menu
Logo
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: New conference with 18-24 teams
Page: 2 of 2
DelBobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/27/2010
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,135
mail
DelBobcat
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 5:38 PM
Villanova may beat out Temple in just about every category, but Temple is ranked highly in one thing...

http://articles.philly.com/2012-02-10/news/31046732_1_col...
D.A.
General User
DA
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,198
person
mail
D.A.
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 5:57 PM
I normally don't post on competing team's message boards, but since I'm on OwlScoop.com I thought...oh wait, this is Bobcatattack.

So to get this thread back on track, I don't think anyone in the traditional MAC (excludes TU and UMASS) has the money, the fanbase or the desire to move anywhere, especially considering the costs for increased travel for the non-cash generating sports.  And there is ZERO desire to significantly increase student fees to cover the increased costs for a conference jump.

Therefore, I go back to the same problem that I have had with the MAC: it doesn't appear the heads of state are working to improve their product through strategic expansion.

Regardless of what the final 18-24 team conference looks like, it will still be:
  1. Non-AQ
  2. The low group on the totem pole if the power conferences make a power play to exclude the have nots from any playoff and bowl participation going forward, or if they break away from the NCAA altogether
In this time of turmoil for the have nots, the MAC needs to be working hard right now to coax just a few of these former CUSA/FCS teams into full membership to improve it's position.  I have to believe the current FB contract with ESPN, and the increased exposure that the MAC has realized over the last three years, would be compelling to a select few. (not to mention that CUSA doesn't have significantly better TV exposure than the MAC; sure they have more revenue, but the exposure isn't conspicuously better, with CUSA largely being on CBS Sports v the MAC on ESPN)

I know it gets boring to discuss the same thing over and over, but the MAC needs to be all over those within a relatively tight radius to its existing footprint (Marshall, East Carolina, App State, Delaware, MTSU) to try to create the best 16 team, full member conference that it can.  And then if UMASS or Temple decide they want in for all sports, so be it.  However, there is nothing those two FB programs bring (based on historic on the field performance, not media market) that can't be replaced or possibly improved by including a handful of those schools above.  Certainly a consolidated travel footprint for the schools above would be appealing from an expenditure perspective v what an expanded CUSA would present.

And at this point, the mission needs to be FB first because that is where the MAC's best TV exposure is at this point, and the best opportunity for revenue generation for advertising/sponsorships/etc.  It would be nice if today was 1998 and the MAC had the presence it had in hoops at that time.  But it isn't, so you need to lead with your strength. (and UMASS and Temple would probably opt out anyway because of their deference to hoops first)

Who knows, if the MAC can compel a select few FB programs into its house then maybe they can realize improved revenues from ESPN, or a better contract from another sports channel, and that could help pay for the added travel costs to a few outlying programs. (and pay a potential exit incentive to EMU to find another home)

An AQ status isn't coming to any of the remaining programs anytime soon, and they won't control their own destiny if/when the NCAA decides to dis-invite them from the post season party, regardless of whether they are in an expanded CUSA or the BIG MAC.  And with the mega-conferences going to nine game conference schedules there will be fewer non-con pay dates for the non-AQ's to help fund their already struggling programs; hence the need for the MAC schools to start working really hard to improve their own lots as quickly as possible.

So just build a better conference and get on with it.
Last Edited: 2/14/2012 6:15:31 PM by D.A.
Mike Coleman
Administrator
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 1,999
mail
Mike Coleman
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 7:27 PM
C Money wrote:expand_more
I really don't see any reason a team from the MAC would want any part of this. Travel would go from great to terrible and would be extremley costly. The level of play in football would be about on par with the MAC. I compared Sagarin ratings from last year in the MAC to those in the teams going to be left in Conference USA and the Mountain West and the MAC comes out ahead of the Mountain West and just behind Conference USA.


This this this this this this this. The CUSA/MWC leftovers are not much--if any--better than the MAC. Yes, having that many teams across that much of the nation gives you a certain degree of leverage in negotiating a TV deal. But for how long? You're asking for disfunction with this many different voices, none of whom actually want to be in the conference but are only there out of fear of necessity. And the MAC puts out a more entertaining product. Our conference just needs to figure out how to better leverage said 63-60 shootouts.
Does it make for a better TV deal?
One, the pot will be split up to 24 ways, and two, if this conference is so big that most teams never play each other, doesn't it really make it four regional conferences with a mini-playoff? Will New Mexico-Air Force rate in North Carolina at 10 pm on a cable channel most people never heard of? And since none of these 18-24 teams will want to play each other in bowls, won't it open up slots for other conferences?
ohio9704
General User
O9704
Member Since: 2/11/2006
Post Count: 1,591
person
mail
ohio9704
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 8:24 PM
I guess I just don't get the Marshall angle in this.  They must be getting a hefty pay out to be in this "mid-major" league.  I am all for the MAC staying together, even with its poor performing schools in football and basketball.  I much prefer the road trip to Northern Illinois, then the trip from Marshall to say La. Tech or even one of the Florida schools in this new league.  The big picture is always the revenue sports, but non-revenues need to fill out league schedules too.  I would love to get Marshall and Western Kentucky and get to 16 for football.  I know we have had the Western Kentucky discussion before, but those two teams don't really expand conference travel and maintain some good natural rivals.  I get it won't happen, but I wish someone would explain the the financial incentives for Marshall gets for being in this cluster F of a "conference".
First Street Forever
General User
Member Since: 12/19/2010
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Count: 247
mail
First Street Forever
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 9:56 PM
I'm just not getting riled up about Ohio being included - or excluded from - the super CUSA or whatever its called.

The MAC and SupraConferencioAmericano both seem like two questionable stalls in a gas station bathroom. Both look clogged, smell pungent and have most likely kept company with the undesirables of the neighborhood. Maybe Supra ConferencioAmericano's seat is dryer - I don't know.

I guess in the long run maybe either is better than crapping your pants. Maybe...
oubobcatjohn
General User
O
Member Since: 1/1/2005
Post Count: 838
person
mail
oubobcatjohn
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 11:12 PM
Best move for Ohio and the MAC is to do nothing.  The conference has been together since 1946. Its has a TV deal with STO and a national one with ESPN. MAC also has bowl agreements. MAC could expand and maintain lower travel costs and strong regional rivalries that command better TV ratings.  

MAC East
UMass
New Hampshire
Temple
Delaware
James Madison
Old Dominion
Buffalo
Kent State
Akron

MAC West
Ohio
Miami
BGSU
Toledo
EMU
CMU
WMU
NIU
Ball State
Physicist MH55
General User
PM
Member Since: 10/29/2007
Post Count: 361
person
mail
Physicist MH55
mail
Posted: 2/14/2012 11:26 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
[QUOTE=Physicist MH55]]

He's right. It's been atrocious. We have the same amount of NCAA tourney wins during the past 10 years as schools like Temple.


and just how many conference championships ? Or wins over RPI top 50 for that matter, Gary ?
Paul Graham
General User
Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424
mail
Paul Graham
mail
Posted: 2/15/2012 1:42 AM
Physicist MH55 wrote:expand_more
[QUOTE=Physicist MH55]]

He's right. It's been atrocious. We have the same amount of NCAA tourney wins during the past 10 years as schools like Temple.


and just how many conference championships ? Or wins over RPI top 50 for that matter, Gary ?


See what he did there!?
BobcatSports
General User
BS
Member Since: 2/2/2006
Post Count: 1,116
person
mail
BobcatSports
mail
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:47 AM
Hey MH55er, it's not us you need to be "impressing" with ALL those grand and glorious Temple stats, according to your fellow Templeton poster, it's NOVA that's  _itch-slapping you wimp-_sses. Remember it's NOVA that wiped their _sses with that "imminent" Temple BigEast invitation. I'm guessing NOVA just can't get beyond the "stench" of Temple's last foray into the BigEast, huh? Now that resulted in some "impressive" Temple stats!
Football Jim
General User
FJ
Member Since: 1/16/2005
Post Count: 177
person
mail
Football Jim
mail
Posted: 2/15/2012 2:59 PM
I would sit tight where I was if I were the one deciding future conference affiliations. The way I see it many schools will try to "move up" to a better position only to find themselves in way over their heads financially. I feel that in the long run the "have nots" who try to upgrade will not only be "have nots" they will be dead broke.
As far as fielding competitive teams in an upper league it will be a game of keeping up with the wealthiest to upgrade stadiums etc.... just to be able to recruit. I see a train wreck.
Steve
General User
S
Member Since: 12/1/2005
Post Count: 713
person
mail
Steve
mail
Posted: 2/15/2012 3:43 PM
Physicist MH55 wrote:expand_more
[QUOTE=Physicist MH55]]

He's right. It's been atrocious. We have the same amount of NCAA tourney wins during the past 10 years as schools like Temple.


and just how many conference championships ? Or wins over RPI top 50 for that matter, Gary ?



Post No. 342 for the guy who says he couldn't care less about Ohio athletics.


 
Showing Messages: 26 - 36 of 36



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