Army in the MAC a possibility??

[MarkL]

So I was thinking ... if the MAC has another football-only member as a possibility to take, Chryst may very well go ahead and take them in. In Phil Steele's season preview for this year, he said that Army would be a great fit for the MAC, and that got me thinking ...
Army plays FOUR MAC teams this year - lost bad to Temple, lost not as bad to Akron, beat EMU, plays Buffalo this weekend. Is it possible that Army is "testing out the waters" in the MAC?
Army is academically not really a fit in the MAC, but they're also not really an academic fit anywhere. What they are, though, is a storied program with at least one national championship to claim (I think, feel free to check me on that one.). The Army-Navy game is year in, year out one of the most hyped games of the year and is always fun to watch, along with being one of the best traditions in all of college football.
Also, the MAC has made a habit out of taking in teams that nobody else really wants to take ... e.g. Buffalo, Temple, and Army, like Temple, was already kicked out of a conference. Is Army going to be the next team in the MAC?

[TG1996]

The Army-Navy game is year in, year out one of the most hyped games of the year and is always fun to watch, along with being one of the best traditions in all of college football.

It also traditionally falls the week of the MACC. Would the MAC budge enough? Because I doubt Army/Navy would.

[1987alum]

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

Army's time in C-USA was not a pleasant one. They are more than a little gun-shy (no pun, or whatever, intended) about joining a conference again.

What's the advantage for Army?

[MarkL]

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

Army's time in C-USA was not a pleasant one. They are more than a little gun-shy (no pun, or whatever, intended) about joining a conference again.

What's the advantage for Army?

Yeah I was skeptical too when I read that Phil Steele opinion, really about Army's perspective. They'd have to split all conference earnings, they wouldn't be able to schedule as many teams, but I guess the good thing is it would give their program an opportunity to flourish. It's just hard for a program to grow when they're not in a conference because far too many games naturally will be played against big teams. I just thought it was really interesting seeing all the MAC teams they scheduled this year, yet only two BCS teams instead of the normal four or five, so that's why I brought it up.

[1987alum]

There are so many advantages to being in a conference, but most don't apply to Army. They already have great traditions, great rivalries, etc. And it's not like being in a conference would help their recruiting.

[BGSU33]

I wouldn't want Army for several reasons, but the top one being you know it would have BG being shipped back to the MAC West.

[Tech83]

Getting both Army and Navy would be a boost to the MAC due to the TV markets. Army would give the MAC a New York City presence. Navy would put us in the Washington/Baltimore market.

It would be a great boost to the MAC..... and as 87 stated...... wouldn't mean anything to Army or Navy.

[Schadenfreude]

I wouldn't want Army for several reasons, but the top one being you know it would have BG being shipped back to the MAC West.

Yeah, that would stink.

But, if the MAC ever adds a 14th program, I do think they should look out east.

Army probably isn't going to happen, but it's in the right direction.

[redskins4ever]

The MAC should be 9 teams... the way was back in the good old days. We have had our sports watered down by the inclusion of all of these new I-A programs, I wish they would all just go away.

[Schadenfreude]

The MAC should be 9 teams... the way was back in the good old days. We have had our sports watered down by the inclusion of all of these new I-A programs, I wish they would all just go away.

I strenously disagree.

I remember nine teams. Five in Ohio, three in Michigan, and Ball State.

Even the MAC powers-that-be recognized that the conference lacked a certain je ne sais quoi. So they shook things up and boldly blazed a new trail by adding .... Akron.

That was the last membership move I disliked. I've supported everything that happened since.

Marshall and Northern Illinois (1997) were both great (re-)additions.

Buffalo (1998) is, in institutional terms, Big Ten caliber, and I like keeping that kind of company. And, on the field, they are coming along

Central Florida (2002) was a temporary arrangement, and everyone understood that.

And Temple? We'll see. Personally, I hope we can firm this thing up in all sports and get them a travel partner (such as Massachusetts or Delaware) out east. But, if not, I'm not unhappy.

All things being equal, I like having divisions. It increases the chances of a Ball State-like run.

[redskins4ever]

What has gotten better with more teams? Now some want to add a fourteenth member? What is this? The WAC with 16? The Big East?

Its harder now than ever to qualify for the NCAA tournament.

Too many I-A schools competing for the same talent... in a little over 15 years I-A has gone from 95 schools to 119 and counting... thats over a 20% increase in schools, and from what I have seen, not a single school that has come to join MAC football has brought with any prestige to raise the level of the conference. (Marshall being the lone exception and they are gone)

The MAC is what it is, because its too scared to be anything else.

Remember... UCF, USF, (The Entire Sunbelt), and Boise state did not play I-A football not to long ago. Each year... the MAC falls a rung lower in the football totem poll.

[daspollak]

I disagree, we still put out quite a bit of NFL talent compared to the other non-BCS conferences. The WAC has an advantage in there are not as many teams out west, to compete for the talent coming mostly out of California. If you look at Cali, name all the FBS schools there, I count 7. They produce more than enough talent for 7 schools. (I may be off, please for give me) In Ohio we have 8 schools and less talent in the state. The MAC can benefit by increasing our conference profile. A NYC or DC/Balt. team could be a huge boost in viewers and prospects. Plus it would force us to look in that direction for recruits. I live in NC and I see several potential kids who could play for us, but they will never get an offer because we spend our time in OH and FL.

[Schadenfreude]

What has gotten better with more teams?

So, if I understand your position, you would like to throw Northern Illinois, Buffalo and Temple out?

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm glad these are MAC schools. They broaden our footprint into some pretty decent markets.

[1987alum]

Its harder now than ever to qualify for the NCAA tournament.

Interesting point. Because I have deep apathy about college basketball, I rarely factor it into the equation when discussion the conference.

[Lord_Byron]

My conversation with the AD last year at the Buffalo game indicated the if the conference expanded, it would be to the east. The reason being the need for a travel partner for Temple, so when teams make the trip east, they can play at both places. The schools he mentioned were UMass, Stonybrook or Albany. Of course they'd have to make the jump to 1A in football. All three fit the conference profile of large public universities. Stonybrook brings in the NYC market.