I want UMass in the league

[nelsonmuntz]

Ad hominem argument. Nothing about that addresses the question. It simply denigrates the people who disagree with you with a conclusory, dismissive statement that is neither true or has a correlation with itself. How do the people who "attack" people who think the C7 is a better option for Uconn also not want to play anyone the casual fan will care about? They don't appear to be related. The question is whether Umass should be added to the NNNNBE, not whether Uconn should ever play them. The most obvious reason that Umass is not a good addition is that they add nothing market-wise and bring no additional money into the conferece. They only add another team to split a pitiful TV deal with. Answer why Umass has positives that outweigh the negatives.

If Uconn is in such a financial bind that they should consider eliminating the football program, then tell us in what way adding another member to the conference allievates that problem. It aggravates that problem and we all know it because Uconn recieves less money because of it. Playing Umass OOC does not require Uconn to split any TV money with them. Sharing a conference with them does. Or does it not? If not, enlighten us as to why.

UConn does not need to be in a financial bind to not want to piss money down a sinkhole.

There are 3 football schools within the NNBE that any casual fan gives a crap about: Temple, Cincinnati and South Florida. There is literally no interest in any of these other schools at all, and their won't be because the fan interest in the core schools is so shallow. There is no history or proximity with these other programs, and they are not big enough names to compensate for that. There is also only one school within 800 miles of UConn. What kind of of attendance do you expect once Rutgers leaves? How many season ticket buyers?

UConn needs to figure out a way to make this conference relevant to fans, or the football program will be shut down. Not just because of financial reasons, but because no one will care either way.

 

[Durks07]

UConn does not need to be in a financial bind to not want to piss money down a sinkhole.

There are 3 football schools within the NNBE that any casual fan gives a crap about: Temple, Cincinnati and South Florida. There is literally no interest in any of these other schools at all, and their won't be because the fan interest in the core schools is so shallow. There is no history or proximity with these other programs, and they are not big enough names to compensate for that. There is also only one school within 800 miles of UConn. What kind of of attendance do you expect once Rutgers leaves? How many season ticket buyers?

UConn needs to figure out a way to make this conference relevant to fans, or the football program will be shut down. Not just because of financial reasons, but because no one will care either way.

Adding another college football program that is little more than a practice squad with no cache is not making the conference more relevant to anyone. If Umass will generate local interest then schedule OOC games with them. Uconn gets to keep the money from the gate, like they would if it was a conference match-up, and they do not have to share TV money with them.

 

[metsfan2323]

Adding another college football program that is little more than a practice squad with no cache is not making the conference more relevant to anyone.\

That's exactly what BC and Cuse fans used to say about UCONN football 13 years ago.

That practice squad with no cache has Notre Dame on their 2015 schedule. Yes they stink now but so did UCONN in 2000 and 2001 when we were starting this journey.

 

[Atross]

We need to stop the quibbling and holier than thou mentality. If we're so much better why are we still on the outside looking in? It is true that UCONN sports is stronger in talent and better off financially than UMASS but some proximity is needed for the students and fans. It would be a simple road trip to both the Mullins Center and Gillette Stadium. As someone said UMASS is in Hockey East with UCONN soon to follow. This is a natural rival that many could relate to. Simply put we need Eastern schools. I like the idea as previously posted of tring to add Delaware and VCU. Didn't Joe Flacco play at Delaware? To counter Syracuse bring in Buffalo.

 

[Fishy]

Anyone suggesting we add Delaware, VCU and Buffalo should be lined up against a stone wall and shot.

UMass is one thing, but adding that other dreck is nothing short of treason.

 

[Chin Diesel]

UConn does not need to be in a financial bind to not want to piss money down a sinkhole.

There are 3 football schools within the NNBE that any casual fan gives a crap about: Temple, Cincinnati and South Florida. There is literally no interest in any of these other schools at all, and their won't be because the fan interest in the core schools is so shallow. There is no history or proximity with these other programs, and they are not big enough names to compensate for that. There is also only one school within 800 miles of UConn. What kind of of attendance do you expect once Rutgers leaves? How many season ticket buyers?

UConn needs to figure out a way to make this conference relevant to fans, or the football program will be shut down. Not just because of financial reasons, but because no one will care either way.

Speak for yourself. And I'll speak for myself.

I despise the position we are in right now.

But, I am intrigued about UCF, Houston and SMU. Big cities with huge football talent. Each city produces multiple more BCS talent than New England and New York combined.

Not really intrigued with playing Tulane and Memphis but both those cities are way better to visit for a weekend football excursion than anything in the current BE football.

Embrace the suck.

 

[whaler11]

UConn does not need to be in a financial bind to not want to piss money down a sinkhole.

There are 3 football schools within the NNBE that any casual fan gives a crap about: Temple, Cincinnati and South Florida. There is literally no interest in any of these other schools at all, and their won't be because the fan interest in the core schools is so shallow. There is no history or proximity with these other programs, and they are not big enough names to compensate for that. There is also only one school within 800 miles of UConn. What kind of of attendance do you expect once Rutgers leaves? How many season ticket buyers?

UConn needs to figure out a way to make this conference relevant to fans, or the football program will be shut down. Not just because of financial reasons, but because no one will care either way.

Call me crazy but a 'casual fan' would actually be a lot more interested in pretty much anyone over Temple. East Carolina is about what... a million times more interesting than Temple? I work with a ton of Temple grads - they tell me there is peer pressure to not go to football games.


And you are wrong that no one will care about UConn football. The same amount that care today will care in the future. The attendance may be lower, but the same amount of people will care.

 

[huskymedic]

Speak for yourself. And I'll speak for myself.

I despise the position we are in right now.

But, I am intrigued about UCF, Houston and SMU. Big cities with huge football talent. Each city produces multiple more BCS talent than New England and New York combined.

Not really intrigued with playing Tulane and Memphis but both those cities are way better to visit for a weekend football excursion than anything in the current BE football.

Embrace the suck.

 

[djct1999]

This proposed league will certainly bode well for an FBS 1 seed. I see it now, UConn will host Nova in the quarterfinals, while UMass will play at Delaware. If Umass can pull off the upset, wow, this would be huge for New England football.

 

[tzznandrew]

People are interested in good teams. Right now, UMass is not one.

The difference between UConn circa 2000 and UMass now: UConn had a track record of investment and success in other sports that you could use to project success in football.

 

[djct1999]

People are interested in good teams. Right now, UMass is not one.

The difference between UConn circa 2000 and UMass now: UConn had a track record of investment and success in other sports that you could use to project success in football.

and by uconn resigned to such a dismal fate, what will UConns worth be to others when it means so little to ourselves. by going this route, this will make us less attractive not more.

 

[Mark W]

Maybe I misunderstood the basis for this thread when I started. My premise was to suggest that UMass would have been a better option than Tulane, Tulsa or some of the other schools brought in.

Football...I don't expect anyone to share my optimism as a UMass fan for the football program. We had a tough first year in FBS and I agree that the jury is still out on whether we can make the program viable. Where I may be overly positive, I think many here are overly negative. Maybe the truth falls somewhere in the middle...a good MAC team. If our athletic budget stays at 27 million and our fan base stays apathetic..maybe that's the ceiling......I'm hoping for more!!

Basketball....that is the crown jewel of UConn's athletic dept and I don't think you guys are giving that enough consideration in this thread. I contend that UMass brings more to the table basketball-wise than anyone you've brought in with the exception of maybe Memphis. Umass is 18-9 with a RPI 48-54 (depending on what site you look). Sure, UConn and Cincy will be the power basketball teams in the conference, but what will your RPI look like after conference play is over? Out of all the teams you're bringing in, are any of them in the top 100?

 

[RS9999X]

ECU is top 100 RPI

ECU: 99
UCF: 111
Tulsa: 124
Tulane: 175
Houston: 200
SMU: 225

Average RPI: 156

 

[RS9999X]

It's a 4 team basketball conference. USF with an RPI of 140 and 10-17 record will decline to the sad state of Tulane, Houston and SMU

 

[Mark W]

ECU is top 100 RPI

ECU: 99
UCF: 111
Tulsa: 124
Tulane: 175
Houston: 200
SMU: 225

Average RPI: 156

Right...and UMass beat them this year...so I'm kinda hoping they stay in the top 100

 

[tzznandrew]

Basketball....that is the crown jewel of UConn's athletic dept and I don't think you guys are giving that enough consideration in this thread. I contend that UMass brings more to the table basketball-wise than anyone you've brought in with the exception of maybe Memphis. Umass is 18-9 with a RPI 48-54 (depending on what site you look). Sure, UConn and Cincy will be the power basketball teams in the conference, but what will your RPI look like after conference play is over? Out of all the teams you're bringing in, are any of them in the top 100?

Look, we hope we're out of here. But I'm like some others on the thread--I'm not against it in theory. Were UMass to become successful at football, I'd consider (as if my opinion matters).

As for UMass basketball: the thing about this is an anomaly.

2001-02
13-16 (6-10)
2002-03
11-18 (6-10)
2003-04
10-19 (4-12)
2004-05
16-12 (9-7)
2005-06
13-15 (8-8)
2006-07
24-9 (13-3) NIT Second Round
2007-08
25-11 (10-6) NIT Runner-up)
2008-09
12-18 (7-9)
2009-10
12-20 (5-11)
2010-11
15-15 (7-9)
2011-12
25-12 (9-7) NIT Semi-Finals

So, when you compare this year to the last 11: only they times has UMass played in the post-season. Only four times were they above .500. I'm not convinced this is the profile that helps the basketball side enough to justify their inclusion. Don't get me wrong: this is better than UCF, Tulane, SMU, Houston. But it's not like we can kick them out, right? Any further addition dilutes the brand.

Get into the NCAA tournament a couple years, go more than 3 years between sub-500 seasons, and we'll talk.

 

[Mark W]

Look, we hope we're out of here. But I'm like some others on the thread--I'm not against it in theory. Were UMass to become successful at football, I'd consider (as if my opinion matters).

As for UMass basketball: the thing about this is an anomaly.

2001-02
13-16 (6-10)
2002-03
11-18 (6-10)
2003-04
10-19 (4-12)
2004-05
16-12 (9-7)
2005-06
13-15 (8-8)
2006-07
24-9 (13-3) NIT Second Round
2007-08
25-11 (10-6) NIT Runner-up)
2008-09
12-18 (7-9)
2009-10
12-20 (5-11)
2010-11
15-15 (7-9)
2011-12
25-12 (9-7) NIT Semi-Finals

So, when you compare this year to the last 11: only they times has UMass played in the post-season. Only four times were they above .500. I'm not convinced this is the profile that helps the basketball side enough to justify their inclusion. Don't get me wrong: this is better than UCF, Tulane, SMU, Houston. But it's not like we can kick them out, right? Any further addition dilutes the brand.

Get into the NCAA tournament a couple years, go more than 3 years between sub-500 seasons, and we'll talk.

Fair enough.... without knowing the dynamics of what is going on at UMass!!!!......you reference a time where UMass not only went through 3 coaches, but woefully underpaid. Lappas was an absolute disaster...Ford took the job never even really liking his position there and lobbied for a new job from day 1. In comes new AD.....in comes Derek Kellogg...Springfield native, UMass point guard (4 time A-10 champion). They just signed DK to a contract that, although not a lock to keep him forever, gives him the opportunity to make up to 880 K with incentives. Some of the incentives are a little out of reach this year, but he should be in the 650-700 K range this year.Compare that to the 350 K we paid Ford and I think we've established some stability at the coaching position.

Kellogg has put UMass back on a recruiting level that we haven't seen since Calipari. Lappas had us to an all-time low where we were fighting the likes of CCSU for guys like Jeff "Big Deli" Solovsky. Ford just didn't recruit at all and left Kellogg with pretty much an empty cupboard.

Kellogg recruiting so far.....grade B so far but trending up.......in for next year..Derrick Gordon (4 star trans from W. Kent), Zach Coleman (3 star de-commit from Mizzou), Clyde Santee ( 3 star kid from Houston) and Seth Berger ( 3 star kid from Seattle)

 

[Limbo Land]

Umass is better option in short run then Tulsa for us. We are already a laughing stock conference and that is not going to change with Tulsa. Our money is already set. Let us get something local going for the time being. Better academic school also. I keep bring up academics because I do not want to be put in with schools that are glorified community colleges. That cannot happen.

 

[CL82]

As a UMass fan, and one that is well aware of our position now without any delusions, I find this an asinine statement. UMass came to the football dance a decade late...I'm well aware of that. There are going to be growing pains, and if we continue to schedule the Wisconsins, Kansas States, and Michigans, it's gonna hurt!! That said, they've committed to growing a viable program and I have confidence they will. Basketball is on the rise and a top 60 RPI now with a great recruiting class coming in next year. Now before the onslaught of posts citing your 3 NC's, I concede...NO, we do not have that pedigree...and to your credit, not many do. Hockey, men's and women's lacrosse, field hockey, softball, and every other sport with the exception of women's basketball (horendous) are fine. So go ahead and judge an entire athletic dept on the results of their first year in FBS football. Very shallow view if you ask me.

Is it okay if we judge an entire athletic department based upon your state's lack of a commitment to the university? I'm just wondering. If not I'll go with the UGame results, if that's okay with you. Or basketball records over the past decade, whatever works best for you.

 

[CL82]

Who should we add? Please enlighten us.

Umass is a step up on half the schools already in the league.

I'd sure like to see just how you justify that statement. About the only things that UMass brings to the table are an easy commute to away games and a long dead rivalry.

 

[Vuce]

No one under the age of 35 remembers or considers Umass as a rival.

 

[Adios]

No one under the age of 35 remembers or considers Umass as a rival.

They are still part of our history. Just like Ivy League schools (particularly Yale) and those Little Ivy schools. They all completely dominated us. The Ivy League schools would dominate the Little Ivies though. We did become an FCS-level equivalent to Yale not too long ago. Now, we'd beat them all to a pulp. We need to continue to beat UMass to a pulp for fun. I am almost 35 (older than) and I consider UMass a rival. Our historic rivalry even might have come into play in stepping up to the FBS level. As you can see, they are jealous of us. They did get to a men's basketball Final Four before we did.

UMass, 1924 was the turning point! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Forgot to mention, we will absolutely be playing them in hockey every year in 2014. They have a very, very good hockey program.

 

[Mark W]

Is it okay if we judge an entire athletic department based upon your state's lack of a commitment to the university? I'm just wondering. If not I'll go with the UGame results, if that's okay with you. Or basketball records over the past decade, whatever works best for you.

This would be easier to answer is I knew exactly what you are referring to. Hopefully it is not that Faculty Senate nonsense that detractors have blown up into meaning something. Do we have the athletic budget UConn has? No. But let's look at positives in the last couple of years

More than doubled the salary of head basketball coach

Breaking ground in the spring of new basketball training facility adjacent to the Mullins Center

Upgraded to FBS football to include the hiring of a bona fide FBS coaching staff

Breaking ground on a 37 million dollar upgrade to McGuirk stadium as a phase 1 to making it suitable for FBS football. I would assume that some level of success will be required to ever see a phase 2, not a given by any means

This is just the athletic dept. I won't go into general academic positives going on at the campus, but the honors college dorms and facilities, the expansion of the Isenberg Management school, new labs built for biology dept, and being one of 11 state universities in the country actually adding professors and staff ( yes, UConn is another) are all readily available through the internet.

Are some of these baby steps...sure. Masachusetts is a cash strapped state and unfortunately secondary and higher education are easy targets for budget cuts ( Don't want to get into the political aspect here)

Now to your point, UMass has a duck**ed up system We have a president but each school has their own chancellor.Even the Medical Center in Worcester has it's own chancellor. What this causes is in-fighting and a very skewed vision of things like endowments, research grants etc. Politically I'm not sure they could ever put these under one governing body, but that would benefit the school quite a bit.

 

[UC990411]

This is exactly the type of attitude that has permeated both the Boneyard and UMasshoops boards for too long. Both boards have a majority of knowledgeable sports fans with a good grasp on reality that realize what is good for New England collegiate sports benefits all teams involved!! Then there's the folks (on both boards) that have such a skewed sense of self worth that any conversation is impossible. If UConn is such a cash cow, what are you doing in this dumpster-fire of a conference? Are you aware that as much as you badmouth the MAC, you've lost to Western Michigan( a middle of the road team in the MAC) 2 years in a row? There...did I accomplish anything there saying things just to demean? That type of discourse, although I know it is what message boards are made of, contributes nothing to finding a solution for 2 teams looking for a good place to land in this realignment. UConn and Cincy should be the leaders in trying to form a strong and viable northeast conference that works for all concerned. That's tough to do when you fancy yourself superior and spend your time looking down your nose!!!!

So UConn and Cinci should be looking out for the well being of Northeast athletics? No, Uconn and Cinci should be looking out for themselves, not for a rivalry with the worst football program in FBS.

 

[uconndogs]

I have no problem with UMASS on the football and hoops schedule. Conference affiliation should be based on what's best for the conference as a whole and I just don't know if UMASS fits that bill. It's my sincere hope that it becomes a mute point for UCONN in the very near future.

That all said, UCONN has made an enormous commitment to its athletics and has peformed at a very high level. UCONN should dictate terms to whatever extent it can (venues, etc.). As I've said before, there is no reason to let UMASS off the mat, especially in football. UCONN should own recruiting and the games should not be close. The differential in the programs should be highlighted at every opportunity.

 

[CL82]

This would be easier to answer is I knew exactly what you are referring to. Hopefully it is not that Faculty Senate nonsense that detractors have blown up into meaning something. Do we have the athletic budget UConn has? No. But let's look at positives in the last couple of years

More than doubled the salary of head basketball coach

Breaking ground in the spring of new basketball training facility adjacent to the Mullins Center

Upgraded to FBS football to include the hiring of a bona fide FBS coaching staff

Breaking ground on a 37 million dollar upgrade to McGuirk stadium as a phase 1 to making it suitable for FBS football. I would assume that some level of success will be required to ever see a phase 2, not a given by any means

This is just the athletic dept. I won't go into general academic positives going on at the campus, but the honors college dorms and facilities, the expansion of the Isenberg Management school, new labs built for biology dept, and being one of 11 state universities in the country actually adding professors and staff ( yes, UConn is another) are all readily available through the internet.

Are some of these baby steps...sure. Masachusetts is a cash strapped state and unfortunately secondary and higher education are easy targets for budget cuts ( Don't want to get into the political aspect here)

Well really Mark, I was referring to your commentary "So go ahead and judge an entire athletic dept on the results of their first year in FBS football. Very shallow view if you ask me." The point is that there are a lot of reasons to be skeptical UMass rather than just your first year in football.

The Massachusetts legislature hesitancy to invers in the school is pretty well documented.

Top UMass administrators say the university will never get more money from the state, so it doesn't, which forces the trustees to raise fees for students, which makes the Legislature believe UMass can handle its financial affairs on its own, which leads to declining state revenues, which leads to more speeches before the Chamber of Commerce declaring that the state will never fund public higher education. Down, down, down we go.

Link to Boston Globe Article. The failure of your own state to invest in the school is certainly going to make those of us outside of the school a little skeptical. Your sports teams have been less than stellar. So, I suggest, that there are plenty of reasons for people to be less than thrilled at a possible affiliation that are neither "assinine nor shallow", rather they are just a natural hesitency to be affiliated with a struggling institution. Reasonable, don't you think? That said, feel free to stop by and mention all the things you feel are steps in the right direction. You just want to be a little more open minded if we are skeptical, or just uninterested.

 

[Mark W]

So UConn and Cinci should be looking out for the well being of Northeast athletics? No, Uconn and Cinci should be looking out for themselves, not for a rivalry with the worst football program in FBS.

Agree wholeheartedly if in fact UConn is a "lock" to be out of there soon. If not, they should absolutely be looking to build as strong a conference, both competition and attendance wise that they possibly can. Not for the other schools, for themselves. As a UMass fan, I'm not asking UConn for any favors. But if you think you will draw more at the Rent for Tulsa than you will for UMass, I guess we've got nothing else to talk about.

 

[Fishy]

UMass is an awful football program at the moment - that really can't be debated.

But if they were somehow to become not awful, and if UConn is stuck in this mess for the long term, I would rather have UMass in the conference. I suspect the rest of the conference might prefer Tulsa because 1) they're not as awful, and 2) if UConn and Cincy do leave, Tulsa would likely be the first of the schools they'd invite anyway.

 

[Mark W]

Well really Mark, I was referring to your commentary "So go ahead and judge an entire athletic dept on the results of their first year in FBS football. Very shallow view if you ask me." The point is that there are a lot of reasons to be skeptical UMass rather than just your first year in football.

The Massachusetts legislature hesitancy to invers in the school is pretty well documented.
Link to Boston Globe Article. The failure of your own state to invest in the school is certainly going to make those of us outside of the school a little skeptical. Your sports teams have been less than stellar. So, I suggest, that there are plenty of reasons for people to be less than thrilled at a possible affiliation that are neither "assinine nor shallow", rather they are just a natural hesitency to be affiliated with a struggling institution. Reasonable, don't you think? That said, feel free to stop by and mention all the things you feel are steps in the right direction. You just want to be a little more open minded if we are skeptical, or just uninterested.

CL82...did you read the post that prompted my response. It was not one of the well-thought out posts discussing revenue sharing or any of the others on here that I have no problem with. I think making the comment that if you let UMass into any conference you are in you might as well give up athletics is indeed short-sighted and asinine. That is not my view of many of the other posts however.

Political posturing to a sympathetic ear at the Globe, while a perception nightmare not to mention the hit to our reputation, may or may not be the whole story. I haven't read the entire article you referenced so I'm in no position to debate that with you either way. What I do know is that I've seen more positives going on at UMass under President Caret and Chancellor Subswammy in the last 2 1/2 years than I have seen in 2 decades. For me, not being a political insider with intimate knowledge of the situation, that is where the rubber meets the road.

 

[tzznandrew]

Fair enough.... without knowing the dynamics of what is going on at UMass!!!!......you reference a time where UMass not only went through 3 coaches, but woefully underpaid. Lappas was an absolute disaster...Ford took the job never even really liking his position there and lobbied for a new job from day 1. In comes new AD.....in comes Derek Kellogg...Springfield native, UMass point guard (4 time A-10 champion). They just signed DK to a contract that, although not a lock to keep him forever, gives him the opportunity to make up to 880 K with incentives. Some of the incentives are a little out of reach this year, but he should be in the 650-700 K range this year.Compare that to the 350 K we paid Ford and I think we've established some stability at the coaching position.

Kellogg has put UMass back on a recruiting level that we haven't seen since Calipari. Lappas had us to an all-time low where we were fighting the likes of CCSU for guys like Jeff "Big Deli" Solovsky. Ford just didn't recruit at all and left Kellogg with pretty much an empty cupboard.

Kellogg recruiting so far.....grade B so far but trending up.......in for next year..Derrick Gordon (4 star trans from W. Kent), Zach Coleman (3 star de-commit from Mizzou), Clyde Santee ( 3 star kid from Houston) and Seth Berger ( 3 star kid from Seattle)

The fact that UMass has had three coaches in this period tells you a lot, though, right?

Look, if Derek Kellogg sticks around, and they keep winning, and they become an asset to the basketball side of this, fine. The ACC didn't look around and pick a mediocre BE school: they picked Syracuse and UConn--and then BC blocked UConn, and they moved to Pitt. For basketball/football schools, throw in Louisville, and those were the four best (EDIT: West Virginia had the best combination at the time of the initial expansion, but it seems academics matter to the ACC in the first two raids). The B1G was looking for markets--they picked the best market the BE had. There seems to me no reason to extend an invite to UMass (or any other school at the moment) other than potential growth. That doesn't seem a strong enough reason.

Win football games in the MAC, dominate the A10 like you did in the mid-90s, and I'll be a UMass advocate.