No Miami Next Year?

[jpfalcon09]

According to Jack Carle, no Miami in 2015 either. This stinks.

http://www.sent-trib.com/bgsu-sports/ma ... ps-1-13-14

[BGSU33]

According to Jack Carle, no Miami in 2015 either. This stinks.

http://www.sent-trib.com/bgsu-sports/ma ... ps-1-13-14

Yep, according to that chart, these cycles have gone in two-year turns. Sucks because we finally turned the series against Miami. When they jump back on our schedule I am sure they'll be much better. Same damn thing happened with us and Akron a few years ago.

[Flipper]

The MAC bones UT in favor of OU during the bowl process and they refuse to force OU to take on an extra crossover game...what kind of embarrassing photos of MAC officials do the kitties have?

[BGSU33]

The MAC bones UT in favor of OU during the bowl process and they refuse to force OU to take on an extra crossover game...what kind of embarrassing photos of MAC officials do the kitties have?

Still scratching my head about the bowl pick of OU over UT, but you know how bowls selections go. And I just saw that Ohio FINALLY has to play three MAC West schools (at WMU, at CMU, vs NIU) and avoids UMass. First time ever for OU. I still don't understand why it took so long. I am very interested in hearing exactly how the MAC makes these selections.

[NY-BG-FAN]

It drives me crazy that we have to lose a traditional rivalry because the MAC has to be a halfway house for UMass. Exactly what benefit is UMass providing the MAC? They certainly aren't helping strength of schedule or the league's standing opposite C-USA, Mt. West, etc.

I'm not sure why the MAC historically volunteers to be a halfway house for programs that don't want to be there long term. Let UCF then, and UMass now figure things out for themselves and not muddy up the MAC schedule and bust up great in-state rivalries. Through all the conference re-alignment, the MAC has primarily been untouched, I think the 12 full members make for a pretty stable league. If the MAC did expand, it would be acceptable if they did so within their current footprint, adding historically solid basketball programs that want to move to FBS. Indiana State, Illinois State, Southern Illinois would all be cool. Adding two of those schools to make it 14 and having them both in the West, to put BG and Toledo in the east with the rest of the Ohio schools would be great. Judging from some journalism out there, the UMass administration isn't even wild about them being in the MAC or being in FBS football to begin with.

Anyway, UMass can go join the American Conference along with all the other misfit toys of Division I-A that the Big Ten or ACC didn't want. Then they can BS a regional rivalry with UConn, which has to sound better than getting pummeled by schools 700 miles away.

[Class of 61]

It has to do with the unbalanced divisions (7 team in the East and 6 in the West). There will always be an East team that does not play all of the East division teams.

If this is the case, and I understand it completely, then UMASS should be the "odd" team EVERY year! As long as these schools continue to be "football only" (like Temple etc.), THEY should be the ones who have additional travel etc. Just my opinion.

[mscarn]

Great post about the pointlessness of UMass. The MAC gets next to nothing out of these relationships and gives away the store in return. UCF was supposed to get us "southern exposure" or some nonsense like that. They didn't factor in the fact that next to nobody in the south gave a flying hoot about UCF in the first place, let alone the teams they were going to play in football. For UMass to "get us into" the Boston/NYC market those markets have to first care about UMass football to begin with.

When the vagabonds (like Temple) do manage to get back on their feet they leave as quickly as the came in.

[BGSU33]

It has to do with the unbalanced divisions (7 team in the East and 6 in the West). There will always be an East team that does not play all of the East division teams.

If this is the case, and I understand it completely, then UMASS should be the "odd" team EVERY year! As long as these schools continue to be "football only" (like Temple etc.), THEY should be the ones who have additional travel etc. Just my opinion.

EXACTLY! I agree 100%! Why does the MAC bend over backwards for a non-full-time member? Further, it pisses me off that it's BG who is being bounce around from East to West back to East to accommodate this crap! Save me the "BG is closer to the MAC West schools" argument too because these schools like UCF, Temple and UMass aren't full-time MAC members. BG is! Let the affiliate members deal with that crap, not a full-time member! If schools like UMass or Temple were full-time members, then okay, I can understand the moves. But they are affiliate members for football! They needed a home for their football program, not all of their programs. So they throw the MAC a few non-conference games at us in basketball. Big deal. If someone wants to JOIN our conference - for everything - then so be it. But if they come in as an affiliate member like this, I wish to God the MAC would stop messing with BG to handle their moves. I wish the MAC had BG's back in these cases. Meanwhile we get pushed and moved around while UCF, Temple and UMass wipe their feet on the conference then later leavee. It's BS! I would much, much rather see UMass just leave and have the MAC at 12 and eliminate all this mess than adding a 14th school.

[jpfalcon09]

Ohio and Kent will open on August 28th and it looks like BG/Toledo might be going back to November for a weeknight slot.

[Schadenfreude]

It drives me crazy that we have to lose a traditional rivalry because the MAC has to be a halfway house for UMass. Exactly what benefit is UMass providing the MAC?

They broaden our footprint. More television sets in our footprint make it easier for us to get our games on ESPN. This increases exposure and helps us recruit. This is worth the aggravation.

I very much hope UMass sticks this out and that the MAC can add another school out that way to round it out to 14 and firm them up out there. Stony Brook would be ideal, in my humble opinion, but any number of schools might be a decent fit. Rhode Island? Maine? Albany? I'm sure there are other possibilities.

If the MAC did expand, it would be acceptable if they did so within their current footprint, adding historically solid basketball programs that want to move to FBS. Indiana State, Illinois State, Southern Illinois would all be cool. Adding two of those schools to make it 14 and having them both in the West, to put BG and Toledo in the east with the rest of the Ohio schools would be great.

I disagree. The MAC should be looking outside our footprint, and East would be preferable to West. This would firm up UMass and Buffalo, and there are more television sets in the East. I realize this would send BG to the West. I prefer us in the East. But I still think the MAC should look East. That's best for the conference.

[BGFalconfromCincy]

It has to do with the unbalanced divisions (7 team in the East and 6 in the West). There will always be an East team that does not play all of the East division teams.

If this is the case, and I understand it completely, then UMASS should be the "odd" team EVERY year! As long as these schools continue to be "football only" (like Temple etc.), THEY should be the ones who have additional travel etc. Just my opinion.

EXACTLY! I agree 100%! Why does the MAC bend over backwards for a non-full-time member? Further, it pisses me off that it's BG who is being bounce around from East to West back to East to accommodate this crap! Save me the "BG is closer to the MAC West schools" argument too because these schools like UCF, Temple and UMass aren't full-time MAC members. BG is! Let the affiliate members deal with that crap, not a full-time member! If schools like UMass or Temple were full-time members, then okay, I can understand the moves. But they are affiliate members for football! They needed a home for their football program, not all of their programs. So they throw the MAC a few non-conference games at us in basketball. Big deal. If someone wants to JOIN our conference - for everything - then so be it. But if they come in as an affiliate member like this, I wish to God the MAC would stop messing with BG to handle their moves. I wish the MAC had BG's back in these cases. Meanwhile we get pushed and moved around while UCF, Temple and UMass wipe their feet on the conference then later leavee. It's BS! I would much, much rather see UMass just leave and have the MAC at 12 and eliminate all this mess than adding a 14th school.

Can I get your guy's opinion on the MAC's men's soccer and wrestling affiliate members

[BGSU33]

Ohio and Kent will open on August 28th and it looks like BG/Toledo might be going back to November for a weeknight slot.

I'm not being a smartass by asking this, but is this a prediction or inside info? I couldn't tell by reading it if you were guessing or telling.

[zete]

No Miami, No Dave Clawson? Maybe Ill follow Wake Forest - LOL

At least we have Indiana at home. I don't care if we get beaten by UMass as long as we totally beat down IU in front of 24K!

[Warthog]

If people are so upset over this MAC schedule issue, maybe we should just drop out of the MAC and become an independent in football with hopes that the Big 12 will eventually ask us to join.

[mscarn]

Television exposore and its attendant role in getting games on TV requires an actual audience to begin with. How many people are sitting in front of their TV sets Saturday afternoon watching UMass football in the Boston Market (the region, not the restaurant)? We don't have our own TV network. We don't get revenue from subscription fees by forcing the content into largely uninterested regions like the Big 10 is trying to do with Rutgers (NYC) and Maryland (Washington DC).

As soon as these interlopers expereince the slightest taste of success the talk begins about outgrowing the MAC and moving on. If they do succeed they will and if they don't we're stuck with a bad program. It's lose/lose either way.