MAC vs. C-USA

[GP1]

There's just something about trying to compete @ the highest level.

There is a difference in "trying" to compete and the actual ability to compete week in and week out. The further I got away from the MAC, the more I realized how unrealistic it is to believe the league can compete every week at the highest level. There will always be cases when MAC schools beat BCS schools. I would argue that many of those BCS schools wouldn't make the top 40 of my list. The year we beat NC State, I think they finished the season with only 3 or 4 wins. I'd have to go back and look at my original post, but I don't think NC State was in the top 40.

It's not about a super difficult schedule made up of the top teams.... that's the NFL!

You're right. It isn't about that. It's about competition. The current state of college football does not allow teams within one division to realistically compete against one another. The separation has to be made to increase competition.

[xu9697]

http://j-darin-darst.blogs.cbssports.com/m...overlist_footer

Lots to chew on there, including:

"Forget adding anybody from the MAC and WAC, so the only choices left are from the Sun Belt."

I don't really think he is right on many things. But this is what you are going to see= lots of people writing articles about what they think will or what they think should happen.

I have said for a long time that Army and Navy makes sense. And, in general, I agree with GP1 that whoever joins should be "all in". But, again, there are just so many ways this can go. And, again, we have to do everything in our power (we being UA) to improve the teams, the faclities, the school, etc. to be well positioned to not be left too far behind.

[Wally B]

http://j-darin-darst.blogs.cbssports.com/m...overlist_footer

Lots to chew on there, including:

"Forget adding anybody from the MAC and WAC, so the only choices left are from the Sun Belt."

I don't really think he is right on many things. But this is what you are going to see= lots of people writing articles about what they think will or what they think should happen.

I have said for a long time that Army and Navy makes sense. And, in general, I agree with GP1 that whoever joins should be "all in". But, again, there are just so many ways this can go. And, again, we have to do everything in our power (we being UA) to improve the teams, the faclities, the school, etc. to be well positioned to not be left too far behind.

I believe this article was written by Kit Kat/Airport KC. It has no logic to it, nor does it justify its stance on the MAC especially traditionally stronger programs.

[Wally B]

There's just something about trying to compete @ the highest level.

There is a difference in "trying" to compete and the actual ability to compete week in and week out. The further I got away from the MAC, the more I realized how unrealistic it is to believe the league can compete every week at the highest level. There will always be cases when MAC schools beat BCS schools. I would argue that many of those BCS schools wouldn't make the top 40 of my list. The year we beat NC State, I think they finished the season with only 3 or 4 wins. I'd have to go back and look at my original post, but I don't think NC State was in the top 40.

It's not about a super difficult schedule made up of the top teams.... that's the NFL!

You're right. It isn't about that. It's about competition. The current state of college football does not allow teams within one division to realistically compete against one another. The separation has to be made to increase competition.

How about changing the snate of the game itself to eliminate tactics used by dominant programs to reduce competition?? Limiting teams to a realistic number of scholarships was a good start!

[scottditzen]

Respectfully disagree re: benefits of the MAC.

I think the Akron/Can't rivalry, and the others you listed to a large extent, survive any kind of fracturing of the conference.

As long as we're both D1 programs, Akron (CUSA) vs. Can't (MAC) still is a great football/basketball contest. In fact, the difference in conferences only intensifies the rivalry.

The only thing I would sincerely miss about Akron leaving is the b-ball MAC Tournament at the Q, which is absolutely amazing.

There's just something about trying to compete @ the highest level.

There is a difference in "trying" to compete and the actual ability to compete week in and week out. The further I got away from the MAC, the more I realized how unrealistic it is to believe the league can compete every week at the highest level. There will always be cases when MAC schools beat BCS schools. I would argue that many of those BCS schools wouldn't make the top 40 of my list. The year we beat NC State, I think they finished the season with only 3 or 4 wins. I'd have to go back and look at my original post, but I don't think NC State was in the top 40.

I don't thinks that's the point. Toledo, Miami, Northwestern, Indiana, Vandy who ever you pick, the will never compete week in week-out with the OSU's. It's not about a super difficult schedule made up of the top teams.... that's the NFL! For most programs it's about supporting your alma matter, hometown or in-state/regional team...... or the one with the nicest threads Top teams need the mids and bcs patsies to pad their schedules and make money. If they play a lot of FCS's they look like gits! For the mids it's still about rooting for your team win or lose. If you ever believed Akron was meant to compete w/ the likes tOSU week in week out in fb you were either ignorant or delusional. If your id dictates rooting for a perennial championship contender then move on and start cheering for the bucks on the side. It's OK, we all do it from time to time. Just don't imply that teams should be eliminated from competition due to inequities of the past. Change comes in small steps over long periods of time. Boisie has done a great job of moving up. Syracuse and Washington have done a great job of moving down. Will Akron get its chance?? time will tell, but they will always be my school, my town, my team!!!

As for MAC/CUSA? I voted MAC because i don't see the benefits of CUSA. Akron and the MAC are tied together with strong rivalries. Akron/Can't BG/UT MU/OU etc. I don't see those splitting up in any realignment. While i somewhat avoid these threads i will say a new conference for the Zips is not out of the question as long as it satisfies the following criteria

1) Includes Can't (obvious), Ohio (Ozone, proximity, alumni, recent bb/fb rivalry type games) proximal CUSA teams Marshall (former budding rival and Rbowl bi**h) East Carolina (good program and located NC not TX) and remnant Big East FB members.

2) All-in includes soccer!

Obviously these two are mutually exclusive given the elimination of Cants soccer program. Either way it is all highly doubtfull. Till then the MAC is right for the Zips!

[Spin]

I'm not convinced that the difference in level of competition is that big a problem to split Div 1A into 2 or more sub-divisions.

If you look at other sports with performance disparities, like Formula One racing or Major League baseball, a disadvantaged team (Virgin/Baltimore Orioles) has to play against the richest teams (McLaren and Ferrari/Yankees and Red Sox) day in and day out.

The disparity between a MAC team and a top 40 team may be bigger, BUT they don't HAVE to play tOSC or USC unless they want to ($$$$$). They can play all of their games against schools with the same relative level (conference games) or much worse (non-con games in basketball).

IMHO all that moving down a subdivision would do is attach an even bigger "minor league" stigma to Akron sports, and take away revenue.

To look at it another way, why should the NCAA give Akron a handicap, since it can't build a competitive program? For a school it's size and also bing in a football hotbed, the right person should be able to make this program into something exciting. Akron has 30,000 students, give or take. And that number goes up faster than the parking decks can. Boise State has 18,900. TCU 8,700. Oregon 37,000. Nebraska 22,000.

There's only one reason Akron hasn't been able to follow in their footsteps (or a closer example, Cincinnati). And it has nothing to do with the Top 40 schools being 20 times bigger...

Good discussion.

[Wally B]

Absolutely, having lived next to the UC campus in the late 90's and having a good friend who played safety for them as well, i can tell you that their attendance #'s are a recent phenomenom. They honestly thought the team would fold in the late 60's with the recent addition of the Bengals (Didn't happen, sorry Xavier). Moving up to the Big East helped but it was getting the right coach that led to several amazing years that did the trick. Doing it all w/ I-71 rival Louisville helped too!

[Wally B]

Additional: Lousiville was able to do it in C-USA!

[UA Fan]

but it was getting the right coach that led to several amazing years that did the trick

which had a lot to do with first becoming a BCS school..

[Wally B]

I wont deny that it didn't hurt, but i personally believe it was and is only a small part of their recent success. Again, Louisville did it in C-USA first before moving up, and they have deteriorated since then. So the opposite is true for them. Boisie St. and Utah have recently found success without becoming BCS first. Fresno State was on the radar for awhile too. Honestly, if UC goes back to the basement again, do you really think they will fill Nippert because they are in the Big East??? I highly doubt it!