UA1996MAENG

I didn't include BGSU. BG and Kent are doing well. The urban factor is important, but then how do we account for University of Cincinnati gaining significant enrollment? Different cities have different pluses and minuses, but the crime and decay in some cities really does hurt the local universities.

I heard the same thing. My son lives in the Honors Complex. That's the paradox about UA - the dormatory space is filled but enrollment is down.

The trend is that universities in a small-town setting like Kent, Bowling Green and others are indeed holding on to students and in some cases increasing their enrollment. Urban centers like Akron and Toledo (but not Cincinnati) are losing students. Talking to parents in my town (Columbus suburbs) many are simply afraid of the crime in Akron and the perception that it is not safe. My son is a freshman at UA; he liked the university and UA was very nice and supportive in the recruiting process. Out of his graduating class of almost 450 kids, he is the only one to enroll at UA. UA recruiting has to go deeper into these outerbelt central Ohio school districts where there are many college-viable students and quite a bit of hesitancy to go to Ohio State due to its size. Also, OSU is so big now and selective that a kid like mine with a good ACT score and a 3.6 GPA could not get onto main campus for his preferred major. UA and other Ohio universities have to exploit this.

UA carries significant debt and is facing an on-going enrollment decline-stagnation much like Toldeo, Wright State, Ohio, Miami and others. "Winning" in the lanscape of NIL and the Transfer Portal requires money that our university simple does not have. Significant money is never going to come from our affiliation with the MAC. I think the largest share of UA's athletics revenue comes from the 2-3 football games each year with Power 5 teams. Other than that, where's the money coming from to "win"?

As much as I hate to see it and as much as I dislike Greg Schiano, I think Rutgers is an 8-win team in 2024. Knights will be tough.

I wish I could lay out the entire ESPN conspiracy to destroy conferences and hurt the mid-majors, but it's just too big to tackle at my age. The Kennedy assasination is an easier topic. Blaming Wilbon is good enough in my book for the sake of brevity.

The greed system is already in place or we wouldn't be witnessing the destruction of the Pac 12 and the early signs that the SEC and Big10 are aligning to dominate the playoff selection process and seedings to undercut the Big 12 and ACC and eventually demote those conferences into the second tier, at least a large number of those conference members. Within 5 years it'll be wery different and none of those cghanges are good for the G5.

I think YSU cares about those championships and that's enough. To stick with YSU as our subject, YSU really cannot rise any higher. Even if the university had aspirations to move up to D1-A (as we used to call it), the university simply does not have the resources to make that move plus stagnant and decling enrollement ends any hope of that move for many universities. The entire MAC, so-called D-1A, is now at risk of falling even lower than they have ever been due to circumstances that these universities did not create; if the MAC and other G5 conferences were second-tier to the P5 before 2023, now we're a de facto farm system for the Power 4. In this environment, how often do you think a MAC member will make this playoff system that begins this fall? I think the answer is never, but that does not mean I'll not support the Zips within any subdivision they end up in or for any post-season level in which they participate.

" Who?" TV Money + NCAA impotence = who. Money will dicate everything as it already does. I cannot imagine that the universities left out of the big boy playoff (including AP ranked teams) will allow themselves to be left out of the proposed G5 playoff. The NCAA, always a weak and visionless institution, is crumbling as we speak. The "who" will be whatever new governing body or bodies that take over in the power vacuum.

I don't mean they would. That's the problem. Those programs love the revenue but are at the same time not going to every be a part of the playoff system. The Indianas, Purdues, Northwesterns have had a century of Big10 affiliation and riches and never (or once in a generation) competed at the top. So, if the G5 becomes its own subdivison with its own playoff, I can't imagine that those "Power" programs that are left out of thier own playoff wouldn't somehow be put into the second-tier playoff...because TV money. Sad as it is, a 7-5 Purdue team (likey ranked above almost the entire MAC, for example) is a bigger TV draw than a (God willing) 10-4 Akron.

G5 definatley needs to be its own division. However, now all G5 universities want to resign themselves offically to a second tier; some are still convinced they will be the G5 team to make the 12-team field. It's going to be messy for years for the Power 4 (soon to be Power 2) too because of the number of universities who love the media revenue but cannot or will not compete for titles and playoff spots: 70% of the Big 10 will never be in contention. Would those teams drop down to complete with the G5 championship or stay home?

Good luck to us then. There isn't even mid-level TV market in the northeast quadrant of the country that is not already over-staturated with MAC universities. I'd like to see the confernce expand, but what would a Western Kentucky, for exmaple, give the MAC in terms of increased TV revenue? At some point, the MAC has to look at a merger with C-USA, etc.

Sure, the Rutgers-Big Ten comparison is valid. Rutgers seemingly offered a vast new TV market for the Big Ten but, as it turns out, NYC still doesn't care about college football. UMASS might not move the ratings needle much either in the greater Boston area, but on paper it's not a bad addition. It's a chance.

The MAC is the lowest rated G5 conference athletically and financially. Adding a large, nationally respected academic institution in a major TV market is harldy a bad idea. I'm not sure there are many potential members that can bring those qualities to the MAC.

It occurs to me that maybe I'm missing the obvious. Many of these young men who enter the transfer portal have been "pushed out" by the coach, i.e. they've been told that they have no future on the roster? I think I read here in other posts that some of Arth's recruits have been, essentially, shown the door over the last two years.

Just curious. This is not just about the UA transfers in the link. In general, what happens to these portal "dwellers" who have not signed with another university? Do they just hang out in limbo hoping or can they re-commit to their current team, provided the coach wants them back? I scanned a large number of teams. It seems that there are many of these athletes who, as of the end of February, have not found a new home. https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/TransferPortal/?institutionkey=24065&status=uncommitted

It’s quite a problem for UA and the MAC in general. UA-YSU seems like a natural rivalry, but it does not seem that this would move the needle for attendance or money that UA desperately needs. The MAC has always been an afterthought, especially for football. Playing in the shadow of the Big 10 (18) is always going to relegate the conference to the back burner. Successful Toledo only drew about 19,000 at home in 2023. That's about the upper limit of support. It's more than just the big money of the big conferences. The populations of Akron and Youngstown are in decline generally, and enrollment is down or stagnant on both campuses and in most of the MAC. OU, Eastern Michigan, Toledo - all losing students. Sadly, you could fit every active student on all three campuses into their respective stadiums and still have thousands of empty seats. Whether we like it or not, UA and 50-60 current "D-1" programs are going to be "demoted" in the coming years either officially by creation of a new NCAA subdivision or de facto by being exiled further into the wilderness of economic realities. Even the blood money games (a la Ohio State in 2024) will be harder to schedule as the Power 4 (2) expands and monopolizes TV revenue. Those paydays are going to be few and far between in a few years. Then what? Increase student fees on a campus] with fewer than 12,000 undergraduates? Not a solution.

Considering Arth's lack of success at UA, he's fallen ass-backwards into a good job in the NFL. Whether he can do it or not is doubtful. In related UA topics....Over at 11 Warriors the OSU crowd seems to want Moorhead to replace Bill O'Brien, who is headed to Boston College. https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football/2024/02/145346/10-possible-candidates-to-replace-bill-o-brien-as-ohio-state-s-offensive-coordinator#comments

I know you made this comment in December (and I hate OSU), but OSU at the moment seems to be in full control of its destiny in the new landscape of top-tier college football, which is a de facto professional league. OSU always had the tradition and money and now it has integrated NIL and the Transfer Portal into its system. What happened in the bowl game was the result of opt-outs and transfers, which occurred because OSU was not in the playoffs and the bowl was "meaningless". I doubt we will see this kind of horrendous performance by OSU again in the 12-team playoff. UA vs OSU next fall only does one thing - it helps finance the UA athletic program that is deeply in debt. I’m not looking forward to it, and I think we will see across CFB and within Power 5 conferences fewer and fewer compelling games. OSU vs Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers, etc.? Always boring matchups and now it’s going to get worse.

There are no surprises in the list of profitable programs, but these data always lead me to wonder why and how the other Big 10 members like Wisconsin or Indiana, for example, cannot at least break even considering the large conference payout each gets. The entire MAC losing money is also no surprise, but it's disheartening because I cannot see this going on forever (enrollment at many MAC universities is dropping or stagnant). It's going to lead to more and more program cuts and this will weaken the conference overall from its already precarious position. Soccer is already gone as a MAC sport, etc. Surely more cuts are coming.

At this point, I don't know if this possibility upsets me or gives me hope. On one hand, UA needs stability and the time to develop under Moorhead. On the other hand, Moorhead's 4-20 record is terrible. I'm just a fan - no college football experience, but I have yet to see any of Moorhead's supposed offensive mastery while at UA. I know this was a major rebuild, but the MAC is a landscape in which there usually is not a giant void between the successful programs and the bottom. A good coach can make a big difference in a short time. It seems that given the possibilities and peculiarities of MAC football, UA should be farther ahead than it is by year two. If he leaves, who is the next coach to lead the program? Is Brookhart promoted due to his experience? https://theathletic.com/5219845/2024/01/22/joe-moorhead-akron-nfl-offensive-coordinator/

I am glad he's coming back. My amateur-outsider take is that he'll be able to improve the WR unit. Here's hoping a QB emerges this year.

Maybe I'm late to this topic (I did not see any other mentjuon in the forums - sorry if I missed it), but I saw this mentined yestreday on Footbal Scoop and it looks like his son is already on campus for spring football (at QB).

January 16

That's true, but it could also be true that a high school kid with ability is going to be buried on the depth chart behind older and more experienced transfers (JUCO or Portal) and this in turn prevents him from gaining playing time to hone his skills and prove his worth. Again, I think this is particular, mostly, to struggling, desparate programs.