Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

UMass is leaving the MAC after 2015. This is great news IMO. Puts the MAC at a balanced 12 teams for football and keeps BG in the MAC East.

http://espn.go.com/boston/college-footb ... er-sources" target="_blank

The Mid-American Conference and University of Massachusetts reached an agreement forcing UMass to leave the league as a football-only member after the 2015 season, sources told ESPN on Wednesday.

UMass had been a football-only member of the MAC the past two seasons and primarily a member of the Atlantic 10 in its other sports.

Last month, the MAC offered full membership to UMass, but the school declined, sources told ESPN. Per UMass' agreement with the MAC, if it turned down full membership from the MAC, the school would only be able to remain a football-only member for two more seasons, sources said.

In each of the Minutemen's first two years in the MAC, in 2012 and 2013, they were 1-7 in MAC play and 1-11 overall.

UMass will remain in the MAC East Division in 2014 and 2015.

In 2016, the MAC will be a 12-team conference consisting of Akron, Bowling Green, Buffalo, Kent State, Miami (Ohio) and Ohio in the East; and Ball State, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo and Western Michigan in the West.

Good, their football has been atrocious.

I would assume this probably means BG goes back to the west, also.

Except that schedules are hard to juggle, I'd say good riddance, can you leave today?

6 and 6 isn't so bad. Kinda even now.

HoopsFan

Falcon137 wrote:I would assume this probably means BG goes back to the west, also.

Why would we go back to the west now that the league is back to an even 12 in football?

BGSU33 wrote:Last month, the MAC offered full membership to UMass, but the school declined, sources told ESPN. Per UMass' agreement with the MAC, if it turned down full membership from the MAC, the school would only be able to remain a football-only member for two more seasons, sources said.

We need to thank Temple of leaving the conference, in one of the articles I read on this it said the MAC used this clause in UMass' agreement because Temple left for the AAC

I was just about to post this. Later, UMass. Can't say I'll miss you if you're not interested in being a full time member.

I also think I can say we have the most stable conference in the country and that is a good thing. I despise conference realignment. The MAC has not been impacted by it and that is a luxury.

See ya. Thanks for nothing.

Falcon137 wrote:I would assume this probably means BG goes back to the west, also.

Why would BG go back to the West??? The East currently has 7 teams in it now and the West has 6. UMass leaving means it will be an even 6 in both the East and West without anyone needing to move. Which is GREAT news IMO!

It's too bad UMass wasn't willing to join as a full member. Perhaps, if Temple had not left, the MAC could have convinced both to come in as full members. This seems like the right decision right now, but I also like that the MAC has been trying to grow the conference footprint. The UMass experiment was worthwhile; it just didn't work out because of unforeseen factors.

Geographic expansion makes great sense for a conference like the Big 10ish. They have a cable network that generates income based on the number of subscribers on each system. They can send a volleyball team from Illinois to Maryland because the $$$ are a pittance compared to the income expansion generates.

The MAC isn't in that position. We shouldn't be trying to expand our footprint when there's no economic or competitive benefit. UMass added nothing...zip...zero...nada. It was a waste of time to pursue them. We'd be far better off in focusing on strengthening the existing conference.

Flipper wrote:We'd be far better off in focusing on strengthening the existing conference.

Agreed. The MAC has been dealt with unbalanced divisions and schedules in football for years now and this will help to straighten it out just fine. For once I finally feel like the MAC is standing up for itself. Helpfully after the UCF, Temple and UMass football affiliation crap the MAC will stand on its own two feet and one, take care of its core members and two, stop taking on affiliate members for football only. Personally, I think 12 is plenty and I hope we stay at that.

I am taking a slightly different approach. I am glad UMass was in our conference these past few years. Gave us much needed wins and possibly without them on our schedule we may not have won the MAC East and with no MAC East Champ means no MAC Championship.

gmartin wrote:I am taking a slightly different approach. I am glad UMass was in our conference these past few years. Gave us much needed wins and possibly without them on our schedule we may not have won the MAC East and with no MAC East Champ means no MAC Championship.

I see what you are tryng it say, but UMass won a combined two MAC games in the last two years. They beat a winless Miami team last year and a winless team in the MAC in Akron (Zips won one game that year) the year before. The two wins in two years that UMass had in the MAC came against teams (Miami and Akron) that had a combined one win between them in those two years. Point being, everyone in the MAC beat up on UMass. Had UMass upset a contender I could see your point though. But let's not sleep on them this season. BG will be their first game back on campus in several years and they will be in for us. They actually gave us a grind of a game last year until we finally started to get something going.

Flipper wrote:We shouldn't be trying to expand our footprint when there's no economic or competitive benefit.

We disagree. Having Temple and UMass in the conference as full members would have benefited the conference. The attempt to engineer that was worth the minor hassle of imbalanced divisions in one sport.

If another expansion candidate emerges, I hope the MAC will pursue it aggressively, Fargo, anyone?

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... g-decision" target="_blank