Wonder what percentage of the UMass fan base will look down their noses at the MAC and consider the MAC to be beneath their dignity...just a quick marriage of convenience until they can do better.  What percentage will heap contempt on the fans of fellow MAC schools? 

We played a "home" game at OSU in the early 1980s - it drew in the teens, I believe.

As noted, there's evidence attendance would not be any higher than average if Ohio played at Ohio Stadium. Sure, if it were against a bigger school, there would be higher attendance. But I don't think more than 25,000 would show up for Ohio vs. Miami. I do think UMass's attendance at the game is impressive. They have a good football fanbase, relative to other MAC schools.

I can understand why adding UMass doesn't excite you. They probably won't make the conference better. It's possible. But I am certain UMass won't make the conference any worse. So what is there to lose?

I would highly, highly doubt it.

I'll say I think UMASS will be at least mid-pack team in the conference by the time they play for a title in 2013, and they have more fan interest already than several programs in the conference.

I agree that contraction by a couple of schools isn't a bad idea, in fact I've advocated for that approach.  Tilly's bowl revenue comment is another good reason for that argument.

I selfishly like the move because it will bring Ohio to a short enough drive from my likely post-graduation home on a semi-regular basis.

I've trolled their board for several months, and of their version of "Attackers", they are all pretty geeked up about the transition to FBS and the MAC.  Of course there are a few that wish they could go to Big East, which makes them pretty much like us, save for the fact that almost no one here is geeked up about us being in the MAC, and they are more rational about their ability (or lack thereof) to be a member of the Big East right now than we are.

Of course, lack of popularity of a position doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong, OCF, but it seems that your view is a very small minority view on this issue. 

Considering our position as a conference, I can't see how adding UMass for football will hurt.  I was very upset when the MAC admitted Temple for football only; I thought we should have played hard ball in negotiations and forced Temple to affiliate men's basketball along with football.  However, I think UMass is a different animal altogether.  They are simply too far away to join the MAC for sports other than football.  Yes, they do have to travel extensively in the A10, but it's much easier to fly to the destinations in that conference. 

I agree with those who think UMass will be competitive in football in the MAC from the get go. 

Having four non-conf. basketball games yearly vs. UMass helps the league coaches with scheduling.  Yes, I'd love to have Temple and UMass as basketball members, but at least this helps the MAC to a degree. 

And JSF is right...as long as the MAC remains FCS in football, we have no other options but the MAC.  Where else would we end up?  We are not an attractive candidate for any conference.  I don't even think the Sun Belt would want us due to being so far north. 

In your opinion, what I am I missing on this issue? 

 

How about going independent or starting a new conference made up of some current MAC members, some of the eastern-most C-USA members and maybe an Appy State (rumor is they want to go FBS)?  This conference from top to bottom is getting more ridiculous each year.  No leadership.  No Vision.   No evidence of any collective gray matter. 

So I'm not going to get an answer, OCF??

Apparently you've mistaken this for a forum in which anyone gives a rat's arse about the stain which is temples.

Monroe, why do you keep taking this guy's bait?  It's really amusing.

MH, if you look at UMass's program and record over the past decade, they are hardly a "middling" FCS program.  They have played well vs. FBS schools, including almost knocking off Michigan last year. 

It sure is indicateive of serios problems with the Mid-American Conference Conference.

First of all, we are currently an FBS team . . . not FCS.  I assume that's a typo.  When I first read your comment, I guess I missed the fact that you were asking a question.  Until the last line, it read more as a statement.  I think you are wrong in not seeing the parallels between the Temple and the UMass situations.  We had all the bargaining chips with the Owls and could have FORCED them to come in for basketball, too, or have to drop their football program or move to FCS.  They really were out of options.  If we had done that we would have been in position to do the same with UMass.  We are a conference without any form of intelligent life in leadership positions.  The fact that we would duplicate our Temple error by doing the same thing with UMass is just one too many screwups for me to stomach.  Do they have any memory of the short stay of UCF as a "football only school"?  I say it's time we take our basketball program somewhere else and become another "football only" MAC school.   On the basketball board there is a discussion of "Ohio to the A-10."  This may or may not be a reasonable possibility, but I personally don't have an exact target conference for us at this point.  My bottom line is that I think it's time to start thinking out side the box that is the MAC.  It may not even be something we can do immediately, but we need to start setting some goals that rise above the stupidity that is the MAC at this point in history.

OCF, you're right, that was a typo.  Should have said FBS.