MAC is unlikely to re-visit some other school’s previously rejected push to participate as solely a gridiron member.
Inadvertently or otherwise, (mis)perceptions of potential purgatory alone likely bogart your suggested eastern alliance for UConn. More likely unless inexplicably proven absolutely impossible, UConn will laser-lock on some hybrid of a few P5, few AAC/MWC, few fellow Indepenendent, traditional other 1 Yankee/Atlantic 1-AA (+1 other as needed).
Time will tell ...
Don't agree and posted on your main football board but could post it here.
Have different version for different audiences, but basically the same. You would still have the ability to play 3 P% or P6 teams and most likely a FCS team. Believe winning is important, along with access to bowl games and a championship game.
The MAC board is probably the best way to gauge their interest and there is some interest. Will quote the thread started on the csnbbs realignment board and then add a link to the thread on the MAC board.
---
Think there is a shot, not sure how much, but will the MAC consider an option of adding UConn and UMass for about 10k-50k per university for additional BB inventory and some extra eyeballs on a canned rivalry. Will copy past something did early as on fumes right now.
Don't have faith that a New East Coast Conference will form and will have a media deal that is better than the current A10 5Mill given that the MAC got 10Mill due to their wiliness to play November mid weeks game on ESPN and CUSA got peanuts. It seems possible and now will give my take and will make a reference back to Bob McGovern's article.
McGovern: UMass can't afford to be left behind again
Will support the dame the torpedo's all in push for the AAC with it's high gamble and seems unlikely IMHO. Feel it would be hard to compete in AAC Football and have to make huge capital commitments, which seems to be a stretch. My view is winning matters more than the conference.
Perhaps it's age related as I'm in my 60's now that prefer a more measured, conservative direction of keeping the A10 and make a hard push with UConn as FB only MAC additions that would require a far less than 50% share. It would give us a fairly tight division of:
- UConn
- UMass
- Buffalo
- Ohio
- Miami
- Akron
- Kent St.
It would give the ability to compete for a conference championship and bowl access. Fits into Ryan Bamford's scheduling philosophy of 9 50-50 games, a P5 and FCS game and is financially responsible.
The MAC pitch in two parts, one is the rationale and second is being financially practical to the MAC and will link the thread so you can see everything in context.
PITCH:
This is not your older brother's, sister's or parent's football only add to get to an even number of teams, with the hope that they might join the MAC as full members, perhaps.
This is adding not one but two football teams, with bb games and taking in the end less than a 50% share. UMass and UConn are old football rivals that dates back to 1897. Two local flagships getting psyched to put one another down, cheer in their demise and want to kick their . You'd be bring in true football rivals that took a break when UConn jumped to FBS a dozen or so years before us.
Our administrations realize fan support starts at home and is added, not harmed by local rivals. We supported UConn's application to Hockey East and will support them now if things go as I hope. Have NO insider knowledge and been out of circulation, just my beliefs. We are a canned rivalry add that logically expands the MAC's markets and footprint, will minimal travel cost of this type of associate membership. This is different in the reduced flight risks. If the MAC lost a team, would think UMass would go all in, but fight tooth and nail to keep UConn football despite the unbalanced schedule. You might not like that, but that is how I'd see it.
We needed to chase the AAC dream and if it's not meant to be then become realistic. Do not think we burnt many bridges leaving, as we did not come along as fast as you'd hope and the pie got so big with CFP cash.
IMHO the AAC has some perils and the big one is that there just be Temple as the closest team, increased travel costs and even greater costs to keep up with the Jones, especially with the stadium's staged improvements. It'd be a better basketball league, but not that much better than the A10 right now and in the medium term. Both UConn and UMass costs has gone up. The A10 is more compact for sports than the AAC and the MAC is the most compact conference for football. It'd be great for us and where can a football only UConn go.
Closing with my opening statement, this is your conference, MAC and what matters to you is the right thing. My point of the canned rivalry is significantly different than ANY football add that you have experimented with. Think in the end of the day, we'd add some value to MACtion.
DOLLARS:
We are just fans posting our thoughts and will agree it will probably be closer to your ideas than mine. Like % and you like carve outs so will play. BruceMcF posted no TV revenue unless it's additive and only that extra amount else give the FB Only the home games and not much out of CFP money as well.
First of all, if we are paying dues, buy-in fees (perhaps ours is reduced since we have bought in once) we need a floor amount. That floor amount could be what independents get from the CFP. Even Indy get a piece. For all universities not named ND, that share is the number of Indy divided into 0.5%.
If TV is for home games, UMass will get the first home game against UConn as we have a lot of games to reschedule and pay for.
We should get the APR cut if our university earns it.
Regarding the performance pool, we should receive a cut if our ranking raises the MAC average.
If there is extra money for making the conference championship game and we make it, we should receive a cut.
Basically saying we need a floor amount, if we help the MAC or earn something, we should get a piece. After all, we are paying conference dues, playing in the league and adding BB inventory.
link:
UConn joining Big East. Football...?
