The only rational way to proceed here is to go with the natural conclusion to two concurrent threads:  columbus's stadium will not be used this year as the BigSomenumbermorethan10 seeks to replace that columbus.  We're in.

 

If Temple was willing to drop football, they could have made another choice.  The fact is that at that juncture, we had them over a barrel and were too dumb to realize it.  They did not want to bring their basketball program, that's certainly true, but would they have have jeopardized their football program and assigned it to oblivion if we had played hardball with them?  I doubt it.  I had a long talk with a nice Temple fan (yes they do exist) at halftime of our game with them at Peden two years ago. He was actually the one who brought up the topic, and he said he couldn't believe how badly the MAC handled this negotiation.  In his opinion, and I've come to accept his logic, we could have forced them to come in for basketball, too, if we had negotiated smartly.  

 

Oh seer, pray tell how you know these things.  The Temple fan I talked to didn't really think they had another option.  But, I bow to your omniscience on the subject, you are obviously wise beyond your years.  Well, come to think of it, you've had a lot years around this place.  

Why do some MAC'ers believe the 12 team conference had us "over a barrel?" Does anyone ever stop to think MAC Basketball is every bit as bad as Temple Football was??? Not a single at large bid in what, a dozen years? That's terrible and getting one of the winningest NCAA Programs in Temple Basketball into your arenas was just as important to your Conference as throwing a lifeline was to our FB Program. Unfortunately, "]["emple is the only party to the deal that has capitalized.

I was in a saloon in Jackson Hole and noticed a big guy wearing a MAC Conference T. I introduced myself to him and it turned out to be former Kent HC, Jim Christian. He was a nice guy and yes, believe it or not, there was some good Head Basketball Coaches in the MAC. After mentioning that he gave Fran Dunphy his first loss, he asked me if "]["emple would ever bring their basketball program to the MAC.

I patted him on the head and suggested he get in line early for the aerial tram... 

Beat me to it DA, I came on here to post that link.

So it's OK for Ohio to try and get of out the MAC as soon as possible, but not Temple or UMass.

I see.  Then you should be blasting your former employer for its relatively short stay in the MAC.

Cheap?  UMass will have paid the MAC $3 million in entry and exit fees if it leaves the MAC.   To put that in perspective, that's almost the equivalent of what the entire conference makes in TV and BCS revenue in a year.  All 13 teams combined.  Marshall and UCF paid $400k when they left the MAC.  Louisville and Cincinnati paid $400k to leave CUSA for the Big East.  Utah is paying $0 to leave the Mountain West for the Pac-10, because all they have is a notice requirement.  Colorado is paying $6.5 million to leave the Big 12 for the Pac-10, but look at that amount relative to the revenue generated in the Big 12 vs. the MAC.  Nobody in the country is paying a larger fee relative to revenue than UMass, except Fresno State if they get nailed for that $5 million that was really more of a special assessment than an exit fee.

What this agreement represents is a rock solid commitment that UMass (and Temple) will not follow UCF's example and leave the MAC for CUSA or any other non-BCS conference.  Between the MAC exit fee, the A10 exit fee, and the CUSA entry fee, it can't be justified financially, even with CUSA's better TV deal and better bowls.  If the BCS comes calling, then yes, we're leaving (and so would you), but if that happens I would assume that UMass must have operated at a higher level and contributed more to the football conference than any previous MAC member, because nobody has ever made that leap directly from the MAC.  Worst case scenario, UMass will double your annual revenue if it leaves.  Whereas if UMass joined the MAC for all sports, we'd pay the $400k and leave for CUSA at the first opportunity.  For us, there's little difference in travel cost.  But now that that's no longer feasible, we need to concentrate on making the MAC better as a long term home.  My one regret is that, if Ohio and the better MAC teams were ever to split and form a better conference, we couldn't afford to pay the exit fee and follow you.  But it doesn't sound like MAC members think along those lines, even though they talk about certain teams needing to be removed.

ultimately UMass may see the MAC as a stepping stone, and their unwillingness to go all-in supports that perception, but the difference in fan reaction from UMass vs Temple fans regarding entrance into the MAC is night and day.

It's because of UMass's genuine excitement to be a part of the MAC that I'm not more cynical about their addition.

That's your opinion.  I was told by a knowledgable Temple fan, as I've posted before, that they did not have any other reasonable options at that time.  His exact words were that we had them over a barrel and didn't know how to play our hand.  I guess unless you have a source who was inside the negotiating room there's room for disagreement on this issue.

I do not take Bleacher Report seriously, but Temple is mentioned in this one.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/696002-college-football-2011-10-programs-that-need-to-drop-football

 

I hate to say it, but the MAC is now a lower mid major. Temple and UMass will leave as soon as they can move to something better. The MAC is not investing enough in their programs to compete at a higher level. Attendance is among the lowest in any conference.

But what the random Temple fan told you is fact?