ESPN reporting again on Pac 16

[tzznandrew]

My order of preference:

1. A strong BE (I'm skeptical of this remaining so--everyone has itchy fingers)
2. Big 10 (provided that this comes with Syracuse and another BE school--not likely)
3. ACC (I'm not as annoyed by this as everyone else. This will likely come with Syracuse. It's a step down from the current conference, but it is tenable, and if it goes to 16 quickly, it will be more stable than the current situation).

I don't like how football is driving the bus. I love playing Louisville, Pitt, etc. (and the basketball onlies like GTown, Nova, Marquette), but if the situation proves as unworkable as it seems to be, I would be very sad but okay with going somewhere else.

The ACC and BE are still in somewhat confortable situations--regardless of whether it is so, the ACC moreso. I hope our commish is as active, or more, than Swofford...and if I'm him, I'm looking at expanding to 14 or 16 myself. If I were the ACC, and academics weren't a concern (and they partially are), I'd look to add WVU, UConn, Syracuse and either Pitt or Louisville. Say they add 'Ville (again, WVU and to a lesser extent, 'Ville, don't quite fit their profile), the Big 10 would likely take Rutgers and Pitt. What that does to USF, Cincy, idk.

 

[babysheep]

Whoa whoa whoa let's take it easy with the blue blood comments (even "to a lesser extent") because Mizzou is NOWHERE CLOSE to becoming a blue blood team. They should try getting to a Final Four first.

I do agree, however, that Georgetown, Nova, SJ and Marquette are good for the conference (from a basketball perspective)

 

[uconNYC]

I potentially see BCU attempt to block any inclusion of UConn in ACC expansion. Also Swofford has proven he does not understand TV Markets. Will probably believe that SU or RU bring the NYC market.

 

[upstater]

Honestly though the whole situation gets super complicated by those three Big 12 teams' alleged possible desire to join the Big East. That would put us at 20 teams, and then would make us at least somewhat better at all sports. KU and KState don't really bring much as far as football goes, do they?

It depends on how long your memory is. I mean, we just added TCU. Kansas St. was last decade's TCU.

 

[UConn5]

I think that the way this plays out is that UConn ends up in the ACC. The ACC could be losing FSU because they will seek to add at the very least a 14th if they do in fact get A&M.

 

[freescooter]

The BE is to bb what the SEC is to football. Sure it can be tweaked to be better. But why. Keep the strongest bb confernce intact and add to the football side to give it stregnth. I guess I don't see any of the teams you list as football bluebloods. I do see Kansas and to a lesser extent Mizzou as bb blue bloods but I'm not comfortable giving up Georgetown, Nova, Marquette or St. John's. They enhance the conference. Add Mizzou, and Kansas to the current BE and the conference would be incredible in bb.

I didn't say they were football bluebloods. I said they were very viable football programs. Kansas went to the Orange Bowl a couple of years ago. K-State has competed in the B-12. Missouri is a Top 25 team right now and has been on and off for a while. They have had top 25 teams on and off for decades. So they are at least solid. And while I agree that the Big East is to basketball what the SEC is to football, the problem is that basketball is to football what soccer is to basketball in the overall scale of things. It is hard to convince people in the Big East, but basketball is just not comparable to football in the world of college conferences. None of these moves, to the PCA 12, to the Big 10, to the SEC, even going back to Miami and BC to the ACC and before that, to the additon of 4 SWC members to the B-12, not one of those moves is driven by basketball...heck, virtually the entire expansion of the Big East except Villanova marquette and DePaul was football driven too, for that matter. Basketball,for good or ill, is a secondary consideration.