Merging Conferences?

[lance99]

Going back and reading my own and other members post on tring to fix the Mac. Is the best thing to do is to blow the whole thing up and start over? Meaning start taking teams and making one super conference? I understand that that are issues with this including, but not limited to:-Travel cost and time-Do you take some sports or all sports-SOS concerns-Charther members of other conferences wanting to leave, or wanting to have their rival game every year-How many teams and who-Getting post season selections(i.e. BCS games)-money sharing between schoolsanyone with ideas?

[GP1]

If the product is competition, improve the product by improving the competition. The MAC should begin to look at contraction and not expansion. "Growth" has not been good for the MAC. The more it grows, the worse it gets. I think the idea of adding more bad teams to an already bad conference would not help in the least. Generating a highly competitive atmosphere within the conference should be the goal of the next MAC president, not resume "building" "growth". Super conferences just generate more games against more teams, but not necessarily more/better competition. I'm talking about the kind of competition where the participants are very familiar with each other and FIERCE competition takes place between the participants each time they play.Keep the conference isolated to the teams in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana. Temple, Buffalo and NIU would be out. No football only. I'd hate to see Buffalo go, but tough business decisions have to be made all the time. I don't know what value Temple and NIU bring to the MAC at this point. This would leave the conference with 10 teams. Every team would have to play nine conference games meaning everyone plays everyone. Alternate home and away games yearly. At the end of the year, the team with the best MAC record is the champion. Tie breakers would have to be established, but that is normal. The Big Ten and PAC10 crown their champions in a similar way. If it is good enough for them, it should be good enough for us.The MAC should require for the remaining three games:1. One BCS school. Everyone needs a pay day.2. One non-BCS, D-1A school.3. Each school gets to select their own team. I would recommend a 1-AA team like the BCS schools do so we can get to 6 wins faster. I used to hate this idea, but it seems to be the thing to do to get to six wins for a lot of teams. In basketball, an 18 game MAC schedule would be played (we play 16 MAC games right now) with every team playing a home and away game against everyone else. At the end of the year they could still have the tournament in Cleveland. The familiarity generated by this type of schedule would make for some great competition in the tournament.Remember, competition is at the core of what the MAC is selling. Improve the competition and improve the product. Improve the product and you generate interest. Improve the product and you have something more people will be willing to pay to go see because there is interest. An improved product will keep them coming back.

[Zipmeister]

We could accomplish several objectives if we merge with the BIG 10. Let's get right on that.

[ziptrumpet87]

We could accomplish several objectives if we merge with the BIG 10. Let's get right on that.

Or the Big East.

[ZachTheZip]

The MAC's problem is that it's too competitive. Look around at other conferences that are considered successful in either basketball or football. They have a consistent group of two or three top teams that compete on a national level, a group of middle teams that sometimes compete for a conference title, and then some cupcakes. What I'm saying is that they have a structure. The MAC really doesn't have a well-defined structure like that.The MAC needs to have an identity. They need two or three teams that people think of when they hear the name "MAC". Merging with another conference doesn't help, adding more cupcakes doesn't help, and removing teams doesn't help. What needs to happen is for a couple of teams to step up and dominate this crappy conference. Akron is in a position to begin doing just that, but we can't let it fade after two or three years. Consistency goes a long way towards credibility.Once that is established, the MAC needs to focus on showcasing its top teams. Right now, our ESPN contract in football shows all teams about equally. Same goes for basketball. You don't see other conferences parading around their last place teams on national television. It creates a bad image.

[GP1]

The MAC's problem is that it's too competitive. Look around at other conferences that are considered successful in either basketball or football. They have a consistent group of two or three top teams that compete on a national level, a group of middle teams that sometimes compete for a conference title, and then some cupcakes. What I'm saying is that they have a structure. The MAC really doesn't have a well-defined structure like that.

The MAC will never have a team that competes for a national championship.The MAC is considered successful in neither football nor basketball. The league has brought in misfits in the past like Central Florida, Buffalo and Temple. Central leaving was a good thing. Replacing them with Temple was a bad thing. I would argue that even NIU is a misfit for the league at this point.Having a league that has the same teams at the top, the same teams in the middle and the same teams at the bottom evey year is terrible for a league. The Big Ten is as bad as it is right now because they have this structure year in and year out.I'm not certain the MAC doesn't have an identity. Identitiy means that something indentifys what you are. For example, a female kangaroo can be identified by a pouch. The identitiy of the mac is that it is a league full of a bunch of schools that underfund their athletics, reside in states that are obsessed with the BCS schools in those states, have little community/alumni support and are ignored by the NCAA (the list could go on, but I'm going to 5:30 mass). The league has been around since 1946. It is just what it is and 60+ years have not changed it. I could care less if it changes. I only want Akron to be the best team in a highly competitive conference. More teams with the same identitiy will not change the league. Fewer teams will create more rivals, more "dislike" for each other and more interest.

[UAZipster0305]

The MAC's problem is that it's too competitive. Look around at other conferences that are considered successful in either basketball or football. They have a consistent group of two or three top teams that compete on a national level, a group of middle teams that sometimes compete for a conference title, and then some cupcakes. What I'm saying is that they have a structure. The MAC really doesn't have a well-defined structure like that.

The MAC will never have a team that competes for a national championship.Replacing them with Temple was a bad thing. I would argue that even NIU is a misfit for the league at this point.

I think adding Temple would have been a good thing provided they joined as a full member.Similarly, I like having NIU especially if it means having parity and adding Southern Illinois as a full member in the coming years (with them advancing their football program to I-A).I don't even know what conference Gonzaga is in or what other schools are members. They have made it to the national level in spite of their conference and so can UA. We already have in soccer and the pieces are in place for other programs to begin doing so as well.

[ksu sucks]

I could care less if it changes. I only want Akron to be the best team

I don't even know what conference Gonzaga is in or what other schools are members. They have made it to the national level in spite of their conference and so can UA. We already have in soccer and the pieces are in place for other programs to begin doing so as well.

Exactly. I know it's fun to think about conference realignments, merges, etc. But Akron should worry about Akron and not the conference we're in. We can only blame the conference so much. We have the resources we need to dominate the MAC, so now we just need a coach and players who will use it(and I'm not saying we don't already). Besides, if we really need a new conference to truly take this program somewhere, just look at Marshall(I know its been said here before). Dominate the conference for a few years, and the C-USA will be a-calling for that brand new stadium. And if they don't want us, who cares? I just want to see some bowl wins!

[lance99]

The MAC's problem is that it's too competitive. Look around at other conferences that are considered successful in either basketball or football. They have a consistent group of two or three top teams that compete on a national level, a group of middle teams that sometimes compete for a conference title, and then some cupcakes. What I'm saying is that they have a structure. The MAC really doesn't have a well-defined structure like that.

The MAC will never have a team that competes for a national championship.The MAC is considered successful in neither football nor basketball. The league has brought in misfits in the past like Central Florida, Buffalo and Temple. Central leaving was a good thing. Replacing them with Temple was a bad thing. I would argue that even NIU is a misfit for the league at this point.Having a league that has the same teams at the top, the same teams in the middle and the same teams at the bottom evey year is terrible for a league. The Big Ten is as bad as it is right now because they have this structure year in and year out.I'm not certain the MAC doesn't have an identity. Identitiy means that something indentifys what you are. For example, a female kangaroo can be identified by a pouch. The identitiy of the mac is that it is a league full of a bunch of schools that underfund their athletics, reside in states that are obsessed with the BCS schools in those states, have little community/alumni support and are ignored by the NCAA (the list could go on, but I'm going to 5:30 mass). The league has been around since 1946. It is just what it is and 60+ years have not changed it. I could care less if it changes. I only want Akron to be the best team in a highly competitive conference. More teams with the same identitiy will not change the league. Fewer teams will create more rivals, more "dislike" for each other and more interest.

Contraction crossed my mind when I was writing the orginal post, but that is not the way to go only because the NCAA will put the entire conference to a lower level(1-AA, or whatever it's called now). You almost have to add teams. I am not saing add teams for the sake of adding teams. If a meger happens between conferences, take the upper tier schools and tell the bottom feeder teams to get lost. I want Akron to be the best in a STRONG CONFERENCE, not one where the BCS schools think of Akron, or other schools in the MAC as easy wins.

[xu9697]

Eventually, when the Big East blows it up, there will be a ton of moving and shaking.Thinking only football..8 BE teams13 MAC teams12 Conference USA teams33 teams total.To have 3, 12 team conferences that play football..we need 3 teams. Army & Navy, IMHO, would be excellent additions to the MAC.If damn ND would jump in this scenario (and go to the Big East!!), it would make it so easy. They would join the BE along with Memphis, UCF and Temple. You could make arguments for others (Miami, Marshall, Akron..yes, there is an argument there, etc.), but these 3 make a lot of sense for different reasons.CUSA would need 2 teams from the MAC. Let's just say, Northern Illinois and Ball State. MAC is left with the 3 directional Michigan schools, 6 Ohio schools, and 3 Eastern schools in Buffalo, Army and Navy. Personally, I like the look of this MAC.WestCMUWMUEMUBGToledoMiamiEastAkronCan't StateOhioBuffaloArmyNavyBack down to 12 teams, more of an "Eastern pull" overall.Now, since ND will not join the BE, this scenario will not happen. But hey, it's fun to think about.

[Zipmeister]

Going back and reading my own and other members post on trying to fix the Mac., I have decided we should not merge with the Big 10, we should merge with the SEC. My apologies to all who have already spent time working on making my previous suggestion come true. Please get on this idea right away.

[GP1]

The MAC's problem is that it's too competitive. Look around at other conferences that are considered successful in either basketball or football. They have a consistent group of two or three top teams that compete on a national level, a group of middle teams that sometimes compete for a conference title, and then some cupcakes. What I'm saying is that they have a structure. The MAC really doesn't have a well-defined structure like that.

The MAC will never have a team that competes for a national championship.The MAC is considered successful in neither football nor basketball. The league has brought in misfits in the past like Central Florida, Buffalo and Temple. Central leaving was a good thing. Replacing them with Temple was a bad thing. I would argue that even NIU is a misfit for the league at this point.Having a league that has the same teams at the top, the same teams in the middle and the same teams at the bottom evey year is terrible for a league. The Big Ten is as bad as it is right now because they have this structure year in and year out.I'm not certain the MAC doesn't have an identity. Identitiy means that something indentifys what you are. For example, a female kangaroo can be identified by a pouch. The identitiy of the mac is that it is a league full of a bunch of schools that underfund their athletics, reside in states that are obsessed with the BCS schools in those states, have little community/alumni support and are ignored by the NCAA (the list could go on, but I'm going to 5:30 mass). The league has been around since 1946. It is just what it is and 60+ years have not changed it. I could care less if it changes. I only want Akron to be the best team in a highly competitive conference. More teams with the same identitiy will not change the league. Fewer teams will create more rivals, more "dislike" for each other and more interest.

Contraction crossed my mind when I was writing the orginal post, but that is not the way to go only because the NCAA will put the entire conference to a lower level(1-AA, or whatever it's called now).

The NCAA can not do this. It is up to each conference which level it belongs to and the conference requires each member to be at that level.The Big East is not going to do anything different than what it is doing right now. That league is primarily a basketball league and secondly a football league. As long as Notre Dame stays in for basketball they will be happy. Adding Central Florida, etc. does not improve that league. You don't improve your league by bringing bad teams into the league.I'll give another example. I once worked for a company that manufactured building products and sold them to contractors as a system. We expanded our sales by contracting the number of contractors eligible to issue a warranty with our products. In that industry, we expanded perceived value in our product by elimating rum dums who were not good installers of the systems. It was very successful. More was not better. Adding contractors every year was sucking the value of the company down the drain in many, many ways. The MAC has not improved itself by adding bad teams and reducing the perceived value of the competition. Contraction is the real key. The new MAC president will not allow it because it will not look good on a resume and ADs will not vote for it because they worry about offending anyone that might be able to help them get another job at a bigger school. When those two motivations are the reason for "growing" the league, it is the wrong thing to do.I can't think of a single confernce that has been helped by becoming larger and having a conference championship at the end of the season. The SEC? The Big 12? These conferences would be great conferences without a championship game. The PAC10 has no championship game and it is just as good of a conference as the Big 12 and SEC. The quality of a league is not measured by one championship game at the end of the year. It is measured by the quality of the competition throughout the season. These three conferences have great competition all year long. Championship games don't matter. Larger conferences don't matter.

[RootforRoo44]

We could accomplish several objectives if we merge with the BIG 10. Let's get right on that.

Or the Big East.

it would be the "HUGE EAST" becasue there would be 35% of college basketball in one conference.

[lance99]

The MAC's problem is that it's too competitive. Look around at other conferences that are considered successful in either basketball or football. They have a consistent group of two or three top teams that compete on a national level, a group of middle teams that sometimes compete for a conference title, and then some cupcakes. What I'm saying is that they have a structure. The MAC really doesn't have a well-defined structure like that.

The MAC will never have a team that competes for a national championship.The MAC is considered successful in neither football nor basketball. The league has brought in misfits in the past like Central Florida, Buffalo and Temple. Central leaving was a good thing. Replacing them with Temple was a bad thing. I would argue that even NIU is a misfit for the league at this point.Having a league that has the same teams at the top, the same teams in the middle and the same teams at the bottom evey year is terrible for a league. The Big Ten is as bad as it is right now because they have this structure year in and year out.I'm not certain the MAC doesn't have an identity. Identitiy means that something indentifys what you are. For example, a female kangaroo can be identified by a pouch. The identitiy of the mac is that it is a league full of a bunch of schools that underfund their athletics, reside in states that are obsessed with the BCS schools in those states, have little community/alumni support and are ignored by the NCAA (the list could go on, but I'm going to 5:30 mass). The league has been around since 1946. It is just what it is and 60+ years have not changed it. I could care less if it changes. I only want Akron to be the best team in a highly competitive conference. More teams with the same identitiy will not change the league. Fewer teams will create more rivals, more "dislike" for each other and more interest.

Contraction crossed my mind when I was writing the orginal post, but that is not the way to go only because the NCAA will put the entire conference to a lower level(1-AA, or whatever it's called now).

The NCAA can not do this. It is up to each conference which level it belongs to and the conference requires each member to be at that level.The Big East is not going to do anything different than what it is doing right now. That league is primarily a basketball league and secondly a football league. As long as Notre Dame stays in for basketball they will be happy. Adding Central Florida, etc. does not improve that league. You don't improve your league by bringing bad teams into the league.I'll give another example. I once worked for a company that manufactured building products and sold them to contractors as a system. We expanded our sales by contracting the number of contractors eligible to issue a warranty with our products. In that industry, we expanded perceived value in our product by elimating rum dums who were not good installers of the systems. It was very successful. More was not better. Adding contractors every year was sucking the value of the company down the drain in many, many ways. The MAC has not improved itself by adding bad teams and reducing the perceived value of the competition. Contraction is the real key. The new MAC president will not allow it because it will not look good on a resume and ADs will not vote for it because they worry about offending anyone that might be able to help them get another job at a bigger school. When those two motivations are the reason for "growing" the league, it is the wrong thing to do.I can't think of a single confernce that has been helped by becoming larger and having a conference championship at the end of the season. The SEC? The Big 12? These conferences would be great conferences without a championship game. The PAC10 has no championship game and it is just as good of a conference as the Big 12 and SEC. The quality of a league is not measured by one championship game at the end of the year. It is measured by the quality of the competition throughout the season. These three conferences have great competition all year long. Championship games don't matter. Larger conferences don't matter.

The big 12 actually became better being larger(the Big 8 and the Southwest Conference Merging). However they do have some stiffs in their conference(i.e. Balyor). If you do it right, it can be better being larger

[johnnyzip84]

While I agree the next MAC commisioner would probably attempt to squelch any notion of contraction, that would not necessarily prevent it from occuring (although perhaps by a slightly different means). When the WAC had grown to a sprawling, illogical, 16-team monster (under former MAC commisioner Karl Benson if I recall correctly), the traditional WAC teams effectively "contracted" by forming the Mountain West Conference in 1999. Giving up the MAC championship game in football is the only negative I personally see if something like this were to occur with the MAC. There are some good arguments for a stronger, 8 or 10-team league; although I'll admit that picking the strongest 8 from an overall standpoint is quite difficult. The only school that seems a sure-fire one to leave behind is EMU. And this brings be to another point. The Michigan schools have always appeard to be sensitive to the MAC becoming too heavily biased towards Ohio. I personally think this is a big reason why YSU has found getting in to be difficult (although I'm sure there are those who feel UA and Can't State have blocked this in the past, and perhaps they have.....I don't know). Booting EMU might be tough to sell to either CMU or WMU. So this got me to thinking of perhaps a bizarre, but possibly workable alternative.Let CMU, EMU, WMU all go. While we're at it, Ball St. and NIU...... it's been nice knowing ya. Add (I'll get flak for this) YSU. Keep Buffalo (they're just beginning to show their promise). If Temple wants to join in all sports, let 'em. If this happens, perhaps Marshall might be encouraged to join. If not Marshall, perhaps Cleveland St., if and when it has a viable football program, might be a possibilty.In summary:AkronCan'tOhioMiami Toledo -----> 8 charter members of Vanguard ConferenceBGSUYSUBuffaloTempleCleveland St. or Marshall ------> later possible additionsI know, there are a few holes in this possible plan. Would U@B and Temple (or Marshall) feel comfortable in an Ohio-dominated league? Would UT and BGSU want to leave the Michigan schools? No plan is perfect. I just wanted to throw out one for kicks. Feel free to hammer it.

[Blue & Gold]

I wouldn't want an almost exclusively Ohio-based league. I think there are too many teams in the MAC from Ohio as it is. I think that might be one reason the MAC suffers with such a low image locally; Ohio isn't the population base it once was & most people, for some reason, think that if you sat the bench in high school you could still start at a MAC school. The sheer ignorance of MAC sports is perplexing to me. (I actually know a guy who thinks Mount Union is so good because the MAC is lousy! I.e., he thinks Mount is getting MAC-caliber football players. This is ignorance to the extreme. Even if Mount played lowly EMU, Mount's entire team would be in the hospital emergency room before halftime.)Now, I say drop EMU, BGSU and Can't (even though it pains me to include Can't because I love the rivalry.)EMU because they are 10 minutes from Ann Harbor and thus will likely never amount to anything athletically.BGSU because they're 30 minutes from Toledo, out in the middle of nowhere, and they're, well, BGSU. Nobody in the U.S. knows or cares where BG is.Can't because they're 10 minutes from Akron.That leaves:1. Akron (NE Ohio)2. Ohio (SE Ohio)3. Miami (SW Ohio)4. Toledo (NW Ohio) - and that makes plenty of schools from a single state - Ohio ain't Texas anymore5. Buffalo6. Temple7. CMU8. WMU9. N. Illinois10. Ball StateDecent conference. Cut some dead weight.

[Zipmeister]

While I agree the next MAC commisioner would probably attempt to squelch any notion of contraction, that would not necessarily prevent it from occuring (although perhaps by a slightly different means). When the WAC had grown to a sprawling, illogical, 16-team monster (under former MAC commisioner Karl Benson if I recall correctly), the traditional WAC teams effectively "contracted" by forming the Mountain West Conference in 1999. Giving up the MAC championship game in football is the only negative I personally see if something like this were to occur with the MAC. There are some good arguments for a stronger, 8 or 10-team league; although I'll admit that picking the strongest 8 from an overall standpoint is quite difficult. The only school that seems a sure-fire one to leave behind is EMU. And this brings be to another point. The Michigan schools have always appeard to be sensitive to the MAC becoming too heavily biased towards Ohio. I personally think this is a big reason why YSU has found getting in to be difficult (although I'm sure there are those who feel UA and Can't State have blocked this in the past, and perhaps they have.....I don't know). Booting EMU might be tough to sell to either CMU or WMU. So this got me to thinking of perhaps a bizarre, but possibly workable alternative.Let CMU, EMU, WMU all go. While we're at it, Ball St. and NIU...... it's been nice knowing ya. Add (I'll get flak for this) YSU. Keep Buffalo (they're just beginning to show their promise). If Temple wants to join in all sports, let 'em. If this happens, perhaps Marshall might be encouraged to join. If not Marshall, perhaps Cleveland St., if and when it has a viable football program, might be a possibilty.In summary:AkronCan'tOhioMiami Toledo -----> 8 charter members of Vanguard ConferenceBGSUYSUBuffaloTempleCleveland St. or Marshall ------> later possible additionsI know, there are a few holes in this possible plan. Would U@B and Temple (or Marshall) feel comfortable in an Ohio-dominated league? Would UT and BGSU want to leave the Michigan schools? No plan is perfect. I just wanted to throw out one for kicks. Feel free to hammer it.

There are a few holes in a sieve. However, the good news is your plan has been nominated for the Black Hole in Football Space Award.

[johnnyzip84]

Blue & Gold you've made a compelling argument. I like the look of that league, and you have a point about how the MAC's local perception is partly rooted in the Ohio school bias.Zipmeister, you're just COLD but I am Zip Fan enough to admit that you're right.At least give me the point that MAC members who might want contraction, can certainly take matters into their own hands. If it comes to this can we still call it the Vanguard Conference? Little MAC?

[RACER]

the one thing the mac should do is make temple commit to all sports, or out of the mac.i would prefer to have them out of the mac.we would have 12 teams,and make schedules alott better.temple has done nothing for the mac.i would like to have home/home b-ball games.that would only be 22 games,and make things alott more balanced.you could play every team in your division plus half the other division on f-ball.it would not be perfect ,but alott better than the mess we have now.i have no idea how you can have divsional play, and not play everyone in your division? the way the mac is with 13 teams is beyond stupidity.

[akronad]

I don't know what the MAC wa sthinking when they provisionally allow Temple to join for football. Whether you are expanding or contracting, you need to llok at what a school is/is notbringing to the league. What has Temple done for the MAC? I think they either need to join as fullfledged memeber or find another league.

[ksu sucks]

I don't know what the MAC wa sthinking when they provisionally allow Temple to join for football. Whether you are expanding or contracting, you need to llok at what a school is/is notbringing to the league. What has Temple done for the MAC? I think they either need to join as fullfledged memeber or find another league.

Yeah, I agree. I could see admitting Temple as a full member for their hoops, but for football? really? That's why Temple fans think their so much better than the rest of the conference. Seriously, they had to be dying laughing when they found out the MAC would allow them in for football alone.

[lance99]

We did Temple a favor by adding them .They would have been a independent otherwise, however, the whole conferences SOS went down by just having them If the MAC launches WMU, CMU, EMU and Temple, now the MAC is a fourth-tier conference and would have to add schools and expand. They bring nothing to the table.Mabye we could merge with C-USA(minus a few teams) or disband the conference and merge with the Big Ten and make two 8 division league(I am willing to put money on the Big Ten want to get rid of some teams, but tradition won't let them)with C-USA:AkronCan'tBGMiamiOhioBall StateECUSMUTulsaSouthern MissMemphisRiceWith Big Ten:AkronCan'tBGMiamiOhioBall StateOhio StateMichiganPenn StateIowaIndianaMichigan Statejust putting idea out there and you can always add teams

[GP1]

We did Temple a favor by adding them .They would have been a independent otherwise, however, the whole conferences SOS went down by just having them If the MAC launches WMU, CMU, EMU and Temple, now the MAC is a fourth-tier conference and would have to add schools and expand. They bring nothing to the table.Mabye we could merge with C-USA(minus a few teams) or disband the conference and merge with the Big Ten and make two 8 division league(I am willing to put money on the Big Ten want to get rid of some teams, but tradition won't let them)with C-USA:AkronCan'tBGMiamiOhioBall StateECUSMUTulsaSouthern MissMemphisRiceWith Big Ten:AkronCan'tBGMiamiOhioBall StateOhio StateMichiganPenn StateIowaIndianaMichigan Statejust putting idea out there and you can always add teams

Below is a list of teams the Big Ten would want to get rid of and replace with a MAC school:That concludes the list.Belolw is a list of MAC schools the Big Ten would consider adding for more than 10 seconds:That concludes the list.Why get rid of some garbage only to add even worse smelling garbage?

[xu9697]

Ohio is still in the top 10 in state population (I believe they are 7th). So I don't really know if 6 teams from Ohio is an issue. Bringing in Navy & Army would be huge in that it would continue to push the MAC into the East. Mixing Ohio with Eastern population would continue to give exposure to the league in that region of the country. Not to mention the prestige of bringing these 2 schools in. And, it would give us more leverage in battling BE schools for players.C-USA is so spread out it has no brand identity. If & when the BE blows it up, you will see a lot of adjustments in BE, C-USA and MAC (along with A-10 from the basketball/other sports side). And for those that think the BE will not break up, look at a program like Depaul= they have too proud of a basketball tradition to go 1-15 or whatever they finished in the BE. It is tough for a program like theirs to compete (though Marquette has done it).

[Blue & Gold]

Ohio is still in the top 10 in state population (I believe they are 7th). So I don't really know if 6 teams from Ohio is an issue. Bringing in Navy & Army would be huge in that it would continue to push the MAC into the East. Mixing Ohio with Eastern population would continue to give exposure to the league in that region of the country. Not to mention the prestige of bringing these 2 schools in. And, it would give us more leverage in battling BE schools for players.C-USA is so spread out it has no brand identity. If & when the BE blows it up, you will see a lot of adjustments in BE, C-USA and MAC (along with A-10 from the basketball/other sports side). And for those that think the BE will not break up, look at a program like Depaul= they have too proud of a basketball tradition to go 1-15 or whatever they finished in the BE. It is tough for a program like theirs to compete (though Marquette has done it).

I really like the idea of bringing in Army and Navy. They are tradition-rich programs and would extend our reach further into the east - along with Buffalo and Temple. And I agree about C-USA. I just think it's a very uninteresting conference. I would much prefer to remain in the MAC (and retain our rivalries with Ohio, Miami & Can't) than jump to the bland C-USA.