The Minutemen fan's home on the Net
https://www.umasshoops.com/newboard/
Definitely not. I’m not sure he could have made much of a difference in independence purgatory however.DougW wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 3:58 pmSometimes I wonder if they ever should have fired Mark Whipple?Merlin Samuels wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 1:13 pm2-8stevemaz wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 5:19 am
He went 0-10 last year and blew a 2 or 3 games with idiocy.. he deserved to get canned.
He went 2-8. Definitely blew some games and was clipped by the unlucky bounce/doink, ie Liberty and Miami. Would be better than this.stevemaz wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 5:19 amHe went 0-10 last year and blew a 2 or 3 games with idiocy.. he deserved to get canned.Merlin Samuels wrote: Sat Oct 11, 2025 6:27 pm Shouldn’t have fired Don Brown. At least we were competitive last season.
We all assumed it was coach joes call of who is on his staff. That it wasn’t should have been a bunch red flag.Steve81 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 8:12 pm Did like Shane Montgomery and Alex Miller. Did assume it was Coach Joe H decision and not the AD. Don't know but saying Shane Montgomery seemed to connect with the players. Based on how hard they played the last 2 games in 2024.
The A10 and any other non power conferences will not benefit from an expanded hoops tournament. Losing football will decimate women’s sports. Wrong answer.shizzle787 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 9:40 pm I'm a UConn fan so I have my own biases and motivations, but hear me out.
I do think UMass joining FBS has been an unmitigated disaster.
Here is what I would do:
1. Call the A-10 and beg to get back in
2. Can the football program
3. Reach out to the Big East and offer the following:
a. To take no TV money for the first TV contract
b. To agree to spend 6.5 million per year for revenue sharing on men's basketball
c. To agree to play 1 Big East game per year at TD Garden
Why?
It is unlikely UMass will ever be in the P4. Basketball, not football, is the best marketing avenue that the school has. Most people nationally have heard of UMass. This is not Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Football is not necessary for marketing.
The NCAA tournament is expanding to 76 from next season. The A-10 will very possibly be a benefactor of this (I also think the top third of the league greatly benefits from the revenue sharing cap which also helps the Big East).
If UMass is unable to get into the Big East, it can still be near the top of the A-10 (which will likely be the #7 or 8 league going forward).
It also cleans up your Title IX as you won't need as many women's teams any more which will save the school money.
I love the “losing football will decimate” argument. There is ZERO financial or statistical proof of that. But that is precisely the study that should have already been done. And it needs to account for the reputational damage done by being an absolute national joke year after year.minutefanjsf wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 9:55 pmThe A10 and any other non power conferences will not benefit from an expanded hoops tournament. Losing football will decimate women’s sports. Wrong answer.shizzle787 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 9:40 pm I'm a UConn fan so I have my own biases and motivations, but hear me out.
I do think UMass joining FBS has been an unmitigated disaster.
Here is what I would do:
1. Call the A-10 and beg to get back in
2. Can the football program
3. Reach out to the Big East and offer the following:
a. To take no TV money for the first TV contract
b. To agree to spend 6.5 million per year for revenue sharing on men's basketball
c. To agree to play 1 Big East game per year at TD Garden
Why?
It is unlikely UMass will ever be in the P4. Basketball, not football, is the best marketing avenue that the school has. Most people nationally have heard of UMass. This is not Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Football is not necessary for marketing.
The NCAA tournament is expanding to 76 from next season. The A-10 will very possibly be a benefactor of this (I also think the top third of the league greatly benefits from the revenue sharing cap which also helps the Big East).
If UMass is unable to get into the Big East, it can still be near the top of the A-10 (which will likely be the #7 or 8 league going forward).
It also cleans up your Title IX as you won't need as many women's teams any more which will save the school money.
Here is my 2030 preseason Mens hoop conference rankingshizzle787 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 9:40 pm I'm a UConn fan so I have my own biases and motivations, but hear me out.
I do think UMass joining FBS has been an unmitigated disaster.
Here is what I would do:
1. Call the A-10 and beg to get back in
2. Can the football program
3. Reach out to the Big East and offer the following:
a. To take no TV money for the first TV contract
b. To agree to spend 6.5 million per year for revenue sharing on men's basketball
c. To agree to play 1 Big East game per year at TD Garden
Why?
It is unlikely UMass will ever be in the P4. Basketball, not football, is the best marketing avenue that the school has. Most people nationally have heard of UMass. This is not Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Football is not necessary for marketing.
The NCAA tournament is expanding to 76 from next season. The A-10 will very possibly be a benefactor of this (I also think the top third of the league greatly benefits from the revenue sharing cap which also helps the Big East).
If UMass is unable to get into the Big East, it can still be near the top of the A-10 (which will likely be the #7 or 8 league going forward).
It also cleans up your Title IX as you won't need as many women's teams any more which will save the school money.
The revenue from being in a conference or playing body bag opponents pays the majority of the largest men’s sport which offsets the non revenue and women’s sports. Getting rid of football will force the school to either pony up a lot more money, or cut non revenue sports. Title ix requires balance in gender numbers for sports, so unless the school ponies up, women’s sports are cut to equal the cost of football.Used to be VOR wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 3:05 amI love the “losing football will decimate” argument. There is ZERO financial or statistical proof of that. But that is precisely the study that should have already been done. And it needs to account for the reputational damage done by being an absolute national joke year after year.minutefanjsf wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 9:55 pmThe A10 and any other non power conferences will not benefit from an expanded hoops tournament. Losing football will decimate women’s sports. Wrong answer.shizzle787 wrote: Sun Oct 12, 2025 9:40 pm I'm a UConn fan so I have my own biases and motivations, but hear me out.
I do think UMass joining FBS has been an unmitigated disaster.
Here is what I would do:
1. Call the A-10 and beg to get back in
2. Can the football program
3. Reach out to the Big East and offer the following:
a. To take no TV money for the first TV contract
b. To agree to spend 6.5 million per year for revenue sharing on men's basketball
c. To agree to play 1 Big East game per year at TD Garden
Why?
It is unlikely UMass will ever be in the P4. Basketball, not football, is the best marketing avenue that the school has. Most people nationally have heard of UMass. This is not Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Football is not necessary for marketing.
The NCAA tournament is expanding to 76 from next season. The A-10 will very possibly be a benefactor of this (I also think the top third of the league greatly benefits from the revenue sharing cap which also helps the Big East).
If UMass is unable to get into the Big East, it can still be near the top of the A-10 (which will likely be the #7 or 8 league going forward).
It also cleans up your Title IX as you won't need as many women's teams any more which will save the school money.
Don't have a neutral source citation for you, but the vast majority of universities outside the power conferences, do not make money. The reason for sports varies but can list why hundreds and hundreds have universities with division 1 football and sports in general and it does not make money for the universities. But that is not the point. What matters to me is UMass is a State Flagship and should have been FBS 30 years ago or at least positioning its self after West Virginia and Rutgers left the A10. 1998 would have been the best time with our sports portfolio at the time. It has been greatly diminished since then and the most desirable moves have accelerated out of reach. It was correct to move to a G6 conference, with revenue to support a lot of non-revenue sports. Basketball for most is not a high revenue generator with the Power Conferences hogging NCAA selections, and how it is valued in media deals. Even the UConn basketball powerhouse cannot get into a power conference to date. But it did get into the only basketball power conference, the Big East. The Big East is a non-public institutional conference, that we were never a former member as UConn. Additional reasons are listed in my prior post.Used to be VOR wrote: Mon Oct 13, 2025 8:26 am Title IX requires that opportunities for athletes accurately reflect the gender population of the school itself. According to the latest numbers I can find that is 47.7% male and 52.3% female. So, yes there would need to be financial accommodations made regarding female sports.
That said you state as a fact that the revenue from conference affiliation and guarantee games is a net positive for Football when accounting for all the other costs (including the proposed $25 million dollar stadium upgrade) like travel, facilities, equipment, coaching staff, etc. If those numbers (by a neutral source) have been shown before, I would love to see them. Because, in my mind, even with scholarships taken out of the equation, that math does not work.