(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

(07-06-2013 03:40 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

Their record against the MAC has been poor as well....

(07-06-2013 04:36 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 03:40 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

Their record against the MAC has been poor as well....

Its not that bad vs the MAC. This site says Army is 13-17 vs the MAC. It also indicates Army is 14-45 vs CUSA.

http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/reco...y&limit=50

(07-06-2013 05:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 04:36 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 03:40 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

Their record against the MAC has been poor as well....

Its not that bad vs the MAC. This site says Army is 13-17 vs the MAC. It also indicates Army is 14-45 vs CUSA.

http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/reco...y&limit=50

Army doesn't play Ohio, Toledo and NIU out of the MAC.

They play programs like EMU and Buffalo, struggling to go .500 against the bottom MAC tier.

(07-05-2013 11:19 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 11:12 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 10:12 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

There is no official scheduling agreement, but Army already plays 4-5 MAC teams every year for the past 15+ years. The MAC would probably be fine signing something official though. Share bowls (MAC backup when Army not eligible, share TV (CBS Sports), etc...

Yes.

The MAC is already playing Army and it is part of an official scheduling agreement with the league. I don't know if there is any contractual maximums or minimums as much as the MAC will help Army as they request to fill out their schedule and that is why you see some flux in the number of games played against the MAC.

What the MAC could really use is a slot in a bowl game vs. Army, BYU and the AAC for its #1 team. That is the biggest thing missing for the MAC, a quality #1 bowl outside of the CFP structure.

I'd rather not play any bowls vs the weak AAC, it helps them but doesnt really help us. We beat them and its expected, they beat us and it a major upset and headache.

For example in 2012:
Ball State beat South Florida
Toledo beat Cincinnati
4-8 Western Michigan owned UConn for the 2nd straight year.
Everybody in the MAC owns Temple
Kent beat Rutgers

What kind of credit did we get? Nothing, was expected. The only credit we got was beating non-AAC teams like Penn State, Iowa, and Indiana. We should not schedule AAC teams unless it is 2 for 1 where we play twice at MAC stadiums or AAC at neutral sites.

We need to distance the gap between the MAC and them. Let them play the Sun Belt.

Can't wait for ESPN to finish replacing their blog with ours. LOL.

Idk... The last few times Tulsa has played a MAC team, it hasn't turned out too well for any of them.

(07-06-2013 06:48 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 05:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 04:36 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 03:40 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

Their record against the MAC has been poor as well....

Its not that bad vs the MAC. This site says Army is 13-17 vs the MAC. It also indicates Army is 14-45 vs CUSA.

http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/reco...y&limit=50

Army doesn't play Ohio, Toledo and NIU out of the MAC.

They play programs like EMU and Buffalo, struggling to go .500 against the bottom MAC tier.

NIU played Army twice - last year and the year before. NIU won both, though the game @Army was close. I don't really want to play Army regularly, and I don't want to add them football-only. You spend a whole bunch of extra time trying to prepare for their offense specifically, and try not to get injured by all the cut blocking. I'd rather add an FCS school all-sports if we have to add somebody. Also, Army won't help garner any respect in football, their team just isn't good enough to help the MAC.

(07-06-2013 09:50 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 06:48 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 05:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 04:36 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 03:40 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

Their record against the MAC has been poor as well....

Its not that bad vs the MAC. This site says Army is 13-17 vs the MAC. It also indicates Army is 14-45 vs CUSA.

http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/reco...y&limit=50

Army doesn't play Ohio, Toledo and NIU out of the MAC.

They play programs like EMU and Buffalo, struggling to go .500 against the bottom MAC tier.

NIU played Army twice - last year and the year before. NIU won both, though the game @Army was close. I don't really want to play Army regularly, and I don't want to add them football-only. You spend a whole bunch of extra time trying to prepare for their offense specifically, and try not to get injured by all the cut blocking. I'd rather add an FCS school all-sports if we have to add somebody. Also, Army won't help garner any respect in football, their team just isn't good enough to help the MAC.

I'm fine if the MAC wants to start a new bowl with Army and BYU as the participants because of the traveling fan base that Army can engineer for a bowl game. No issue with that at all.

They otherwise are not a great addition to a solid Midwestern football conference. They currently have a 7 game losing streak to the MAC including a loss to a 2-10 Eastern Michigan team. Army would have been a great addition to the MAC in the 80's but in today's era not so much.

(07-05-2013 11:19 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 11:12 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 10:12 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

There is no official scheduling agreement, but Army already plays 4-5 MAC teams every year for the past 15+ years. The MAC would probably be fine signing something official though. Share bowls (MAC backup when Army not eligible, share TV (CBS Sports), etc...

Yes.

The MAC is already playing Army and it is part of an official scheduling agreement with the league. I don't know if there is any contractual maximums or minimums as much as the MAC will help Army as they request to fill out their schedule and that is why you see some flux in the number of games played against the MAC.

What the MAC could really use is a slot in a bowl game vs. Army, BYU and the AAC for its #1 team. That is the biggest thing missing for the MAC, a quality #1 bowl outside of the CFP structure.

I'd rather not play any bowls vs the weak AAC, it helps them but doesnt really help us. We beat them and its expected, they beat us and it a major upset and headache.

For example in 2012:
Ball State beat South Florida
Toledo beat Cincinnati
4-8 Western Michigan owned UConn for the 2nd straight year.
Everybody in the MAC owns Temple
Kent beat Rutgers

What kind of credit did we get? Nothing, was expected. The only credit we got was beating non-AAC teams like Penn State, Iowa, and Indiana. We should not schedule AAC teams unless it is 2 for 1 where we play twice at MAC stadiums or AAC at neutral sites.

We need to distance the gap between the MAC and them. Let them play the Sun Belt.

Can't wait for ESPN to finish replacing their blog with ours. LOL.

UConn has been hampered by a bad coach. Our talent is well above Western Michigan; we had five players drafted this year. But our coach has the amazing ability to turn an 8-4 team (or at least 7-5) into a 5-7 team.

(07-06-2013 03:21 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  Two catches: The American already has 12 for football starting in 2015, and the traditional date of the Army-Navy game makes it hard to count it as part of the standings in a league that has a championship game. UMass and Army can fix the first problem, the second one might be more of an issue.

(07-06-2013 03:40 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

I agree with Charger above, the date of the Army/Navy game makes it impossible to be a conference game. Also Army was in a conference with most of these teams and they did not fair well. I think Army would be much more comfortable in the MAC.

I didn't say there wasn't challenges, I just said they'd probably prefer The American. The conference name is appropriate, Navy is already a member, they'll work around Army's CBS media deal (same as with Navy), and they have what is believed an open ended invite.

I think Army's struggles the last decade and the date of the Army-Navy game are the biggest stumbling blocks, but they aren't impossible.

For scheduling purposes I think Army will have to join a conference, whether they win or lose. Historically, the Army-Navy game was played the Saturday after Thanksgiving, but had been moved to the first Saturday of December, eventually landing on the second Saturday of December to avoid television conflicts with other league championship games. They've changed the date for TV, I'm sure they can shuffle again for their own conference's championship game, as long as their game remains their last regular season contest.

(07-06-2013 11:10 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Championship game in Cleveland.

I think a conference with attendance issues to begin with, should have its games at the site of the best record/highest ranked division champ.

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

Army has 12 games scheduled for 2013 and 2014. They also has 11 games scheduled for 2015 too. They do not have a scheduling problem and neither does ND. As for the MAC - Army has always scheduled 2 - 4 MAC teams without a scheduling agreement and make their own bowl agreements with the Military, Armed Forces, Poinsettia, and Kraft Hunger Bowls. Yes the Military and Kraft Hunger options are going away but they will at least be a back up option in the Military and will just pick up one of the other lower bowls with the Sun Belt or CUSA. They don't need or want a scheduling agreement with the MAC for bowl agreements either. Besides the MAC can't schedule enough bowls for all of their bowl eligible teams to give one up for Army anyway. Also the the MAC will add a teams which they are currently working on before going into a self concocted arrangement like the one above.

(07-07-2013 08:03 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 11:19 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 11:12 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 10:12 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

There is no official scheduling agreement, but Army already plays 4-5 MAC teams every year for the past 15+ years. The MAC would probably be fine signing something official though. Share bowls (MAC backup when Army not eligible, share TV (CBS Sports), etc...

Yes.

The MAC is already playing Army and it is part of an official scheduling agreement with the league. I don't know if there is any contractual maximums or minimums as much as the MAC will help Army as they request to fill out their schedule and that is why you see some flux in the number of games played against the MAC.

What the MAC could really use is a slot in a bowl game vs. Army, BYU and the AAC for its #1 team. That is the biggest thing missing for the MAC, a quality #1 bowl outside of the CFP structure.

I'd rather not play any bowls vs the weak AAC, it helps them but doesnt really help us. We beat them and its expected, they beat us and it a major upset and headache.

For example in 2012:
Ball State beat South Florida
Toledo beat Cincinnati
4-8 Western Michigan owned UConn for the 2nd straight year.
Everybody in the MAC owns Temple
Kent beat Rutgers

What kind of credit did we get? Nothing, was expected. The only credit we got was beating non-AAC teams like Penn State, Iowa, and Indiana. We should not schedule AAC teams unless it is 2 for 1 where we play twice at MAC stadiums or AAC at neutral sites.

We need to distance the gap between the MAC and them. Let them play the Sun Belt.

Can't wait for ESPN to finish replacing their blog with ours. LOL.

UConn has been hampered by a bad coach. Our talent is well above Western Michigan; we had five players drafted this year. But our coach has the amazing ability to turn an 8-4 team (or at least 7-5) into a 5-7 team.

Not so fast my friend......Western Michigan has a higher rated recruiting class than UConn for 2014.

#32 Western Michigan
#110 Connecticut

http://247sports.com/Season/2014-Footbal...amRankings

IMO any speculating based on 2014 recruitiing classes is a bit premature, don't you think? Let's compare classes on signing day and see what we come up with...

(07-05-2013 11:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

Why not just add them as a football only---but let them keep their separate media agreement? They, like Navy, make more than the members of the conference they are joining (because the Army-Navy game alone pays each school 2.5 million). Just let them keep their independent media agreement with CBS.

The MAC would still get 4 Army games added to their media package (all the Army away conference games). Adding Army balances the league, adds a little value to the package----and it doesn't cost the league a dime (the media deal will continue to be split 13 ways as Army would not get a share). For Army, it solves their scheduling problems and cleans up their bowl situation. Their schedule wouldn't change that much as they played quite a few MAC teams anyway.

The MAC would be a good conference for Army to join and it would give the MAC another Eastern team with UMass but if they join a conference it will be the American with NAVY. Their season ending game every year will be a conference game then. Their games with UConn and Temple would be conference games too. The last four games would be reserved for Air Force and then normal teams they usually play like, Duke / Wake Forest, Rice / N. Texas, a MAC, a D-1AA, Vandy, a west coast team (usually a PAC-12 team), and other Sun Belt and CUSA teams. However for the foreseeable future Army has taken the stand to remain independent to schedule some weaker low end teams of conferences outside of its annual academy opponents and a regional D1-AA to try and become bowl eligible.

(07-06-2013 02:55 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  My guess if Army is going to give up it's independence, that it would probably prefer The American, given that Navy is already there and the Army-Navy game as a conference game, would allow the Knights to then use their OOC schedule on other traditional opponents.

This ^^^^^^^^

(07-06-2013 03:21 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  Two catches: The American already has 12 for football starting in 2015, and the traditional date of the Army-Navy game makes it hard to count it as part of the standings in a league that has a championship game. UMass and Army can fix the first problem, the second one might be more of an issue.

One possible method around that might be to have Army and Navy in separate divisions, and treat the game as a non-conference game. There's always the mathematical possibility (1/49) of an Army-Navy championship game preceding the scheduled game in Week 15, but it would be unlikely. Of course that means both Army and Navy are still giving up at least 8 games annually.

The American could also have Army and Navy use their game against each other as one of their 8 or 9 conference games and keep the traditional date for their game, but then that opens up the possibility of one of them going 6-1 in conference play, while a team in their division that beat them but finished 6-2 doesn't play for the conference title.

The Army / Navy would have to go back to rivalry Saturday as the last game of the year. Schedule the game around noon or 1 PM and it would still be a success on National TV as the kick off game on rivalry Saturday.

(07-07-2013 10:15 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

Army has 12 games scheduled for 2013 and 2014. They also has 11 games scheduled for 2015 too. They do not have a scheduling problem and neither does ND. As for the MAC - Army has always scheduled 2 - 4 MAC teams without a scheduling agreement and make their own bowl agreements with the Military, Armed Forces, Poinsettia, and Kraft Hunger Bowls. Yes the Military and Kraft Hunger options are going away but they will at least be a back up option in the Military and will just pick up one of the other lower bowls with the Sun Belt or CUSA. They don't need or want a scheduling agreement with the MAC for bowl agreements either. Besides the MAC can't schedule enough bowls for all of their bowl eligible teams to give one up for Army anyway. Also the the MAC will add a teams which they are currently working on before going into a self concocted arrangement like the one above.

Then why did ND just sign on to play 5 ACC teams a year? Is it because it's becoming increasingly harder to schedule games towards the end of the season?

(07-07-2013 11:15 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-07-2013 10:15 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

Army has 12 games scheduled for 2013 and 2014. They also has 11 games scheduled for 2015 too. They do not have a scheduling problem and neither does ND. As for the MAC - Army has always scheduled 2 - 4 MAC teams without a scheduling agreement and make their own bowl agreements with the Military, Armed Forces, Poinsettia, and Kraft Hunger Bowls. Yes the Military and Kraft Hunger options are going away but they will at least be a back up option in the Military and will just pick up one of the other lower bowls with the Sun Belt or CUSA. They don't need or want a scheduling agreement with the MAC for bowl agreements either. Besides the MAC can't schedule enough bowls for all of their bowl eligible teams to give one up for Army anyway. Also the the MAC will add a teams which they are currently working on before going into a self concocted arrangement like the one above.

Then why did ND just sign on to play 5 ACC teams a year? Is it because it's becoming increasingly harder to schedule games towards the end of the season?

To get out of the BE after Syracuse and Pitt left. They probably knew Rutgers and L'Ville were on their way out the door too and knew the BE was on the verge of collapse. They definitely were probably on the inside with the other Catholic schools as they planned their escape too with C-7 hoping they would come with them too. ND can always get teams to play them any time of the year. Conferences will adjust their schedules to get ND on the schedule. Even the PAC-12 has allowed USC and Stanford to work their schedule around the ND / USC / Stanford games in November. ND has plenty of quality games in November when most conferences kick into their regular conference schedules with a traditional game with Navy, USC, Stanford, and BYU as November opponents, and Texas has been tying to set up an annual Thanksgiving Day game with them since they dropped ATM for leaving the B-12. Finally there is also an opportunity for an occasional traditional Army / ND game that can be played in November at Giants Stadium or Yankee stadium for the Army home game and of course at home in South Bend in the contract to help with scheduling and be viewed Nationally spread out through the years. ND still has their chief goal with the ACC in exchange for BE membership - football independence plus membership in one of the best BB leagues in the country. The price of membership was a few extra conference games over what they would give BE schools for access to all of their bowls which the BE wouldn't give them, except the Orange Bowl which they have access to on their own. And in the process they keep a presence in the NE, Mid Atlantic, and SE states where they want to be.

(07-07-2013 09:41 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(07-06-2013 11:10 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Championship game in Cleveland.

I think a conference with attendance issues to begin with, should have its games at the site of the best record/highest ranked division champ.

Why? Championship week occurs during winter break, and most MAC schools are located in college towns. Nobody would show up. Put the championship game in a city where most students/alumni are located during winter break, and things look better.

(07-07-2013 12:22 PM)panite Wrote:  

(07-07-2013 11:15 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-07-2013 10:15 AM)panite Wrote:  

(07-05-2013 09:08 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The MAC continues to review its options regarding how to balance the conference given its current 13 school configuration (drop UMass vs. adding a 14th school), and Army faces the same scheduling problem as Notre Dame, i.e, how to fill its schedule in the middle of conference play and how to arrange suitable bowls. Army hasnmultiole open dates, for instance, this year during the heart of conference play. One mutually beneficial solution would be for Army and the MAC to make a scheduling alliance like Notre Dame's deal with the ACC in Football.

For instance, if the MAC split its divisions with 7 in the east (Umass, Buffalo, Kent, Akron, Ohio, Bowling Green and Miami) and 6 in the West, Army could play 4 games against the East that would count as conference games. Eastern division schools could play 2 interdivision games (2x7=14) plus 4 games against Army, and Western Division schools could play 3 interdivision games (3x6=18). Army could play 2 games against Western Division school that did not count as conference games. The MAC could add Army to its bowl rotation, presumably with an extra bowl.

This arrangement would benefit both the MAC and Army.

Army has 12 games scheduled for 2013 and 2014. They also has 11 games scheduled for 2015 too. They do not have a scheduling problem and neither does ND. As for the MAC - Army has always scheduled 2 - 4 MAC teams without a scheduling agreement and make their own bowl agreements with the Military, Armed Forces, Poinsettia, and Kraft Hunger Bowls. Yes the Military and Kraft Hunger options are going away but they will at least be a back up option in the Military and will just pick up one of the other lower bowls with the Sun Belt or CUSA. They don't need or want a scheduling agreement with the MAC for bowl agreements either. Besides the MAC can't schedule enough bowls for all of their bowl eligible teams to give one up for Army anyway. Also the the MAC will add a teams which they are currently working on before going into a self concocted arrangement like the one above.

Then why did ND just sign on to play 5 ACC teams a year? Is it because it's becoming increasingly harder to schedule games towards the end of the season?

To get out of the BE after Syracuse and Pitt left. They probably knew Rutgers and L'Ville were on their way out the door too and knew the BE was on the verge of collapse. They definitely were probably on the inside with the other Catholic schools as they planned their escape too with C-7 hoping they would come with them too. ND can always get teams to play them any time of the year. Conferences will adjust their schedules to get ND on the schedule. Even the PAC-12 has allowed USC to work their schedule around the ND / USC game in November. ND has plenty of quality games in November when most conferences kick into the regular conference schedules with a traditional game with Navy, USC, and BYU as November opponents and Texas has been tying to set up an annual Thanksgiving Day game with them since they dropped ATM for leaving the B-12. Finally there is also an opportunity for an occasional traditional Army / ND game that can be played in November at Giants Stadium or Yankee stadium for the Army home game and of course at home in South Bend in the contract to help with scheduling and be viewed Nationally spread out through the years. ND still has their chief goal with the ACC in exchange for BE membership - football independence plus membership in one of the best BB leagues in the country. The price of membership was a few extra conference games over what they would give BE schools for access to all of their bowls which the BE wouldn't give them, except the Orange Bowl which they have access to on their own. And in the process they keep a presence in the NE, Mid Atlantic, and SE states where they want to be.

Or they were actually having trouble getting meaningful late in the year games. If the SEC, B1G and Pac are playing December games that are going to determine who wins their division and have a chance to play for a playoff spot and ND is playing Army and Navy. Thats not really optimal for the Irish.

ND left the BE before Rutgers and Maryland left for the B1G and before UofL was selected as Marylands replacement. The C7 didn't start putting their plans together until those three jumped ship and Fox approached them. Without Fox offering up legit money they don't leave. ESPN wasn't going to offer them more money when they could have had the whole package for much less.

I think the scheduling agreement was totally the entrance fee from the ACC, but it was also something that the Irish wanted almost just as much. They get all these games but still keep their "Independence". BYU is having a hard time finding meaningful late in the year games. Playing Army, Idaho and New Mexico St. is not what they had in mind when they decided to go out on their own. Look at Navy, they are in much better shape as a program than Army and they have given it up, because they see the writing on the walls. The Pac-12 just passed a rule that their will be no more late year OOC games (except those already planned i.e. ND/USC and ND/Stanford), that means the Utah BYU game is now a Sept game instead of a Dec game. That was something the Cougars didn't see coming when they made their decision. They have also been in talks with both the old Big East and Big XII so going solo is not in their long term plans. I wouldn't be shocked if they either get plucked up during the Big XII expansion back to 12 or if they can't wait for their TV deal to finish go back to the MWC until the Big XII starts looking for new members again.

Personally I think BYU would be better suited in the MWC banging it out with Boise, SD St and Fresno trying to be the best of the Go5 and get that at large bid, which they aren't allowed to win as an indie.