|
|
Post by mattg on Feb 27, 2024 9:59:50 GMT -6
There will never be a direct 1:1 positive correlation for us and conference realignment. Adding a non-MAC school like WKU is good because it exposes BSU has a brand to more eyeballs (the state of Kentucky in this case). We have to hope that expanding our footprint in different markets leads to a benefit down the line, not in the immediate future.
That’s why Stony Brook is intriguing. NYC market for the MAC? Worked out well for the Big Ten and Rutgers. For basketball specifically I’d think that could be a selling point. I know it’s Long Island and not downtown NYC, but we can’t be picky.
|
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Feb 27, 2024 10:12:51 GMT -6
Its not about improving a specific school its about improving the entire conference. Why because of instead of waiting to lose the inevitable battle the rulers of the MAC are ready to go with their 300 spartans and try to hold off the big guys until everyone is dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 27, 2024 10:14:49 GMT -6
Talking about upgrading MAC FB at the margin still leaves us as the weakest G5, eons away from P5. With budget demands to be G5 too much.
Why any school would leave the MVC in BB escapes me.
Plus, those schools now have the option to avoid the squeeze in FB in a conference tolerating lower cost FB. Costs are only going to escalate there. The MAC essentially taxes schools to retain FBS status with its commitment to FBS FB and accompanying attendance requirements.
|
|
|
|
Post by redbirdman on Feb 27, 2024 10:18:23 GMT -6
Massachusetts was helpful only in basketball & there such a drag in FB it leads me to believe the league did not think before jumping to add them. They are not even close to Buffalo (327 miles). Buffalo is closer to Toledo & BG by 20 miles than Amherst. Massachusetts's FB stadium has 17,000 seats. WKU & M Tenn St are both much better fits in the MAC. Massachusetts wil be 13th in the MAC in FB & an probably 12th in baseball only because Buffalo doesn't play baseball. The rest of the league in baseball now has to go 500 miles further east to play them. That makes no sense & costs money. The weather there is horrible in the spring. The other MAC baseball schools should donate money to have Massachusetts drop baseball to save them all money.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 27, 2024 10:18:51 GMT -6
We could wish this was a move to transition to an upper tier FCS conference in FB, poised for the coming realignment, but it's the opposite.
|
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Feb 27, 2024 10:41:13 GMT -6
I think quite a bit looking specificly at Football and Basketball. Football: Only 3 losing seasons the past 10 years. So you're pulling in a G5 program that should compete at the top of the league right away and would boost the overall league strength. They're a team that could be in the conversion for a G5 playoff spot or can help make your case if you beat them. It also weakens CUSA by taking them down to 8 members which can reduce competition for a G5 playoff spot. Setting aside the argument that 7 winning seasons in 10 years equals a good program. Why would I want to bring in a new conference member who immediately competes for championships? How is my life improved by UMass playing in the MAC championship? Also what benefit is received by boosting overall league strength? How does it help us for UMass to "be in the conversation" for a playoff spot? Assuming UMass gets in the playoffs, how much actual money does that put in our pockets? I remember someone on the MAC board before the 2020 MAC championship game saying that even BSU fans should be rooting for Buffalo because it strengthened the MAC's argument for something. As if BSU losing that game would have been justified by the righteous indignation we would have received when Buffalo didn't get whatever that guy thought they'd have a stronger argument for. This seems a lot like that. Basketball: They've been at or near the top of CUSA pretty consistently in recent years and are 144 in Ken Pom right now which would put them in line with Toledo. So again you have a program who would likely be able to compete at the top and improve the league a bit overall. What does that improve? How does giving UMass the MAC's auto bid make any of our lives better? From there maybe you try to pull over 2 solid MVC schools from a pool of say NDSU, SDSU, Ill St, IN St, or SIU, you have a shot of pulling in some programs that are performing better than most of the MAC in basketball right now and could compete and are spending around what most MAC schools spend on football. Why would we want to bring in a bunch of schools performing better than we are? |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Feb 27, 2024 11:01:43 GMT -6
There will never be a direct 1:1 positive correlation for us and conference realignment. Adding a non-MAC school like WKU is good because it exposes BSU has a brand to more eyeballs (the state of Kentucky in this case). We have to hope that expanding our footprint in different markets leads to a benefit down the line, not in the immediate future. That’s why Stony Brook is intriguing. NYC market for the MAC? Worked out well for the Big Ten and Rutgers. For basketball specifically I’d think that could be a selling point. I know it’s Long Island and not downtown NYC, but we can’t be picky. This makes more sense than "UMass and WKU are good to add because they can defeat you on their way to winning what used to be your conference championship" but having fans of WKU sports realize Ball State exists seems like a heavy price to pay. I should also say that I'm not looking for any 1:1 correlation. I just seriously can't understand why anyone thinks this is a good idea. Bringing eyeballs does have value. If Ohio State and Michigan joined the MAC they'd bring their eyeballs and we'd get to share in their largesse like IU currently does. But when UMass and WKU are most likely in the identical dire financial situation we're in while also most likely bringing only a comparable amount of eyeballs that each member currently already brings, it seems pointless. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 27, 2024 11:15:07 GMT -6
MAC leaders are convinced the MAC "model" including FBS is sound. Once you go there maybe in that universe this makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by kylebsu on Feb 27, 2024 11:59:06 GMT -6
I think quite a bit looking specificly at Football and Basketball. Football: Only 3 losing seasons the past 10 years. So you're pulling in a G5 program that should compete at the top of the league right away and would boost the overall league strength. They're a team that could be in the conversion for a G5 playoff spot or can help make your case if you beat them. It also weakens CUSA by taking them down to 8 members which can reduce competition for a G5 playoff spot. Setting aside the argument that 7 winning seasons in 10 years equals a good program. Why would I want to bring in a new conference member who immediately competes for championships? How is my life improved by UMass playing in the MAC championship? Also what benefit is received by boosting overall league strength? How does it help us for UMass to "be in the conversation" for a playoff spot? Assuming UMass gets in the playoffs, how much actual money does that put in our pockets? I remember someone on the MAC board before the 2020 MAC championship game saying that even BSU fans should be rooting for Buffalo because it strengthened the MAC's argument for something. As if BSU losing that game would have been justified by the righteous indignation we would have received when Buffalo didn't get whatever that guy thought they'd have a stronger argument for. This seems a lot like that. Basketball: They've been at or near the top of CUSA pretty consistently in recent years and are 144 in Ken Pom right now which would put them in line with Toledo. So again you have a program who would likely be able to compete at the top and improve the league a bit overall. What does that improve? How does giving UMass the MAC's auto bid make any of our lives better? From there maybe you try to pull over 2 solid MVC schools from a pool of say NDSU, SDSU, Ill St, IN St, or SIU, you have a shot of pulling in some programs that are performing better than most of the MAC in basketball right now and could compete and are spending around what most MAC schools spend on football. Why would we want to bring in a bunch of schools performing better than we are? In the case of both football and basketball who you play, who you beat, and the preceived strength of your conference and schedule matter in determining your access to play for a championship. Bringing in competitive programs aids that. The likelihood the MAC stays at 13 members is pretty low. If you're going to add more schools go after the best you can get to try and raise your overall profile. On a basketball front I think the mindset isn't let's give UMass our auto bid, it's who can we bring in to push the conversation around the MAC being worthy of multiple bids. For football it isn't can WKU be a possible playoff team, its can WKU who has seen some success in the current CFB landscape, help keep the MAC in the conversation by playing more quality teams in conference? As a BSU fan, with how things are right now, yes adding UMass makes things harder for basketball and if they go after WKU it likely makes football and basketball harder for us. Let's say we get our shit together in both sports yhough and those programs perform at the top and we can pick up quality wins, it improves our resume. With how subjective college sports can get, that matters. From a fan perspective it could also mean a higher quality product and produce more meaningful and exciting games if you're bringing in competitive teams over more bottom feeders. Would adding WKU change out station over night? Likely not, but they could improve the conference as a whole and keep us in the conversation. If nothing else the MAC has been sitting on their hands and declining for at least decade, so maybe this wakes us and other programs up to the potential of new blood coming in and kicking our ass. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 27, 2024 12:36:21 GMT -6
Kyle, we are not going to be a two bid conference until we have two teams in the top 30 or 40. Not a lock then.
We are not close to that. With NIL disparity, and trying to maintain FBS, the decline isn't reversed by adding more low budget similar schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by cardsfan606 on Feb 27, 2024 12:54:48 GMT -6
western Kentucky is where the MAC hits a home run, then by hopefully that pulls middle Tennessee with them. Then we’re in a position to get picky for the 16th team. Then we have a chance to compete with MW and SB again Honest question, not trying to be combative: how is WKU a home run? What does it improve? name any other established FBS school that geographically makes sense, that we could get right now. |
|
|
|
Post by cardsfan606 on Feb 27, 2024 12:56:50 GMT -6
WKU has developed into a top tier G5 program in football. They have always had a good basketball program that would be upper tier MAC. What exactly does that improve though? They would dominate the MAC in both FB and basketball. That seems like an argument against bringing them in. First, if we bring in a random outside school that immediately dominates the entire conference, that supports the argument that our conference sucks. Second, they will be a permanent roadblock to BSU winning. All I really care about is BSU winning. Indiana State and Illinois, with the addition of WKU and UMass would greatly enhance our basketball status. To what end? BSU being at the bottom of a better conference doesn't give me much solace. Would love to see that. The MAC has been moving backwards in both BB and FB this past decade! Bringing in non-MAC schools that are better than us isn't really moving the MAC forward though. If we just bring in a bunch of better teams and all the existing teams still suck, we're just giving those teams what would have otherwise been our auto-bid. if you’re against adding other good schools because they’re going to be better than us and beat us, then that’s a really bad look for you |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 27, 2024 12:57:40 GMT -6
Honest question, not trying to be combative: how is WKU a home run? What does it improve? name any other established FBS school that geographically makes sense, has FBS football, that we could get right now. THAT is true. Doesn't make it good idea to go that way is the point. |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Feb 27, 2024 13:03:10 GMT -6
Honest question, not trying to be combative: how is WKU a home run? What does it improve? name any other established FBS school that geographically makes sense, has FBS football, that we could get right now. Why expand at all? |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Feb 27, 2024 13:05:07 GMT -6
What exactly does that improve though? That seems like an argument against bringing them in. First, if we bring in a random outside school that immediately dominates the entire conference, that supports the argument that our conference sucks. Second, they will be a permanent roadblock to BSU winning. All I really care about is BSU winning. To what end? BSU being at the bottom of a better conference doesn't give me much solace. Bringing in non-MAC schools that are better than us isn't really moving the MAC forward though. If we just bring in a bunch of better teams and all the existing teams still suck, we're just giving those teams what would have otherwise been our auto-bid. if you’re against adding other good schools because they’re going to be better than us and beat us, then that’s a really bad look for you I'm against adding other good schools because they're going to be better than us and beat us and offer us no benefits in return. I'd join the B10 and take our regular ass whoopings from OSU and Michigan in exchange for the money and benefits you get from being a middling B10 team. If UMass and WKU were bringing those benefits I'd be much more open to it. I've not heard a single argument that offers some realistic benefit from this. |
|
