FOOTBALL Show of hands….

[MT01]

Why would that be the goal? Its not like they are leagues above the MAC. With recent defections, there is very little parity in conferences anymore....except CUSA.

To not have every single sport we play not only outside of our media profile but also our recruiting area. Again, as I have said having a couple of games a year on ESPN2/U ain't gonna make up for those impacts. People seem to keep forgetting that our exposure is going to come in the form of the streaming platform with ESPN and weeknight games when 98% of the college football world isn't paying attention except for the MAC schools. And that half of our games this year are already on that ESPN platform.

While the MAC has seen a couple of programs catch lightning in a bottle over the past 12/13 years, the league is consistently the second to worst or worst FBS conference. Again, another factoid people are ignoring. So, we're going to one of the worst conferences overall, giving up a lot of revenue to do it, and aligning ourselves with schools we have no history with and will have zero chances of developing rivalries with. How is that going to excite a fledgling fan base?

That said, I will acknowledge that the AAC with any more losses isn't going to be that attractive, but I really love what the Sun Belt has become. I would be thrilled to go back where we have a chance to renew some old rivalries like with Troy, the Cajuns, Georgia Southern. And even App St which I think could really be a special rivalry. And with USM and Marshall going to the league I would take that over being in the current AAC. The way in which the Sun Belt has begun to condense geographically with quality football programs is the ideal situation for us IMO. But if we sign this GOR we will never have that option. And the only states in the south the SBC won't have teams in now is Fla and Tenn. It's pretty obvious that the Sun Belt eventual next moves would be FIU and MT if they went to 16 or needed to replace someone. I venture a hypothesis that Texas State will likely eventually end up in the MWC. ODU's stay in the SBC may be short lived as well.

 

[blueraiderJT]

We will never go back to thr Belt. The University presidents and conference commish can't stand us because we left. We have been blackballed by them.

 

[MT01]

We will never go back to thr Belt. The University presidents and conference commish can't stand us because we left. We have been blackballed by them.

That's simply not true. The Commissioner wasn't even there when we left.

We still have great relationships with almost all of the schools in the Belt. Hell, we played a home and home with Troy in football last year. We schedule Belt schools routinely in all the other sports. Our relationship with the conference is not bad.

The reason they did not look at us has nothing to do with being blackballed. It's first and foremost what CNM has done to our basketball program and the fact that Stockstill has turned the football program into a losing one not to mention our facilities have fallen behind most Sun Belt programs. The fact that they invited JMU is because they feel that FCS program has more upside because they demonstrated more of a commitment and have better facilities at their level than we do at ours.

Our athletic department is like the house on the street that hasn't gone through remodeling and renovation while all the other houses on the street in our neighborhood have. This is why we need the cash to facilitate the facilities.

 

[RaiderDoug]

To not have every single sport we play not only outside of our media profile but also our recruiting area. Again, as I have said having a couple of games a year on ESPN2/U ain't gonna make up for those impacts. People seem to keep forgetting that our exposure is going to come in the form of the streaming platform with ESPN and weeknight games when 98% of the college football world isn't paying attention except for the MAC schools. And that half of our games this year are already on that ESPN platform.

While the MAC has seen a couple of programs catch lightning in a bottle over the past 12/13 years, the league is consistently the second to worst or worst FBS conference. Again, another factoid people are ignoring. So, we're going to one of the worst conferences overall, giving up a lot of revenue to do it, and aligning ourselves with schools we have no history with and will have zero chances of developing rivalries with. How is that going to excite a fledgling fan base?

That said, I will acknowledge that the AAC with any more losses isn't going to be that attractive, but I really love what the Sun Belt has become. I would be thrilled to go back where we have a chance to renew some old rivalries like with Troy, the Cajuns, Georgia Southern. And even App St which I think could really be a special rivalry. And with USM and Marshall going to the league I would take that over being in the current AAC. The way in which the Sun Belt has begun to condense geographically with quality football programs is the ideal situation for us IMO. But if we sign this GOR we will never have that option. And the only states in the south the SBC won't have teams in now is Fla and Tenn. It's pretty obvious that the Sun Belt eventual next moves would be FIU and MT if they went to 16 or needed to replace someone. I venture a hypothesis that Texas State will likely eventually end up in the MWC. ODU's stay in the SBC may be short lived as well.

1. If our recruiting "territory" is Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and Alabama, - the new CUSA isn't going to be a significant difference in recruiting.

Recruiting in MAC vs CUSA - the new CUSA has 1 game in our recruiting territory (Jax State), and I guess FIU But they're 900 miles from our campus so I'm not sure that really counts.

The new CUSA is going to have an average of 1 road game in our territory every year. 1.

And the fact is - we don't have many good players anyway and haven't in a long time. I'm sure they're all good kids and will help with the APR. But they're pretty much the bottom of the FBS barrel in the recruiting world and they're coming here because there's really no other FBS option. Those kids would be available if we played our road games on Mars.

Say what you will about the MAC, but if you drew a 4 hour circle around every campus in the MAC, we have, by far, the best recruiting territory of anyone in the conference.

2. No debate that the MAC has been the worst or second worst. But new CUSA is 100% going to be the worst.

3. You keep comparing the MAC to the Belt and AAC.

That's not the debate.

"It's pretty obvious that the Sun Belt eventual next moves would be FIU and MT if they went to 16 or needed to replace someone."

There's no evidence whatsoever of this. No source, from anyone, anywhere other than you is reporting this.
This whole debate would certainly turn if you could provide anything, from anyone, anywhere that could corroborate this stance.

I get that it's fun to speculate that this could happen, or that team could move here or there and this would open up that spot in that conference - but risking the entire future of the athletic department on "hey, who knows, we'll see what happens later on" is not a wise decision.

You've set yourself up as some sort of insider here, so I'm going to ask you know to lay it out for the record (I'm not asking for me, I'm asking on behalf of the folks here):

Do you know of or have any hard evidence that the Belt/AAC is a probability? What's your % chance that the Belt/AAC calls up MTSU (in the state we're in) in the next 3 years.

I'll even take your word for it. But I'm not asking for idle speculation on moves you think might just maybe happen later. We can all do that.

 

[RaiderDoug]

That's simply not true. The Commissioner wasn't even there when we left.

We still have great relationships with almost all of the schools in the Belt. Hell, we played a home and home with Troy in football last year. We schedule Belt schools routinely in all the other sports. Our relationship with the conference is not bad.

The reason they did not look at us has nothing to do with being blackballed. It's first and foremost what CNM has done to our basketball program and the fact that Stockstill has turned the football program into a losing one not to mention our facilities have fallen behind most Sun Belt programs. The fact that they invited JMU is because they feel that FCS program has more upside because they demonstrated more of a commitment and have better facilities at their level than we do at ours.

Our athletic department is like the house on the street that hasn't gone through remodeling and renovation while all the other houses on the street in our neighborhood have. This is why we need the cash to facilitate the facilities.

If you could assure us that the MT admins would take the cash, use it to invest in the 2 major programs (Men's BBall and FB), get rid of dead coaching staffs, and invest in facilities, and begin a rebuild of both programs from the ground up - I think you'd get a lot more people on board.

But from where I'm sitting, that would require nearly a 180 degree turn from the folks who have for the past 15 years done exactly the opposite from "invest in programs, invest in facilities, fire dead-weight coaches".

So you can naturally see why we're skeptical.

I said this in a post days ago - if you're the MT AD, i'm buying your plan.

But McPhee and Massaro? I don't think they'll do any of the things you are proposing.

 

[MT01]

If you could assure us that the MT admins would take the cash, use it to invest in the 2 major programs (Men's BBall and FB), get rid of dead coaching staffs, and invest in facilities, and begin a rebuild of both programs from the ground up - I think you'd get a lot more people on board.

But from where I'm sitting, that would require nearly a 180 degree turn from the folks who have for the past 15 years done exactly the opposite from "invest in programs, invest in facilities, fire dead-weight coaches".

So you can naturally see why we're skeptical.

I said this in a post days ago - if you're the MT AD, i'm buying your plan.

But McPhee and Massaro? I don't think they'll do any of the things you are proposing.

I understand you are skeptical. As you should be given what we've seen. We haven't invested because there has been nothing to invest. Fundraising has dried up. No fans, so no ticket or concession revenue. We can barely afford to operate.

I mean I can make the same argument. If you can prove to me and point to something that says - if we had the money (over what our normal operating expenditures are) - they would use it for something like one of the examples you came up with last week vs. facility improvement, then I would shut up. The bottom line is you can't prove that anymore than I can prove they would use it for facilities.

But more importantly (and maybe the most important) what we do know is without it we damn sure are never getting new facilities. At least with it there's a chance. Going to the MAC there's no chance. So, here's the thing. If we're not going to take risk to be competitive then why do you care if we go somewhere stable? What difference does it make to be in a stable conference, know that we're never going to have the facilities to be competitive and reside in a conference just as shitty as the one we're leaving that's located in places we all know we're never going to take the road trips to. And without those improvements plus the impacts to our recruiting pipelines we're never going to be competitive in it. So, you're advocating for the same thing you're advocating against at the same time.

Going to the MAC, is giving a .500 coach a lifetime contract. Literally, it's the same mindset. Because, let me tell you there isn't a college football program in the country as "stable" as MT's. Where has that gotten us except a heap of mediocrity? So, that's why I'm having such a hard time seeing why everyone supports this. It's the same decision as not firing McDevitt and the Stockstill contract. We're making the same decisions with this conference decision instead of taking a chance and figuring out how to make it work.

 

[EllistonVU]

quote: I'm sure they're all good kids and will help with the APR.

I saw this a while back.

One of the current full member schools, the University at Buffalo, is a member of the Association of American Universities (AAU), an organization of 66 leading research universities in the United States and Canada. All members of the MAC are considered "high research activity" by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching except for the University at Buffalo, which is considered "very high research activity", the highest classification given.

and this

Re: the term "Public Ivy"

The eight schools that Richard Moll chose when he coined the term “Public Ivy” back in 1985:

• College of William & Mary
• Miami University
• The University of California system
• University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
• University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill
• University of Texas–Austin
• University of Vermont
• University of Virginia

 

[MTsumner92]

Cusa

 

[MidTennMtneer]

Do we know, has anything been announced, with regards to the money? I'm more worried about us even getting the $ than I am about what we will do with it. Got to get it first.

I dint trust Judy at all except for her to give herself a nice bonus for "saving" CUSA.

That is why I say MAC more so than my distrust in CM and even McPhee (who I trust less than CM)

 

[MTsumner92]

Hey Der hi Der. You a Blue raida?

 

[RaiderDoug]

I understand you are skeptical. As you should be given what we've seen. We haven't invested because there has been nothing to invest. Fundraising has dried up. No fans, so no ticket or concession revenue. We can barely afford to operate.

I mean I can make the same argument. If you can prove to me and point to something that says - if we had the money (over what our normal operating expenditures are) - they would use it for something like one of the examples you came up with last week vs. facility improvement, then I would shut up. The bottom line is you can't prove that anymore than I can prove they would use it for facilities.

But more importantly (and maybe the most important) what we do know is without it we damn sure are never getting new facilities. At least with it there's a chance. Going to the MAC there's no chance. So, here's the thing. If we're not going to take risk to be competitive then why do you care if we go somewhere stable? What difference does it make to be in a stable conference, know that we're never going to have the facilities to be competitive and reside in a conference just as shitty as the one we're leaving that's located in places we all know we're never going to take the road trips to. And without those improvements plus the impacts to our recruiting pipelines we're never going to be competitive in it. So, you're advocating for the same thing you're advocating against at the same time.

Going to the MAC, is giving a .500 coach a lifetime contract. Literally, it's the same mindset. Because, let me tell you there isn't a college football program in the country as "stable" as MT's. Where has that gotten us except a heap of mediocrity? So, that's why I'm having such a hard time seeing why everyone supports this. It's the same decision as not firing McDevitt and the Stockstill contract. We're making the same decisions with this conference decision instead of taking a chance and figuring out how to make it work.

Good post.

Are we settling?

I know it seems like settling to go to the MAC.

But here's where I am as approaching a 20 year fan of the MTSU program. I don't think we're ever going to reach the heights that we all envisioned or hoped we would 15 years ago. I had a glimmer of hope that we could Boise ourselves into the limelight. But I don't believe that's ever going to happen. I believe there's structural systems that would keep us (not just us, G5/lower budgeted schools in all) from getting into the upper tier.

If you want to run with the biggest dogs, you're going to need a 75 million dollar budget. That's just not going to happen for us here on the bottom end. There's no # of donors, no amount of on-field success, that would provide that to us.

If some folks want to take the "why even bother then" view, or we should go back to FCS so we can win a championship or that's loser talk, or something or whatever - that's all fine and valid. I disagree, but really, that's personal preference. I'd rather be at the bottom end of FBS than the top end of FCS.

So, what is success for us?

I kind of like the idea of our level of college football returning to a simpler, more regionally focused view. I like the idea of sticking with WKU and continuing to build a big rivalry. I like the idea of winning a conference title on ESPN. I like the idea of fun MAC-tion games on weeknights. I like the idea of a smaller, more compact conference that we might be able to travel to one day. I like the idea of other MAC fan-bases looking at our trip as a road trip they'll want to make. I like the idea of shocking P5 programs from time to time.

Here's a little more about why I'm a little more enthusiastic about the MAC:

So, if you liken each G5 conference to individual small ponds - AAC is one, Belt is another, MAC, CUSA - i think we're set up well to be the biggest fish in the MAC pond. And i'm not sure that, nationally, most folks are going to see much of a difference between those conferences. From a national perspective - winning the MAC is going to be seen exactly the same as winning the Belt or the AAC or CUSA.

Looking at the MAC - we have a recruiting advantage over all of those teams. We have a budget that puts us near the top. We have a staff payroll that should (if it were going to a coach with a pulse) give us an advantage over the MAC peers. Our facilities (or lack thereof) are not a hinderance in the MAC.

I like the idea of swinging the biggest you-know-what in the MAC.

I'm not sure that MT has advantages over anyone in some of those other conferences.

I'm in Knoxville, and as a student at UTk before transferring to MT (over half my credits on my degree are from UTk), I see where the Vols program is. And the fact is, no matter what they do, they're going to be at a disadvantage to programs like Florida, Alabama, Texas, LSU, Georgia when it comes to recruiting territory and some other issues. But they have the massive $$$$'s to try and even that playing field. We do not.

We have the same problems in some of those other conferences. As CUSA pivots to Texas, we're losing our recruiting territory, and we're playing against programs in their home state with massive recruiting advantages.

In the Belt and AAC, i'm not sure we have the program cache to be anything more than a middle of the pack try-hard. And that's if we even are trying hard. We certainly will never have the recruiting grounds, budget, etc that would put us probably in the top half of those conferences. Which I think has been a problem and will continue to be.

Here's the crux if it all - If I felt that this program was ever going to really go all in on athletics, I might feel differently. We simply don't have the will as a program, as a fan base, as a state, as a region, as a university/school system, as an alumni base to really devote all that's needed to be really great.

I look at what happened to UAB. That program was a dead as we are. Then they dropped football, the whole state rallied, and look where they are now. If we dropped football - could any of us really see us doing what UAB did? Me neither.

Let's go to the MAC, and let's enjoy it for what it is, not for what it's not and what we'll never be.

 

[BRaiderDave]

Good post.

Are we settling?

I know it seems like settling to go to the MAC.

But here's where I am as approaching a 20 year fan of the MTSU program. I don't think we're ever going to reach the heights that we all envisioned or hoped we would 15 years ago. I had a glimmer of hope that we could Boise ourselves into the limelight. But I don't believe that's ever going to happen. I believe there's structural systems that would keep us (not just us, G5/lower budgeted schools in all) from getting into the upper tier.

If you want to run with the biggest dogs, you're going to need a 75 million dollar budget. That's just not going to happen for us here on the bottom end. There's no # of donors, no amount of on-field success, that would provide that to us.

If some folks want to take the "why even bother then" view, or we should go back to FCS so we can win a championship or that's loser talk, or something or whatever - that's all fine and valid. I disagree, but really, that's personal preference. I'd rather be at the bottom end of FBS than the top end of FCS.

So, what is success for us?

I kind of like the idea of our level of college football returning to a simpler, more regionally focused view. I like the idea of sticking with WKU and continuing to build a big rivalry. I like the idea of winning a conference title on ESPN. I like the idea of fun MAC-tion games on weeknights. I like the idea of a smaller, more compact conference that we might be able to travel to one day. I like the idea of other MAC fan-bases looking at our trip as a road trip they'll want to make. I like the idea of shocking P5 programs from time to time.

Here's a little more about why I'm a little more enthusiastic about the MAC:

So, if you liken each G5 conference to individual small ponds - AAC is one, Belt is another, MAC, CUSA - i think we're set up well to be the biggest fish in the MAC pond. And i'm not sure that, nationally, most folks are going to see much of a difference between those conferences. From a national perspective - winning the MAC is going to be seen exactly the same as winning the Belt or the AAC or CUSA.

Looking at the MAC - we have a recruiting advantage over all of those teams. We have a budget that puts us near the top. We have a staff payroll that should (if it were going to a coach with a pulse) give us an advantage over the MAC peers. Our facilities (or lack thereof) are not a hinderance in the MAC.

I like the idea of swinging the biggest you-know-what in the MAC.

I'm not sure that MT has advantages over anyone in some of those other conferences.

I'm in Knoxville, and as a student at UTk before transferring to MT (over half my credits on my degree are from UTk), I see where the Vols program is. And the fact is, no matter what they do, they're going to be at a disadvantage to programs like Florida, Alabama, Texas, LSU, Georgia when it comes to recruiting territory and some other issues. But they have the massive $$$$'s to try and even that playing field. We do not.

We have the same problems in some of those other conferences. As CUSA pivots to Texas, we're losing our recruiting territory, and we're playing against programs in their home state with massive recruiting advantages.

In the Belt and AAC, i'm not sure we have the program cache to be anything more than a middle of the pack try-hard. And that's if we even are trying hard. We certainly will never have the recruiting grounds, budget, etc that would put us probably in the top half of those conferences. Which I think has been a problem and will continue to be.

Here's the crux if it all - If I felt that this program was ever going to really go all in on athletics, I might feel differently. We simply don't have the will as a program, as a fan base, as a state, as a region, as a university/school system, as an alumni base to really devote all that's needed to be really great.

I look at what happened to UAB. That program was a dead as we are. Then they dropped football, the whole state rallied, and look where they are now. If we dropped football - could any of us really see us doing what UAB did? Me neither.

Let's go to the MAC, and let's enjoy it for what it is, not for what it's not and what we'll never be.

Well said.

 

[arg3b]

I also think that the sun belt is blackballing all of the 2012/13 defectors. If the sun belt really wanted strong programs in their conference they would’ve invited WKU back. But instead they chose So Miss who is an all around dumpster fire and ODU who hasn’t done jack in football.

 

[ewglenn]

I think the most important thing to recruiting is winning. The more you win the easier it is to recruit. Charlotte is much more attractive than Boone but App has won a lot so recruits will flock there first. In the MAC we are much more likely to be the big fish. If we win some games there we will start to see more recruits wanting to come. Winning solves all the problems. Regardless of where we go. I think we have a better shot to win in the MAC than in the new CUSA. Liberty is going to run that conference. UTEP has a fan base we could only dream of (when they win). FIU is in an extremely desirable area with tons of recruits. Sam Houston has been winning a ton. Honestly I think CUSA will be okay and will win a lot of games. I think we will just fall further behind and not win. Losing is killing this fan base. Our admins have not changed that and I don’t think they will. I want to win and I see that happening in a very stable, more lucrative MAC (long term money vs short term).

 

[MT01]

Good post.

Are we settling?

I know it seems like settling to go to the MAC.

But here's where I am as approaching a 20 year fan of the MTSU program. I don't think we're ever going to reach the heights that we all envisioned or hoped we would 15 years ago. I had a glimmer of hope that we could Boise ourselves into the limelight. But I don't believe that's ever going to happen. I believe there's structural systems that would keep us (not just us, G5/lower budgeted schools in all) from getting into the upper tier.

If you want to run with the biggest dogs, you're going to need a 75 million dollar budget. That's just not going to happen for us here on the bottom end. There's no # of donors, no amount of on-field success, that would provide that to us.

If some folks want to take the "why even bother then" view, or we should go back to FCS so we can win a championship or that's loser talk, or something or whatever - that's all fine and valid. I disagree, but really, that's personal preference. I'd rather be at the bottom end of FBS than the top end of FCS.

So, what is success for us?

I kind of like the idea of our level of college football returning to a simpler, more regionally focused view. I like the idea of sticking with WKU and continuing to build a big rivalry. I like the idea of winning a conference title on ESPN. I like the idea of fun MAC-tion games on weeknights. I like the idea of a smaller, more compact conference that we might be able to travel to one day. I like the idea of other MAC fan-bases looking at our trip as a road trip they'll want to make. I like the idea of shocking P5 programs from time to time.

Here's a little more about why I'm a little more enthusiastic about the MAC:

So, if you liken each G5 conference to individual small ponds - AAC is one, Belt is another, MAC, CUSA - i think we're set up well to be the biggest fish in the MAC pond. And i'm not sure that, nationally, most folks are going to see much of a difference between those conferences. From a national perspective - winning the MAC is going to be seen exactly the same as winning the Belt or the AAC or CUSA.

Looking at the MAC - we have a recruiting advantage over all of those teams. We have a budget that puts us near the top. We have a staff payroll that should (if it were going to a coach with a pulse) give us an advantage over the MAC peers. Our facilities (or lack thereof) are not a hinderance in the MAC.

I like the idea of swinging the biggest you-know-what in the MAC.

I'm not sure that MT has advantages over anyone in some of those other conferences.

I'm in Knoxville, and as a student at UTk before transferring to MT (over half my credits on my degree are from UTk), I see where the Vols program is. And the fact is, no matter what they do, they're going to be at a disadvantage to programs like Florida, Alabama, Texas, LSU, Georgia when it comes to recruiting territory and some other issues. But they have the massive $$$$'s to try and even that playing field. We do not.

We have the same problems in some of those other conferences. As CUSA pivots to Texas, we're losing our recruiting territory, and we're playing against programs in their home state with massive recruiting advantages.

In the Belt and AAC, i'm not sure we have the program cache to be anything more than a middle of the pack try-hard. And that's if we even are trying hard. We certainly will never have the recruiting grounds, budget, etc that would put us probably in the top half of those conferences. Which I think has been a problem and will continue to be.

Here's the crux if it all - If I felt that this program was ever going to really go all in on athletics, I might feel differently. We simply don't have the will as a program, as a fan base, as a state, as a region, as a university/school system, as an alumni base to really devote all that's needed to be really great.

I look at what happened to UAB. That program was a dead as we are. Then they dropped football, the whole state rallied, and look where they are now. If we dropped football - could any of us really see us doing what UAB did? Me neither.

Let's go to the MAC, and let's enjoy it for what it is, not for what it's not and what we'll never be.

I think the biggest place you and I depart on is you think we’re going to recruit just as well or better. I can’t be more diametrically opposed to that. i believe recruiting is going to be much harder. We’re going to have to change our recruiting profile to the Midwest. We will still recruit the south for sure but it won’t be nearly as easy and force us to split our resources to recruit in both places we play and also places we don’t where we have relationships. It’s easy for the MAC schools to recruit Midwest kids because they don’t have to spend anything but time. For the handful of schools that go south and spend resources to get Fla kids they do pretty well. But MT will have to spend resources to recruit both locales. That’s going to be harder not easier.

None of that changes the fact we are choosing the safe option instead of the one gives us a chance to get back to actually being in a regional league. So that’s the other place I disagree. There is nothing regional about the MAC for us that is. We’re going to be the biggest outlier having to fly to 75% of opponent destinations (more than we do in current C-USA). So, you say you want to be in a regional conference yet the MAC doesn’t actually offer us that. Aside from wkcc there’s a couple of schools we can bus to.

Lastly, I realize I can’t predict it as a certainty but I definitely have reason to believe we could position ourselves better than we have the last eight years. We could probably roll out of bed and hit the floor every day and position ourselves better than what we’ve done the last seven or eight years. That’s why I have reason for hope in the next five years if we passed on this. It’s literally impossible for us to be worse than we’ve been in terms of the things that matter in positioning an athletics program for future success and opportunities. There isn’t a single person on this board who doesn’t already know that so could go without saying.

 

[MTsumner92]

This sucks.

 

[MTsumner92]

The demographic growth is in the South. Not the North.

 

[sWiley]

The demographic growth is in the South. Not the North.

Yeh. It's going to be a monumental mistake if we join the MAC. Keep this post bookmarked for future reference. I've already bookmarked this one and the other 15 page discussion on the MAC to come back to in the future

We've been a do nothing athletics program for the last decade outside of two good NCAA tourney years w/ upsets and if we end up in the MAC with a GOR we will continue to be a do nothing athletics program for the next several decades. Everyone here knows it too. We will be in a "stable" conference though!

At least by staying in C-USA we ATTEMPT to stay in our footprint and pocket more $$$ as we hope to join a more regional, southern based conference in the near future (SBC/AAC).

I'm honestly tired of talking about it all. I've given my 2 cents much like everyone else has. It's not up to us unfortunately. We will just have to see what McPhee and Massaro decide on. I'd feel a lot better about whatever the outcome is if we had better leadership. In my eyes it doesn't matter where we end up as long as Dumb & Dumber are in charge our athletics we are going to suffer big time.

 

[Raiderclyde]

I think the most important thing to recruiting is winning. The more you win the easier it is to recruit. Charlotte is much more attractive than Boone but App has won a lot so recruits will flock there first. In the MAC we are much more likely to be the big fish. If we win some games there we will start to see more recruits wanting to come. Winning solves all the problems. Regardless of where we go. I think we have a better shot to win in the MAC than in the new CUSA. Liberty is going to run that conference. UTEP has a fan base we could only dream of (when they win). FIU is in an extremely desirable area with tons of recruits. Sam Houston has been winning a ton. Honestly I think CUSA will be okay and will win a lot of games. I think we will just fall further behind and not win. Losing is killing this fan base. Our admins have not changed that and I don’t think they will. I want to win and I see that happening in a very stable, more lucrative MAC (long term money vs short term).

"Winning cures everything" or "Money Makes the World Go Around". Know these are worn age-old truisms or many accept as bonafide facts. Problem is commitment. That edict must come from the Board of Trustees or University President and then the Athletics Director. I've worn out mission and vision over the years. Without tactically carrying mission and vision out in deeds; words won't mean much at the end of the day---and, that is exactly where our IPF and athletic plan is located today on paper.

An example I like to point out again is in radio coverage. Last weekend, I was in an adjoining county 26 miles from campus attending a milestone birthday party. If one has to struggle to hear the flagship station traveling down the road being not more than 20-25 miles away from the transmitter, it tells me how important our football or our athletics program really is to the community and the university as an FBS University. Last night at my home, I sampled at least four "local" radio stations carrying the UT/Kentucky Game and no problem with reception or finding it on the dial (if one were to drive or casually listen). When I hear WGNS from my home just outside city limits of Murfreesboro, have to tilt my GE Superadio a certain way to get it clear or otherwise I hear pulsating static on 1450 at evening or at night-- the FM is OK on all my radios. Daytime AM is OK also. I say all of this because details are important and MT isn't very good at carrying out details or marketing effectively in omni-channel media delivery environment that is required today for fan engagement. If MT don't take care of details A-Z in our entire program (such as this), how can we expect a more prominent conference to take us seriously--such as the AAC--the next time the FBS football chessboard is shuffled again?

No interest: no exposure. No exposure: no (or weak) recruiting. No (or weak) recruiting: difficult to win.
Few wins=few dollars. Few dollars=difficult to attract talented coaches that win. All equals a stale program that is withering away. That's where MT is today--hoping for a MAC invite to come through.

 

[blueraiderJT]

I also think that the sun belt is blackballing all of the 2012/13 defectors. If the sun belt really wanted strong programs in their conference they would’ve invited WKU back. But instead they chose So Miss who is an all around dumpster fire and ODU who hasn’t done jack in football.

Exactly. That is totally happening. Former SBC programs inquired with the Belt and were basically told to kick rocks.

 

[arg3b]

I’m leaning more towards CUSA because the athletic program desperately needs the money to upgrade the facilities. Ideally I’d like to see MT go back to the SBC. The AAC doesn’t excite me because it’s what we have now. The MAC doesn’t excite me either. So I guess my official position is stay in CUSA and HOPE we get the money, HOPE we use it wisely to position a potential return to the SBC. But like everyone here realizes, it’s not up to us. I’ll still be a diehard no matter what happens

 

[TRUEBLUE73]

I’m leaning more towards CUSA because the athletic program desperately needs the money to upgrade the facilities. Ideally I’d like to see MT go back to the SBC. The AAC doesn’t excite me because it’s what we have now. The MAC doesn’t excite me either. So I guess my official position is stay in CUSA and HOPE we get the money, HOPE we use it wisely to position a potential return to the SBC. But like everyone here realizes, it’s not up to us. I’ll still be a diehard no matter what happens

Money will go into the general fund like all monies. Then athletics will have to apply. They will get some and the rest will go to a new building for McPhee. Good Luck with CUSA money. We would blow through that money in 15 mins traveling the country trying to get to Las Cruces.

 

[MT Glenn]

"Winning cures everything" or "Money Makes the World Go Around". Know these are worn age-old truisms or many accept as bonafide facts. Problem is commitment. That edict must come from the Board of Trustees or University President and then the Athletics Director. I've worn out mission and vision over the years. Without tactically carrying mission and vision out in deeds; words won't mean much at the end of the day---and, that is exactly where our IPF and athletic plan is located today on paper.

An example I like to point out again is in radio coverage. Last weekend, I was in an adjoining county 26 miles from campus attending a milestone birthday party. If one has to struggle to hear the flagship station traveling down the road being not more than 20-25 miles away from the transmitter, it tells me how important our football or our athletics program really is to the community and the university as an FBS University. Last night at my home, I sampled at least four "local" radio stations carrying the UT/Kentucky Game and no problem with reception or finding it on the dial (if one were to drive or casually listen). When I hear WGNS from my home just outside city limits of Murfreesboro, have to tilt my GE Superadio a certain way to get it clear or otherwise I hear pulsating static on 1450 at evening or at night-- the FM is OK on all my radios. Daytime AM is OK also. I say all of this because details are important and MT isn't very good at carrying out details or marketing effectively in omni-channel media delivery environment that is required today for fan engagement. If MT don't take care of details A-Z in our entire program (such as this), how can we expect a more prominent conference to take us seriously--such as the AAC--the next time the FBS football chessboard is shuffled again?

No interest: no exposure. No exposure: no (or weak) recruiting. No (or weak) recruiting: difficult to win.
Few wins=few dollars. Few dollars=difficult to attract talented coaches that win. All equals a stale program that is withering away. That's where MT is today--hoping for a MAC invite to come through.

The radio situation is ridiculous. I live on the northern edge of Rutherford county and can't get the games or the coach's show. You know who's games come in clear though? TSU and WKU.

 

[crposton]

quote: I'm sure they're all good kids and will help with the APR.

I saw this a while back.

One of the current full member schools, the University at Buffalo, is a member of the Association of American Universities (AAU), an organization of 66 leading research universities in the United States and Canada. All members of the MAC are considered "high research activity" by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching except for the University at Buffalo, which is considered "very high research activity", the highest classification given.

and this

Re: the term "Public Ivy"

The eight schools that Richard Moll chose when he coined the term “Public Ivy” back in 1985:

• College of William & Mary
• Miami University
• The University of California system
• University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
• University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill
• University of Texas–Austin
• University of Vermont
• University of Virginia

Academics are great. That is why colleges exist, but it has absolutely nothing to do with anything going on here. When it comes to college football and what is driving realignment, academics mean next to nothing. SEC is worst P5 for academics and they bring in most money.

 

[blueraiderJT]

That's simply not true. The Commissioner wasn't even there when we left.

We still have great relationships with almost all of the schools in the Belt. Hell, we played a home and home with Troy in football last year. We schedule Belt schools routinely in all the other sports. Our relationship with the conference is not bad.

The reason they did not look at us has nothing to do with being blackballed. It's first and foremost what CNM has done to our basketball program and the fact that Stockstill has turned the football program into a losing one not to mention our facilities have fallen behind most Sun Belt programs. The fact that they invited JMU is because they feel that FCS program has more upside because they demonstrated more of a commitment and have better facilities at their level than we do at ours.

Our athletic department is like the house on the street that hasn't gone through remodeling and renovation while all the other houses on the street in our neighborhood have. This is why we need the cash to facilitate the facilities.

And.. that's simply not true. The belt ain't never happening unless every president agrees and Arky st,, Troy, and ULL won't ever vote us back.

 

[crclarke55]

The radio situation is ridiculous. I live on the northern edge of Rutherford county and can't get the games or the coach's show. You know who's games come in clear though? TSU and WKU.

This really is a joke. How can we let this happen???

 

[crclarke55]

I understand you are skeptical. As you should be given what we've seen. We haven't invested because there has been nothing to invest. Fundraising has dried up. No fans, so no ticket or concession revenue. We can barely afford to operate.

I mean I can make the same argument. If you can prove to me and point to something that says - if we had the money (over what our normal operating expenditures are) - they would use it for something like one of the examples you came up with last week vs. facility improvement, then I would shut up. The bottom line is you can't prove that anymore than I can prove they would use it for facilities.

But more importantly (and maybe the most important) what we do know is without it we damn sure are never getting new facilities. At least with it there's a chance. Going to the MAC there's no chance. So, here's the thing. If we're not going to take risk to be competitive then why do you care if we go somewhere stable? What difference does it make to be in a stable conference, know that we're never going to have the facilities to be competitive and reside in a conference just as shitty as the one we're leaving that's located in places we all know we're never going to take the road trips to. And without those improvements plus the impacts to our recruiting pipelines we're never going to be competitive in it. So, you're advocating for the same thing you're advocating against at the same time.

Going to the MAC, is giving a .500 coach a lifetime contract. Literally, it's the same mindset. Because, let me tell you there isn't a college football program in the country as "stable" as MT's. Where has that gotten us except a heap of mediocrity? So, that's why I'm having such a hard time seeing why everyone supports this. It's the same decision as not firing McDevitt and the Stockstill contract. We're making the same decisions with this conference decision instead of taking a chance and figuring out how to make it work.

I appreciate all the knowledge and the background on the issues but my thing is who is responsible? Why can’t we sell tickets? Who is out driving donations and new donors? Who is selling coprorate sponsorships? I get what you are saying but would this all not reside with a completely inept leadership team?

I don’t disagree with a lot you are sharing but when does this change? It is like a vicious cycle of excuses on why not. The program and department is stale. All the way around with the exception of a couple sports and those raise their own money and drive their own success.

I think everyone just wants to fix it, but how…..

 

[BRaiderDave]

Total housecleaning at the top. Bring in a prez who values athletics and then watch us spring back to life.

 

[EllistonVU]

Academics are great. That is why colleges exist, but it has absolutely nothing to do with anything going on here. When it comes to college football and what is driving realignment, academics mean next to nothing. SEC is worst P5 for academics and they bring in most money.

Then WKU will be an anti-academic boost for the MAC. Isn't their acceptance rate like 98% - ??

If the MAC needed to boost it's academic reputation, they could add Case Western Reserve.

 

[MTLynn]

An example I like to point out again is in radio coverage. Last weekend, I was in an adjoining county 26 miles from campus attending a milestone birthday party. If one has to struggle to hear the flagship station traveling down the road being not more than 20-25 miles away from the transmitter, it tells me how important our football or our athletics program really is to the community and the university as an FBS University. Last night at my home, I sampled at least four "local" radio stations carrying the UT/Kentucky Game and no problem with reception or finding it on the dial (if one were to drive or casually listen). When I hear WGNS from my home just outside city limits of Murfreesboro, have to tilt my GE Superadio a certain way to get it clear or otherwise I hear pulsating static on 1450 at evening or at night-- the FM is OK on all my radios. Daytime AM is OK also. I say all of this because details are important and MT isn't very good at carrying out details or marketing effectively in omni-channel media delivery environment that is required today for fan engagement. If MT don't take care of details A-Z in our entire program (such as this), how can we expect a more prominent conference to take us seriously--such as the AAC--the next time the FBS football chessboard is shuffled again?

No interest: no exposure. No exposure: no (or weak) recruiting. No (or weak) recruiting: difficult to win.
Few wins=few dollars. Few dollars=difficult to attract talented coaches that win. All equals a stale program that is withering away. That's where MT is today--hoping for a MAC invite to come through.

If you were trying to kill fan support, and hinder an athletic department, how would you do it?

 

[MT01]

And.. that's simply not true. The belt ain't never happening unless every president agrees and Arky st,, Troy, and ULL won't ever vote us back.

Relationship with UL and Troy is fine. Ark St has a new AD from Memphis this year so not sure on that one. In a lot of these schools none of the people who were there when we left are still there. If you have some details to prove this statement otherwise please do so.

 

[FranklinRaider315]

Relationship with UL and Troy is fine. Ark St has a new AD from Memphis this year so not sure on that one. In a lot of these schools none of the people who were there when we left are still there. If you have some details to prove this statement otherwise please do so.

Tom Bowen is a first class AD. Worked in the 49ers front office before completely turning.around the San Jose St program by hiring Mike McIntyre. Revived the football program at Memphis after RC Johnson and Shirley Raines almost killed it. Got sideways with the new Prez after failing to disclose his pursuit of the Cal Berkley job. Arkansas St is lucky to have him. Wren Baker was his first hire at Memphis as his Deputy Director. Look at him now. I doubt Tom Bowen is too concerned about MTSU one way or the other.

 

[JohnDavidBlue]

One has to admit....not getting invited back to the Belt is weird. It doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

[RaiderDoug]

I think it makes total sense when you realize that the Belt learned from CUSA's mistakes and are not repeating them.

They're taking programs that are built and brands that they believe will sell. They're not concerned with X market or TV sets in a zip code that theoretically could watch maybe if X team did this.

Basically, the only program they took with a similar blah-ness to us is ODU, and you could see they wanted to bring them in with solid JMU/Marshall programs for a travel bloc. Say what you will about USM, but they have a history of mid-major competence (on a bad run now though) and they're far more likely to turn things around than we are. They've had 6 coaches since we've had Stock. They're at least trying.

We have an athletic program with no pulse. We've no fans, meh budget, no investment in facility or programs, no track record of success, no leadership, no brand profile in our market. None of these are a 1 fix problem. None of these are going to turn around in 18 months.

We need to fix a lot of problems for the 'Belt to take notice. A couple of million bucks which will be quickly squandered in operating costs or plopped into general university funds isn't going to move the needle.

 

[EllistonVU]

Besides the initial boost of interest because change brings attention, a large number of MTSU students/alums know somebody who went to a MAC school, have a relative or relatives that went to a MAC school. However, it's up to MTSU to take advantage of that short term increase of attention and turn it into long term athletic respect.

That is not the MAC's job. It's the school's job.

 

[sWiley]

Besides the initial boost of interest because change brings attention, a large number of MTSU students/alums know somebody who went to a MAC school, have a relative or relatives that went to a MAC school. However, it's up to MTSU to take advantage of that short term increase of attention and turn it into long term athletic respect.

That is not the MAC's job. It's the school's job.

And this is why it doesn’t really matter where we end up. We will continue to be failed by our “leaders.”

they are so fortunate they hold government bureaucratic style jobs. In the real world they would have all been fired long, long ago.

 

[RaiderDoug]

Besides the initial boost of interest because change brings attention, a large number of MTSU students/alums know somebody who went to a MAC school, have a relative or relatives that went to a MAC school. However, it's up to MTSU to take advantage of that short term increase of attention and turn it into long term athletic respect.

That is not the MAC's job. It's the school's job.

Good post - most of the migration to the area is from the mid-west and rust-belt. I remember being a Preds season tix holder when I lived in the area, and the infamous "PRed-wings". Transplants who were Preds fans every game except for retaining their allegiance when the Red Wings came to play.

Maybe we can sell some tix to some NE Ohio and Directional Michigan folks who have moved to the area.

 

[MT Glenn]

I'm retired and drive for Uber now. I met several tourists, that are alums from MAC schools, that are excited about WKU and us joining the conference because it will give them another excuse to go to Nashville.

 

[Demsar Fashist]

CUSA. shoulda never left the sunbelt though.

 

[BRaiderDave]

CUSA. shoulda never left the sunbelt though.

Leaving SBC was the correct decision at the time. Who knew that they'd name Judy as commissioner and then let it all go to $shit. Not to mention our own administration start sitting on their laurels.