UMass Tailgater: "The games aren't that fun, because our team sucks." Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Let me start this post by saying like most UMass fans, my number one source for UMass sports news is the webpage http://www.umasshoops.com/. The entire site is a pretty good source for UMass Basketball.

If your not big into basketball, fear not. There's a message board with threads on all the main UMass teams: Men's hoops, women's hoops, football, men's hockey and men's lacrosse. If those aren't your thing, there's also a thread for other UMass sports, where in my experience softball and men's soccer seem to be the dominate topic of conversation, though there's mention of everything from women's crew (who last I checked had won something like 11 or 12 A-10 championships in a row) to baseball. The moderator is sort of on the strict side, so everything posted has to be backed up with sources, which I like. You know for the most part, you won't be reading rumors. Just the facts.

So, like most days, I'm on the umasshoops football board, and I saw someone posted this artical written by a Harvard student. He went to the football game on Saturday with his friends who go to UMass. Or more accurately, he went to a tailgate that occured outside the football game. In it, he talks about how awesome UMass tailgates are, and how they far exceeded his expectations. I thank him for his praise. However, I take issue with the one thing written about the football team itself:

No one was really talking football, since, just like at Harvard, nobody
goes to the games.

“The games aren’t that fun, because our team sucks,” one tailgater succinctly explained.

But we don’t have that excuse. Despite a tough loss to Holy Cross in Worcester last weekend, the Crimson is primed for another strong football season.

So, before I begin with my assault on this, let me make one thing clear. I don't blame the author. If I was invited to a school and someone at the tailgate told me what he was told, I'd believe them. Why wouldn't you? So, now that we're clear that I don't blame the author, I'm going to defend the Minutemen. As I have a lot I want to say on this topic, I'm going to do it over at least 2 posts...maybe three depending on how long post 2 is. The first post will address the accusation, that the Minutemen suck. The second and third posts will address why those associated with UMass might feel the team sucks and will look at possible solutions. Without further ado, I begin.

UMass plays in the premier FCS conference, the CAA (formerly the Atlantic 10). This conference is responsible for such current NFL stars as Tim Hightower (Richmond), Marques Colston (Hofstra) and Joe Flacco (Delaware). Aside from these three name brand players, many NFL teams have CAA players. I can't say I follow all former CAA stars, but off the top of my head, I do know the Patriots have Brandon McGowan, a saftey from Maine. I also know former UMass players are currently in Miami (WR Brandon London), Jacksonville (Long Snapper Jeremy Cain) and New York (S James Ihedigbo, who from my encounters with him is a great guy inspite of being a Jet). I'd be willing to bet your favorite NFL team has at least one CAA player, despite it being an FCS league. I just checked Joe's Steelers, and it turns out they have Willie Colon, a right tackle from Hofstra. Just for kicks, I also checked the Steelers main historical rival, the Cleveland Browns. They have two: WR Ray Ventrone of Villanova and DB Mike Adams from Delaware. Check your team. If they don't have a CAA player, leave a comment below.

So that's great. The CAA has it's fair share of NFL players. However, in my opinion, NFL players aren't the measure of how good a conference is. I think the best measure of an FCS conference would be playoff appearences. FCS has a 16 team playoff. There are 8 automatic bids, of which the CAA champion receives one. That leaves 8 at large bids. According to Wikipedia, there are 125 FCS teams (which is much more than I thought there were). The Ivy League decided as a whole academics was more important than football, and bans its 8 members from participating in the postseason tournament. That leaves 117. SWAC teams have there own championship game and other traditional rivals and sometimes opt out of the playoffs, but they're eligible to compete if they don't have a conflict. Even if we kick out all 10 teams, that's still 107. If we take out the 8 autobids, we're left with 99 teams fighting for 8 spots.

In 2007, the CAA received 3 at large bids and an autobid, for a grand total of 4 playoff teams. This either set the record for most teams from a conference making the playoffs or it tied it. It doesn't really matter, because the next year, the CAA broke it by receiving 4 at large bids and an autobid, for 5 total playoff teams. That's right. Out of those 99 teams fighting for the 8 spots, the CAA got 4 of them. (For the record, there are 12 CAA teams. 1 gets an outbid, so that leaves 11 CAA teams in the 99).

Ok, so the CAA sends a lot of teams to the playoffs. Big deal. How do they do?

I'm glad you asked. Since I started following 1AA/FCS in 2003, A10/CAA teams have played in 5 of the 6 championship games. The only year the conference missed out was 2005, and I blame UNH for choking that year, losing at home in the second round though ranked number 1 in the nation. Of the 5 times I mentioned, the conference has come home with 3 championships. That's pretty good. Appalacian State won the other three, so if it weren't for them...but I digress.

Who cares about FCS. The only thing that matters is FBS!

The CAA also has success playing FBS opponents. I believe I've already mentioned the FBS victories Richmond (beat Duke), William & Mary (beat Virgina), UNH (beat Ball State) and Villanova (beat Temple) have secured this year. UMass took Kansas State to the brink, and lost the game. JMU lost to Maryland in overtime. True, Northeastern got demolished by BC, but every conference has a bad team. That means the CAA is currenty 4-3 (SEE EDIT BELOW) against FBS teams and 2-2 against BCS opponents. All of the were on the road. I know an FBS team would probably never come play in a CAA stadium, but I'd be interested to see what the record would be if half were at home and half were on the road. I think it's safe to assume that the CAA could hang with the non-BCS FBS conferences.

So, we've established that the CAA is a really good conference. What does this have to do with UMass?


Since 2006, UMass has won 2 A10/CAA conference championships. Since I started following in 2003, UMass has won 3 conference championships. In 2003, they were co-conference champs with Delaware. In 2006, they won it outright. In 2007, they were co-champions with Richmond.

Not only that, but consider this fact I stole from the UMass game notes for Saturday's game against Stony Brook. Since the start of the 2006 season, the Minutemen are 21-2 at home. That's amazing. 21 wins to 2 losses. And remember, they're playing in the premier conference in FCS. Before losing to eventual national champion Richmond last year, UMass had a 16 game winning streak at home, which apparently at the time was second in FCS (San Diego, 28) and third in Division 1 (Oklahoma was second with 21). And I'll stress this: UMass plays in the best conference in FCS. It's not like a bunch of creampuffs are coming out to Amherst every week.

There are two more facts I'll steal from the game notes. First, UMass has had 7 winning seasons in a row. I don't know when that tailgater began his association with UMass Football, but if this team goes about .500, that will be five consecutive classes at UMass who have never known a losing season (or a .500 season for that matter).

Lastly, since 1998 when UMass won the national championship, all while playing in the premier FCS conference, UMass has gone 82-43. According to the game notes, that's the best in the conference. That's right. Going back more than a decade, UMass has been the best team in the best conference.

How can you say the team sucks? How can you justify that, being right outside the stadium on game day? How can you call them "our team" and say such terrible unfounded things? It's baffiling. This isn't Northeastern. This program is respectable. No. Calling them respectable is short changing them. It's a boarderline National Powerhouse. It's right there on the cusp of being one of the all time great FCS programs, and believe me, it's done it with minimal support from the Massachusetts Legislature, the UMass Alumni and the UMass Student Body as a whole.

In my next post, I'll give my theory as to why he or she said it. And by my theory, I of course mean a theory I read on umasshoops by another poster (ShadesOf96and98) that made a lot of sense to me and I am adopting.

EDIT: I just realized Towson lost to Northwestern, so the record is 4-4 against FBS teams, 2-3 against BCS teams.