UMass as an Independent in Football: Tough to Schedule

[Pudge]

Completely disagree. In my opinion, TV revenues are going to go up for the AAC. Why? The AAC will produce mediocre TV ratings which is better than what the conference is being paid for. Plus, the OOC scheduling will be somewhat attractive and the home games will be worth something. Look at future OOC scheduling for AAC teams over the next 4 years as of now:

Navy: let's assume Army game is treated separately. They have 2 ND and 2 Air Force home games.

UConn: home games with Army, Virginia, Missouri.

Cincy: future home games with Miami, BYU.

East Carolina: home games with Virginia Tech twice, NC St., BYU, and UNC.

Houston: home games with Vandy, Oklahoma, Louisville, Texas Tech, Arizona.

Memphis: home games with Ole Miss twice, Kansas, UCLA

SMU: home games with Baylor, TCU twice.

Temple: home games with Penn St., Notre Dame, Army

Tulane: home games with Duke, Wake Forest

Tulsa: nothing of note at home.

UCF: home game with Maryland.

USF: home games with Syracuse, Florida St., Illinois, Wisconsin,


Thus, there are about 9 decent out of conference games/ year over the next 4 years. If you take the ACC contract of $20 million per school and assume 2/3 of TV revenues are for football, ESPN is paying about $2 mill/year for each ACC team's home games. So these out of conference games should be worth about $18 mill to the AAC per year alone vs the current total contract of $25 million for all sports. The rest of the games may be worth another $18 to $30 mill in total per year for 54 conference games, a conference championship game, and maybe 10 misc OOC games.

Look at basketball. Big East gets $3 million per school per year and ACC gets about $7 million per school per year. I think the AAC basketball would be worth $2 to $3 million per school per year or another $25 to $30 mill per year. Heck, the AAC performed better and had higher ratings than the Big East.

Back of the envelope, the AAC should get anywhere from $5 to $8 mill per school per year. Of course, if schools leave, all bets are off. In my opinion, conference stability is one of the main reasons the current contract is so low.

As for UMass, they bring absolutely nothing to any conference as they are not popular even in Massachusetts. Heck, they drew maybe 10k for their game against Colorado.

I actually see your point & I agree. All these are solid. And notably, certain conferences want to eliminate them. I just don't know where they are going. Further, ALL live content still has room to grow revenue appreciably.

 

[Kolumbo]

You missed the point of this thread. It is difficult to schedule for UMass going forward, especially when not in a conference. Also, most teams don't have room for non-conference games after September/early October, so how is UMass going to get home games against decent teams in October/November/early December? By the way, UConn can't get home and homes with former conference mates BC, Rutgers, and Syracuse. How is UMass going to get them?

BC, Rutgers, and SU will be more than happy to schedule some FBS wins. They will need them.

 

[UConnJim]

BC, Rutgers, and SU will be more than happy to schedule some FBS wins. They will need them.

They are not going to give home games to UMass and in five years, UMass will be an FCS team anyway so you can do a one and done with them.

Navy is joining the AAC because they recognize that you can not schedule enough decent home games without a conference, especially after early October and Navy already has 3 locked in games per year: Notre Dame, Army, and Air Force.

 

[Waquoit]

I expect the shoe to drop...

on our head...again

 

[Kolumbo]

They are not going to give home games to UMass and in five years, UMass will be an FCS team anyway so you can do a one and done with them.

Navy is joining the AAC because they recognize that you can not schedule enough decent home games without a conference, especially after early October and Navy already has 3 locked in games per year: Notre Dame, Army, and Air Force.

Of course UMass could likely be FCS anyway. My point was it will need to schedule those schools to remain FBS. You don't think programs like SU would schedule UMass? Why not? SU is not playing for championships, its conference is all over the map, and it loves to schedule cupcakes. Yes, I believe SU would schedule UMass. At least until UMass surpasses the orange.

 

[whaler11]

You don't get paid for ratings. You get paid by having muliple networks compete for your inventory.

So unless somebody else wants it and bids accordingly - there is no fantasy money coming.

 

[Fishy]

Gawd! Fishy is starting to sound like me on one of my rants about expansion....a traditionalist.

You're a traditionalist. At this point, I believe I am a fatalist.

We're in a bad conference with schools that we have nothing in common with - even some of our recent conference mates like USF and Cincinnati are essentially strangers. There are no same-day road trips for our fans in this conference unless you think a nine-hour round trip to Philly every other year is doable.

UConn at the conference meetings is like your going to a cocktail party where not only do you not know the people in the room, you don't even speak their language. If nothing else, UMass would at least be a familiar face.

People don't like UMass because they're actually a historical rival, because they don't add to the conference's non-existent television prospects, because they might actually benefit from this muck of a league, etc., etc. But reality is that UMass doesn't make the conference worse and they'd actually give us a game in a couple of sports that we might actually be able to visit on the road.

 

[noeynox]

I've been pro UMass from the jump. I'm pro Army if they'd come, and hell Buffalo is an overnight trip for sure, but I'd add them as well.

If were not getting into a P5 league anytime soon, I see no reason to be in a conference with Tulsa and Tulane when we could at least be playing in a league with teams that if not historical, you could develop regional rivalries with. UMass and Buffalo Basketball would probably both be in the top half of this league's standing off rip. It's sad that this where we are at, but pretending its not, doesn't make it any better.

 

[ZooCougar]

You're a traditionalist. At this point, I believe I am a fatalist.

We're in a bad conference with schools that we have nothing in common with - even some of our recent conference mates like USF and Cincinnati are essentially strangers. There are no same-day road trips for our fans in this conference unless you think a nine-hour round trip to Philly every other year is doable.

UConn at the conference meetings is like your going to a cocktail party where not only do you not know the people in the room, you don't even speak their language. If nothing else, UMass would at least be a familiar face.

People don't like UMass because they're actually a historical rival, because they don't add to the conference's non-existent television prospects, because they might actually benefit from this muck of a league, etc., etc. But reality is that UMass doesn't make the conference worse and they'd actually give us a game in a couple of sports that we might actually be able to visit on the road.

I don't like UMass because it feels like their program is at the brink at all times. That being said, they should be on the schedule every year.

I have also changed my mind on Buffalo. Another close-ish opponent. I feel bad for the students that will miss out on the experience of going to close by meaningful road games in both football and basketball.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Two things - UMass and next tv deal.

1) Would you rather play Tulsa in football and Tulane twice in basketball or UMass?There's no way that if we're in the same league, the AAC doesn't make sure of the above. I'd be all for it.

2) I think the AAC has some decent top level football, in addition to some decent top level basketball. I figure espn would like to retain this relatively cheap product and I would envision fox maybe trying to get in the mix as well. Depending on how the next few years go,
could we realistically get $4M a team? Not that it changes much, but it's still better than $2M.

 

[dayooper]

Just playing around here, but how would this regional conference feel? I know they aren't any big names, but these might be somewhat locale teams that may jump ship to start a new local league:

UConn
UMass
Army
Temple
Navy
Old Dominion
Marshall
Appalachian State

That's seven. I think all of them would bite, with Marshall being the least likely. You have the four remaining Northeast FBS schools (not counting 'Cuse, BC, or Rutgers) and four in the Mid - Atlantic or close to (Marshall). East Carolina would be awesome, but highly doubt they would go. There is UNC-Charlotte that is joining FBS next year as well

Not a very good league, but if you want local, this is all I could come up with.

 

[UConnJim]

Well, financial and attendance issues will doom UMass anyway. Big football deficits, averaging less than the FBS minimum of 15k, and no conference for football will ultimately force a decision on UMass football.

Here are some quotes from a December 2012 Boston Globe article:

“I think we certainly need to get out of the FBS experiment,’’ said Max Page, an architecture professor who co-chairs a campus committee examining the cost. “There is a feeling of urgency because of the disastrous attendance this year, which contributed to higher costs than we expected. They already were bad enough.’’

“We have long been told that one important reason alumni support for UMass is so mixed is that we didn’t play FBS football,’’ said Ernest May, head of the university’s Faculty Senate. “Well, we have now played FBS football in a great venue located right in the backyard of where most of where our alumni live, and the silence was deafening.’’

UMass-Amherst chancellor Kumble Subbaswamy, who inherited the football plan when he took office last summer, said he was generally satisfied with the inaugural season and will evaluate the initiative annually. He attributed the lackluster ticket sales in part to the leadership transition from the previous chancellor, Robert Holub, who spearheaded the upgrade.

“If this keeps up, then it will become a concern,’’ Subbaswamy said. “But we are still in the very early stages of the transition.’’ (Note: He made these comments before it was announced UMass was leaving the MAC and becoming an independent in football.)

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...nce-problem/g7gKSRY6HhclPTsOgc9tpM/story.html

 

[noeynox]

Just playing around here, but how would this regional conference feel? I know they aren't any big names, but these might be somewhat locale teams that may jump ship to start a new local league:

UConn
UMass
Army
Temple
Navy
Old Dominion
Marshall
Appalachian State

That's seven. I think all of them would bite, with Marshall being the least likely. You have the four remaining Northeast FBS schools (not counting 'Cuse, BC, or Rutgers) and four in the Mid - Atlantic or close to (Marshall). East Carolina would be awesome, but highly doubt they would go. There is UNC-Charlotte that is joining FBS next year as well

Not a very good league, but if you want local, this is all I could come up with.

No to the likes Appalachian State. No one wants exclusively regional. Horrible hoops. At least now we have Memphis and Cincy who are competent in BBall.

 

[Dooley]

UCONN fans have a heck of an opportunity to show some Boston reach in 2015 when we play UMASS at Gillette Stadium. Don't fool yourself into thinking that the B1G and ACC won't be watching the attendance figures from our game there and the one this year at Yankee Stadium against Army. Show that we have presence in NYC and Boston like we always claim, then that certainly would not hurt our chances to quit this Tulsa/Tulane nonsense.

 

[Dooley]

Just playing around here, but how would this regional conference feel? I know they aren't any big names, but these might be somewhat locale teams that may jump ship to start a new local league:

UConn
UMass
Army
Temple
Navy
Old Dominion
Marshall
Appalachian State

I think the basketball fans just threw up in their mouths after reading this conference list. Would need to keep Memphis and Cincinnati, at the very least, to at least try to sell some tickets in the winter.

 

[Fishy]

Just playing around here, but how would this regional conference feel? I know they aren't any big names, but these might be somewhat locale teams that may jump ship to start a new local league:

UConn
UMass
Army
Temple
Navy
Old Dominion
Marshall
Appalachian State

That's seven. I think all of them would bite, with Marshall being the least likely. You have the four remaining Northeast FBS schools (not counting 'Cuse, BC, or Rutgers) and four in the Mid - Atlantic or close to (Marshall). East Carolina would be awesome, but highly doubt they would go. There is UNC-Charlotte that is joining FBS next year as well

Not a very good league, but if you want local, this is all I could come up with.

Are you drunk or just really stupid today?

We've had idiotic scenarios posted here, but you've just retired them all.

That is the worst conference in the history of 'n world.

 

[UMass]

I'm not posting here in defense of UMass football as I believe we have some fairly tough times ahead. But the one thing I'd like to say is to tell you guys not to put much credence in anything that Max Page has to say. He is against EVERYTHING athletic related. He has chosen to funnel his dissatisfaction through Boston Globe's resident idiot Bob Hohler. Bob's Wikipedia page references his hatred for UMass, so Page found a sympathetic ear for his incessant whining. The faculty senate, a completely impotent group by the way, has even distanced themselves from Page after he forced a vote that was defeated. Now, has Page accomplished something with the negative press? Sure. However president Caret and Chancellor Subbaswamy are adamant in their support of FBS football (especially after the return of Whipple). Does that mean it will succeed? The jury is still out. But I guarantee you Max Page has no influence either way.

 

[freescooter]

I've always thought that UMass football had some potential but thus far they've approached it in a completely screwed up way. There is zero sense to playing games 100 miles off campus. They really should be playing at an upgraded/expanded McGuirk at 25,000 or so seats, with the goal of attracting students and a fan base from their area, Springfield to Worcester. Doesn't matter how many alumni they have in Boston. Foxboro isn't Boston (Its more like Providence) and the UMass alumni have no exposure to 1A football. Much like UConn, they have to build a fan base. They don't have one ready made. You want to play 1 game in Foxboro each year, by all means go ahead. Play your "big name team" there.

As far as UMass in the AAC, I am conflicted about that. They are bad...really really bad right now. But I could see them being a decent program eventually. And I agree with fishy that having local rivals is a good thing. This league is a mess as it is. How mcuh worse would it be to have two opponents that are reasonably local>

 

[UConnJim]

Besides the bad economics and support of UMass football, nobody in the "southern" part of the AAC is ever going to vote for UMass. Why? WHEN UConn leaves the conference, they do not want to be stuck with UMass as a northern outlier.

 

[CL82]

You're a traditionalist. At this point, I believe I am a fatalist.

We're in a bad conference with schools that we have nothing in common with - even some of our recent conference mates like USF and Cincinnati are essentially strangers. There are no same-day road trips for our fans in this conference unless you think a nine-hour round trip to Philly every other year is doable.

UConn at the conference meetings is like your going to a cocktail party where not only do you not know the people in the room, you don't even speak their language. If nothing else, UMass would at least be a familiar face.

People don't like UMass because they're actually a historical rival, because they don't add to the conference's non-existent television prospects, because they might actually benefit from this muck of a league, etc., etc. But reality is that UMass doesn't make the conference worse and they'd actually give us a game in a couple of sports that we might actually be able to visit on the road.

Oh how times have changed:

Temple is a complete dog. They're a known quantity and they were unfit for the conference when the Big East was the Big East and not whatever this muddle is now.
Even now, their primary attraction to the conference is nothing past the fact that they have 85 players who are at 98.6 Fahrenheit and that their ties to where they are can be quickly severed. We're buying long-term misery for short-term gain.
I'm not even going to pretend to understand the thought process that would come up with UMass as a viable addition - that's a brain stem injury, not an idea.
But, anywho, if I put one of these "" here, everything will be okay because it is all about thinking positive.
Lemme throw a few more out there just to be sure - , , , , , !

The sad part is I don't really disagree. It is just a sad statement of where we are currently.

 

[rw005]

Except in 5 years, Buffalo will still be part of the MAC in FBS and UMass will be playing FCS football.

Good point, if that happens, we might have to find another team like Buffalo (just not them). I'm fine with MAC opponents, only when we got nothing.

 

[Ha Who]

UCONN fans have a heck of an opportunity to show some Boston reach in 2015 when we play UMASS at Gillette Stadium. Don't fool yourself into thinking that the B1G and ACC won't be watching the attendance figures from our game there and the one this year at Yankee Stadium against Army. Show that we have presence in NYC and Boston like we always claim, then that certainly would not hurt our chances to quit this Tulsa/Tulane nonsense.

Any word on ticket sales for the Army game? Unfortunately, my guess is not good. Hope I am wrong.

 

[buddy]

Wishful thinking.

As we are now and likely still will be, UMass will be mired in some dead-end group of five conference in five years. The only difference is that they won't mind it.

 

[buddy]

Wishful thinking.

As we are now and likely still will be, UMass will be mired in some dead-end group of five conference in five years. The only difference is that they won't mind it.

That is really a sad statement.

 

[dayooper]

Are you drunk or just really stupid today?

We've had idiotic scenarios posted here, but you've just retired them all.

That is the worst conference in the history of 'n world.

Thank you for making my point. The talk was a conference with UMass and Buffalo. That was the best "regional" grouping I could come up with. There was talk of not wanting to play Tulsa and Tulane (and I understand why) and playing teams that you could drive to. In all reality, there is no regional conference in The Northeast possible unless either the Big10 or ACC implodes. In fact, it's only going to get worse unless UConn gets the Hell out of The AAC. There is no one left to take in The NE, unless you count Army. UMass? Buffalo? They aren't bringing in any more NE schools in the near (or far) future because there is no one viable there to take. Does that mean I think that scenario is viable? Hell no! I was trying to show that there is nothing viable left in the East that isn't already in a P5 + AAC.

UConn is on an island of suckatude and needs to get off of it. As a Michigan fan (and a fan of college athletics period) UConn is getting a raw deal.