- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 87,408
- Reaction Score
- 325,716
The MAC is officially examining expansion
- Thread starter Dooooooomed
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 87,408
- Reaction Score
- 325,716
MTSU AD:
Absolutely not/no interest for C-USA (and UMass won't be going there... they've already more or less begged C-USA to allow them to join for football only, if C-USA didn't have interest when they were desperate for numbers just to survive; they won't have interest in UMass football only now).
If we blamed lack of recognizable opponents for the flagging attendance (which is BS, its the losing, give people a reason to believe they'll see a competitive game that their team can (or should) win and you'll fix the attendance issues)... C-USA is that on steroids. (Sam Houston State (probably the best team in that league in a year or two)? Louisiana Monroe? Jacksonville State (fun fact, that's the one in Alabama)?)
The C-USA TV deal is a trainwreck.. and UConn's football TV deal alone is significantly better than the per team share for C-USA for all sports. The UConn TV deal would be hurt (even if C-USA allowed the school to keep it) as it's based in part on the attractiveness of the home games that UConn can draw. ULM - UConn is not an attractive game for the CBS Sports Network schedule.
The fact is we have largely full independent schedules going into the future. The teams losing out of conference games that will now become conference matchups will provide additional openings to schedule teams, even later in the year. (Plus UMass & Army are around for late season match-ups among the remaining independents). As an Independent UConn has the ability to follow the Army model to schedule attractive games, as well as enough games to keep the team at/around bowl eligibility.
The lack of a conference schedule should not be a hindrance to a attracting a coach, in fact some coaches may welcome the control over their schedule; and honestly if Independence vs. the C-USA trainwreck is the deal-breaker for a coaching candidate, it's probably not someone UConn wanted. Particularly when you look at the facilities and the differences between what coaches would see looking at other G5-level jobs. The key for coaching candidates will be to believe that the university and state are committed to supporting the football program at a high-enough level. That goes beyond the 0s in the coaches' own contract.... will there be money to attract a strong staff? will there be continued facility investment? will there be a commitment to accepting the athletes (into the school) the coach deems a priority? after cycling through 3 coaches in 10 seasons of play (not counting the 2 interim coaches for mid-year terminations) will the school give the coach a chance to turn things around? or will they bail on the coach (and the commitment to the program) if improvements don't immediately register in the standings?
Some conference football only affiliates might benefit UConn... but a C-USA football-only affiliate does not and should be a non-starter.
If we blamed lack of recognizable opponents for the flagging attendance (which is BS, its the losing, give people a reason to believe they'll see a competitive game that their team can (or should) win and you'll fix the attendance issues)... C-USA is that on steroids. (Sam Houston State (probably the best team in that league in a year or two)? Louisiana Monroe? Jacksonville State (fun fact, that's the one in Alabama)?)
The C-USA TV deal is a trainwreck.. and UConn's football TV deal alone is significantly better than the per team share for C-USA for all sports. The UConn TV deal would be hurt (even if C-USA allowed the school to keep it) as it's based in part on the attractiveness of the home games that UConn can draw. ULM - UConn is not an attractive game for the CBS Sports Network schedule.
The fact is we have largely full independent schedules going into the future. The teams losing out of conference games that will now become conference matchups will provide additional openings to schedule teams, even later in the year. (Plus UMass & Army are around for late season match-ups among the remaining independents). As an Independent UConn has the ability to follow the Army model to schedule attractive games, as well as enough games to keep the team at/around bowl eligibility.
The lack of a conference schedule should not be a hindrance to a attracting a coach, in fact some coaches may welcome the control over their schedule; and honestly if Independence vs. the C-USA trainwreck is the deal-breaker for a coaching candidate, it's probably not someone UConn wanted. Particularly when you look at the facilities and the differences between what coaches would see looking at other G5-level jobs. The key for coaching candidates will be to believe that the university and state are committed to supporting the football program at a high-enough level. That goes beyond the 0s in the coaches' own contract.... will there be money to attract a strong staff? will there be continued facility investment? will there be a commitment to accepting the athletes (into the school) the coach deems a priority? after cycling through 3 coaches in 10 seasons of play (not counting the 2 interim coaches for mid-year terminations) will the school give the coach a chance to turn things around? or will they bail on the coach (and the commitment to the program) if improvements don't immediately register in the standings?
Some conference football only affiliates might benefit UConn... but a C-USA football-only affiliate does not and should be a non-starter.
I hear ya. These folks are though.
They also were thinking that MTSU and WKU were leaving.. and that by adding UConn and UMass, they'd be adding Maine shortly thereafter.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 87,408
- Reaction Score
- 325,716
CL82
NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 56,852
- Reaction Score
- 208,246
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 7,324
- Reaction Score
- 24,026
Yes hopefully we are now in play for a football only offer. We'd be fools not to take it. Right now we are about as independent as a beggar on a street corner.
Being completely reliant on the goodwill of others to stay afloat is not independence, it's more like an outcast.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 87,408
- Reaction Score
- 325,716
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 945
- Reaction Score
- 4,842
RIP UMass Football
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2014
- Messages
- 16,669
- Reaction Score
- 19,802
Not even an informal vote by the presidents. Sounds like the MAC might be feeling a little rejection by MTSU's snub.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 87,408
- Reaction Score
- 325,716
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 21,606
- Reaction Score
- 52,251
Not a surprise. They really only worked as a pair for travel/scheduling.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 87,408
- Reaction Score
- 325,716
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 21,606
- Reaction Score
- 52,251
Odd number is no problem for FB given the off weeks and nonconference games throughout the year. Harder in non-FB sports.
Wonder if team #10 is coming? Eg, Tarleton.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 7,324
- Reaction Score
- 24,026
They probably want to expand beyond 9 to get a conference championship game and to add some buffer teams in case they get raided again.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 21,606
- Reaction Score
- 52,251
They just lost 11 teams and didn't die. Should change its name to Conference Bulletproof.