 PM
Based on the criteria used today defining that to belong in a major conference a school requires a large market or if not have statewide stature as a land grant college none of the MAC (aside from Buffalo) has any business playing playing at the top level of football. I don't know what to make of small market program in the MAC and other MAC like programs playing in FBS but they are there because of tradition. I guess its okay if you've got a program like East Carolina pulling in the fans that has enough of a alumni donor base to offset the lack of metropolitan money. The NCAA should require all FBS programs to provide a 5 million letter of faith backed by the athletic department annually. Too many MAC level schools are running on the fumes of student fees and its an issue. I don't know how else to address it.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 4/24/2012 1:41 AM
Let us bring full effort to victory against our foe on September 1 upcoming.

Then, we can continue this discussion.
Brian Smith (No, not that one)
General User
BSNNTO
Member Since: 2/4/2005
Post Count: 3,057
person
mail
Brian Smith (No, not that one)
mail
Posted: 4/24/2012 3:51 PM
The real insight in Weinreb's piece is the sobering reality that the greatest success a MAC football program can hope to attain is to win enough to leave the MAC.

The MAC, after decades of work, is as far away from being big-time football as it ever has been. College football is engaged in an arms race and the MAC is a subsistence farming nation.

Ohio either needs to accept this and tend to its meager acreage or develop a faster-moving plan to exit the conference than it is currently following.

The real danger, as Weinreb suggests, is getting caught being indecisive. When the AQs secede from the NCAA or make the NCAA completely pliable by threatening to leave-- and it's not far down the road-- you don't want to be stuck in the MAC.
Last Edited: 4/24/2012 3:58:22 PM by Brian Smith (No, not that one)
Showing Messages: 1 - 8 of 8



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)