Big East wants Bowl for champion

[Dann]

Drop ECU and Fresno or Nevada and I like it ... maybe drop both and get Southern Miss or Tulsa as a rival for Memphis. A 16 team conference would need ~9 bowl affiliations, so definitely should be able to get a bowl in all those places.

need 2 cali schools and fresno brings good things to the fball table. smiss makes ecu look like a good market/fanbase. tulsa is interesting.

 

[coachcap]

Here's another stick to add to the fire. Coach P. was quoted over the last day or so in the media. On the conference's expansion, he mentioned that it was great for the ability to recruit in Florida, Texas (specifically mentioning the DFW Metroplex & Greater Houston) as well as California. I'm wondering how this will affect divisional alignment. with all conference members wanting to make inroards in recruiting in those areas.

 

[SubbaBub]

There haven't been too many new rumors but as of a few months ago, Air Force and BYU were the main targets (rumored). So the rivalries could be:

UConn-Rutgers
USF-UCF
Louisville-Cinci
SMU-Houston
Boise-SDSU
Navy-Air Force (or BYU)
which would leave
Memphis-Temple

I'll take the left division, thank you very much.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[freescooter]

maybe we should set the divisions alphabetically dropping the "University of" Then we could have the B-M Division and the N-Z division.

 

[UConnDan97]

maybe we should set the divisions alphabetically dropping the "University of" Then we could have the B-M Division and the N-Z division.

I agree with your sarcasm. This thing is getting out of hand. The whole point of adding teams like SDSU and Memphis was for the "traveling partner" aspect in an East-West format. If that is no longer the case, what was the point??

For the record, I think that SDSU was a decent add, not a bad one. But to have multiple eastern schools in their division is beyond stupid...

 

[pj]

I agree with your sarcasm. This thing is getting out of hand. The whole point of adding teams like SDSU and Memphis was for the "traveling partner" aspect in an East-West format. If that is no longer the case, what was the point??

For the record, I think that SDSU was a decent add, not a bad one. But to have multiple eastern schools in their division is beyond stupid...

The point of adding them was that they were in the biggest available media markets, and wanted to build up their football programs. This was a made for NBC league.

But I agree, they should hold down traveling costs. East-West divisions make the most sense.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

We get screwed in the zipper concept. There is no way that RU isn't going to play both us and Temple every year. So that means that RU and us (or Temple) are in the same division, and then RU plays Temple (or us) as its fixed rival from the other side. And we would play Memphis every year and Temple one out of six. So we have a conference with two drivable road opponents, and one of them we'd only play away once every dozen years.

East -- West alignment, please god.

Shame on you. Even HuskyfanDan would've capitalized "God".

 

[businesslawyer]

Shame on you. Even HuskyfanDan would've capitalized "God".

That may be the single best post ever made.

 

[freescooter]

The basic point is that it makes no sense to have to travel across the country for half your conference games, when you can almost drive to them. It doesn't make sense for the eastern teams, UConn, Temple, Rutgers, Navy in particular, nor does it make sense for most of teams in the west, though to a lesser extent. Louisville- Cincy, Houston-SMU. Boise and San Diego State are in a bit of a tough spot, neither is really that close to anyone, but they are the exception. But it makes no sense for UConn to have to make an annual trek to Bosie or San Diego, nor for Boise to have to travel to Rutger and Temple, for example in the same year.