For those of you who don’t know, there is a group of bloggers who carry the MAC torch. Season after season, we make bold ass predictions, argue about MAC supremacy and ask each other burning questions about the conference. Without further ado, let the MAC round table begin…

This week’s questions are brought to you by us, TheChipReport.com.

1) Over the last 5 years, the MAC has seen an influx in recruiting talent. Is this consistent with the national landscape or is the MAC slowly gaining ground on other conferences?

There has never been better practice facilities, coaches or organization at the high school level than there is right now. The nation is flush with high school football talent. That being said, the MAC is definitely gaining on other non AQ conferences and stealing the occasional recruit away from the bottom of the BigTen. As always, a premium is still on finding the diamond in the rough type player—even though now he may have 2 to 3 stars next to his name.

2) Which currently successful MAC team is built for long term success and which, if any, has all their eggs in the 2012 basket?

Ohio, Toledo and NIU consistent success over the last 5 years is the model for any MAC team striving to build a program for the present and the future. As CMU fans know better than anyone, things can come crashing down in a hurry with a single bad head coach hire—sustained success is hard. The reason CMU has failed miserably under Dan Enos is he took a successful offense and completely gutted it. NIU and Toledo have both lost their head coaches recently but both replacements took the game plan of the previous regime and continued with it. It’s no coincidence that both teams run the spread.

I know it’s a safe answer but of these teams, I’m not sure there is a single pretender. These teams are here to stay and it will take a really good football team to emerge from the rest of the MAC to contend with them.

3) What statistic has been most crucial to your team’s success or failure?

The startling stat in 2012 is really second half scoring. Throwing out FCS opponent SE Missouri St., CMU was outscored 96 to 68 in the first half. This is very respectable considering they played MSU and Iowa as well as 2 high powered MAC offenses (Toledo and NIU). The games were all within striking distance after 2 quarters and given the correct 2nd half adjustments, very winnable ball games.

The adjustments, of course, did not come. CMU has been outscored 112 to 43 in the second half. This is not getting beat, this is getting creamed. This falls squarely on the head coach and if I’m Dave Heeke, I take a long hard look at this stat for 2012 and the last 2 seasons when evaluating the program’s head coach this offseason.