UMassHoops.com

DEM · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:49 am Post subject:

Being the best we can be in the MAC is a good goal, I agree. Even if the current Big East were to last a few more years, even if we somehow managed to tear it up in the MAC in our first or second year, the BE has effectively been paralyzed by its politics, and we would probably still be on the outside of all of this. And as it is, it looks like some members of the Big East and maybe Big 12 might be in a not-so-great position after this is all done. On the other hand, I think the dynamics from within the MAC will be more or less the same...we will still have a chance to be good in the conference and upset some storied teams in our out of conference schedule, as Temple and Toledo nearly did the past couple weeks. That's not so bad if you ask me.

Quinn · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:39 am Post subject:

For those interested, in addition to the regular conference realignment articles, I'm now doing a daily recap since so much happens during the day that gets missed:

http://collegesportsinfo.com/2011/09/19/conference-realignment-updates/

As for UMass, things do not look good at all.

The likely path will be that within 2 weeks, everything will be finalized for a Big East/Big 12 merger.

This will result in the 7 Big East football schools likely moving to the Big 12 with the 5 remaining schools. Would retain BCS AQ, Big 12 bowl ties-ins (other than big ones like Cotton which would be Pac16 vs SEC).

There could be other schools leaving from the group of 12:
* Uconn and Rutgers ARE on the ACC active radar.
* Both could join or 1 with Notre Dame if ND opts for all-sports ACC membership.
* Missouri will likely join the SEC as #14 at some point IFFFF the ACC holds tight with the new $20 million exit fee.
* SEC officials are showing less interest in WVU as before, mostly due to push by UF and Vandy (and TAMU now) to improve academics with #14 being an AAU school (Missouri is and would be most willing).
* So even if that all happened...2-3 from Big East leave, 0-1 from Big 12 meaning at worst, 3 leaving, the 12 schools now become 9.
* The group of 9 would have options but would likely look at MWC or CUSa schools. Assuming TCU remained and didn't return to MWC (be 8 total BE12 schools), then that leave 4 spots maximum.
* The likely schools (assuming BYU, Boise St., and Air Force pass) will be the same top candidates: UCF and Houston.
* Memphis is getting a push by some vocal and influential people like Pitino. If Memphis commits to football, they are likely in for #12 as it would give a better market for the new footprint.

So if the ACC holds:
Uconn, Rutgers, Cincy, Louisville, USF, *Missouri/WVU
Iowa St., Kansas, Kansas St., Baylor, TCU, *Missouri/Houston

If Uconn, Rutgers, and either WVU or Missouri leave:

Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, USF, UCF, *Missouri/WVU
Iowa St., Kansas, Kansas St., Baylor, TCU, *Missouri/Houston

As you can see, UMass is not a target.

Think of it this way: if the Big 12 had remained with no issues...like if the ONLY move were the ACC adding 2 Big East schools, then YES, UMass could have been a candidate. Because after adding UCF and Houston to get back to 9 members, the conference would still consider a 10th or even 12 schools. Most likely would have been 10, with UMass, Temple, Memphis, ECU, Nova as #10 candidates.

But instead, the Big 12 is falling AND the Big East. So whether its 5 or 7 Big East schools, they will FIRST take ALL 4-5 Big 12 teams (or all elave to Big 12). And then it's the same UCF and Houston candidates. But then, you also have MWC schools in the mix due to the new footprint. And only after those top 2-3 CUSA schools and 3 MWC schools do you get to the UMass/Temple/ECU tier of schools.

As for UMass, the only potential moves?

For UMass to join a BCS conference, we would likely need:
1) ACC to 16: Uconn and Rutgers (of ND and either school)
2) SEC to 16: taking 3 schools from Big 12 and Big East pool
3) Pac-16: 4 from Big 12
4) Big Ten to 16: with 4 from Big 12 and Big East

Only then would the schools left out be able to MAYBE use threat of lawsuit to retain a BCS spot.

But it would be an ugly group. Because the MWC would likely leapfrog the leftovers.

And the leftover would be a group like:
UMass, Temple, Cincy, Iowa St., USF, UCF, Houston, Memphis, TCU, Baylor, Air Force, BYU, Boise St.

Find it hard to envision that group being BCS worthy.

Especially since the MWC and CUSA are discussing a football partnership where the combined winner would be given a BCS spot.
_________________
Welcome Back DK!
Update the Calipari Coaching Tree

DrG · Hall of Fame Joined: 02 Apr 2003 Posts: 2171 Location: MA

I agree the short-term outlook is not good for UMass. However, while all that crazy stuff is happening up above, being in a lower-tier FBS conference still leaves us in a better position down the road than if we had stayed in FCS. I'm sure App St. is thinking the same thing. They'd love to be in CUSA, but the MAC would be a good second-choice option for them if CUSA moves ahead with a MWC merger. There will be much more difficult choices for the other FBS wannabes still in FCS. The CAA southern schools may entertain the possibility of elevating the league to FBS status once the remaining northern schools (UNH and Maine) are broomed out, but that would require a commitment that some members (UD, UR, W&M) probably wouldn't be willing to make.

Quinn · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:43 am Post subject:

indeed.

And it comes down to this: only thing UMass can do is prove they belong by winning on the field. Winning will bring fandom, as we saw in basketball.

And in time, UMass might be able to put itself in a position like Boise St., where conferences want them. But for BSU, it's the low academics and lack of market that keeps them out of say, P16 discussions. But for UMass, with solid academics and the Boston media market, winning can open doors.

The problem is that the easy paths and doorways are all but closed with the proposed upcoming moves. But if Umass can succeed, then there is a chance to leapfrog some of the higher candidates like Houston and UCF. If they struggle and UMass succeeds, there is hope.
_________________
Welcome Back DK!
Update the Calipari Coaching Tree

DrG · Hall of Fame Joined: 02 Apr 2003 Posts: 2171 Location: MA

sleepy sheep · Senior Joined: 01 Dec 2007 Posts: 939 Location: Boston

I'm hoping for a scenario that sends a couple peers to the MAC. Rutgers and Cincy? Seems more likely at this point rather than us moving somewhere.

Quinn · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:13 pm Post subject:

DEM · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:19 pm Post subject:

Malves21 · Freshman Joined: 16 Mar 2011 Posts: 57 Location: Boston

http://www.yahoosportsradio.com/shows/john-swofford-acc-is-in-no-rush-to-get-to-16-teams-7705/

John Swofford- ACC is in no rush to get to 16 teams

Crank · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:31 pm Post subject:

I realize this is the football forum and all, but all of these points leave out the biggest negative impact of this shakeup which is the decimation of UMass basketball. When this is all said and done, the A10 will be no more (or be a shadow of its former self once the Big East Catholics poach X, Dayton, St. Louis). Life in the MAC for football works fine, but for basketball...not good at all; nor is the likely neutered A10. This couldn't have come at a worse time for UMass athletics.

Malves21 · Freshman Joined: 16 Mar 2011 Posts: 57 Location: Boston

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=515732

DEM · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:57 pm Post subject:

Chris20 · Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:46 pm Post subject:

Quinn, I appreciate the extensive updates.

DrG · Hall of Fame Joined: 02 Apr 2003 Posts: 2171 Location: MA

[quote="DEM"]

Jackman · Senior Joined: 02 Jun 2006 Posts: 1973