BIG EAST DIVIDED ON 14TH MEMBER | Page 2 | The Boneyard

BIG EAST DIVIDED ON 14TH MEMBER

Status
Not open for further replies.
UConnDan97 said:
I would bet $20 and a dozen doughnuts that if it's BYU, their rival will become Boise and SDSU will get Memphis. SDSU is probably the only BE team praying that BYU doesn't join...
Expand ...

There is a solution that makes about 800000 times more sense. Navy gets SDSU and Temple gets Memphis - but the idiots that run this league can't find their asses in a dark room so I won't hold my breath.
 
whaler11 said:
There is a solution that makes about 800000 times more sense. Navy gets SDSU and Temple gets Memphis - but the idiots that run this league can't find their asses in a dark room so I won't hold my breath.
Expand ...

Well, I think what they are hoping for is that either one or both of Temple and Navy become somewhat relevant (i.e., top25), and then try to use that to leverage the Philly-Baltimore-DC metro areas for ratings. I'll let you decide whether or not that is something that is.....possible.

The only bright side that was offered in that idiotic plan was that they respect the fact that UConn and RU have to be together in the rivalry game. There was so much early talk about making it RU-Temple that I was actually starting to believe the league was dumb enough to do it...
 
In my opinion there is really only one way to do the divisional split, and that is East and West. I know they are trying like hell to avoid it because of the fact that the "Big East East" and the "Big East West" names will become a running joke. So call them something else!!!

Big East Colonial (or whatever): UConn, Rutgers, Louisville, Cincy, USF, Temple, UCF
Big East Frontier (or whatever): Boise, SDSU, BYU, Navy, SMU, Houston, Memphis

Your rivalry games are now within your own division, and you get 3 rotating cross-over games (almost half the other side). The "original" Big East members (Temple included) are on the same side. Travel is cut down on, and each conference's power is evenly distributed (Colonial might be tougher top to bottom and the Frontier is a little top-heavy). Simple! Do it! Jesus! Help me!
 
UConnDan97 said:
Well, I think what they are hoping for is that either one or both of Temple and Navy become somewhat relevant (i.e., top25), and then try to use that to leverage the Philly-Baltimore-DC metro areas for ratings. I'll let you decide whether or not that is something that is.....possible.

The only bright side that was offered in that idiotic plan was that they respect the fact that UConn and RU have to be together in the rivalry game. There was so much early talk about making it RU-Temple that I was actually starting to believe the league was dumb enough to do it...
Expand ...

If the league somehow comes up with non-geographical divisions I may go blind with rage. It's idiotic to the point of questioning the sanity of the people who run these universities.
 
UConnDan97 said:
BYU has to be the 14th member, if they can make the tv rights agreement happen. It will add another solid football team with a big following.

On a side-note: I really friggin' hate the "Red Division - Blue Division" crap!!! What was the point of adding "Western traveling partners" for Boise if they aren't all going to be in their division??? Stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid........stupid.....:mad:

While we're at it, why don't we make the Red and Blue divisions reflect school colors, because that would make just as much sense:

Red: Rutgers, SMU, SDSU, Cincy, Louisville, Houston, and Temple
Blue: UConn, Boise, Memphis, Navy, USF (default), UCF (default), and BYU (if they come)

We're color-coded!!!! Yay!!!! :confused: (sorry about the rant, I'm just frustrated)
Expand ...

I'm sure the divisions only apply to FB.

I actually hate the idea of geographic-based divisions, so I prefer this red/blue setup.
 
whaler11 said:
If the league somehow comes up with non-geographical divisions I may go blind with rage. It's idiotic to the point of questioning the sanity of the people who run these universities.
Expand ...

I couldn't have said it any better. A gigantic WTF. The answer is so simple that it is escaping them...
 
.-.
vowelguy said:
I'm sure the divisions only apply to FB.

I actually hate the idea of geographic-based divisions, so I prefer this red/blue setup.
Expand ...

It's horrid!!! Keep in mind that some of the reason behind some of the additions to the conference were under the guise of "traveling partners." If we no longer need western "traveling partners," then what #$k is Memphis doing here???? They are the 7th best football team in Tennessee!!
 
UConnDan97 said:
It's horrid!!! Keep in mind that some of the reason behind some of the additions to the conference were under the guise of "traveling partners." If we no longer need western "traveling partners," then what #$k is Memphis doing here???? They are the 7th best football team in Tennessee!!
Expand ...

Traveling partners idea is irrelevant for football, because you're only playing one game a week.

Repeat: I doubt the divisions will apply to the other sports.
 
vowelguy said:
Traveling partners idea is irrelevant for football, because you're only playing one game a week.

Repeat: I doubt the divisions will apply to the other sports.
Expand ...

I'm not sure why you keep repeating that the divisions will not apply to other sports, since Boise, SDSU, Navy, and perhaps even BYU won't play in those sports anyways. You don't need a volleyball traveling partner if you aren't playing in our conference in volleyball...
 
UConnDan97 said:
I'm not sure why you keep repeating that the divisions will not apply to other sports, since Boise, SDSU, Navy, and perhaps even BYU won't play in those sports anyways. You don't need a volleyball traveling partner if you aren't playing in our conference in volleyball...
Expand ...

And I'm not sure why you're talking about travel partners in relation to football.
 
vowelguy said:
And I'm not sure why you're talking about travel partners in relation to football.
Expand ...

You're not?? This is the first you've heard of Big East "travel partners" for football???

Dec. 5th 2011: http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/201...e-boise-state-san-diego-state-smu-ucf-houston

"the Big East is prepared to go forward with a plan that includes San Diego State as the western travel partner for Boise State and helps create a west division with SMU, Houston, UCF and eventually Navy and Air Force."

Four months ago: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-the-big-west-adds-the-broncos-olympic-sports

"One overlooked angle in this whole Big West and Big East dilemma is San Diego State. Remember, they were added to the Big East to be Boise State's western travel partner."

November 7, 2011: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...07_1_temple-and-memphis-bronco-mendenhall-byu

"UCF President John Hitt said Conference USA candidates UCF, SMU and Houston all wanted to announce their transition to the Big East as a group with Mountain West member Boise State, but the Broncos are waiting for the Big East to add another western travel partner before formally announcing their move to the new conference."

Seriously?? This is your first time hearing it....wow...
 
It has to be BYU and then Air Force and Army if you need the 16 teams. I prefer 14 with adding BYU and leaving it at that. That way you play 9 conference games 3 out of conference and then a championship game with a tied in with the Cotton Bowl which I think will be the next BCS bowl added. Playing in Dallas Stadium before 100,000 people will help any Big East team.
 
.-.
If the Big East entices both BYU & Air Force, but Army still resists, then make a run at Colorado State. They may be middle of the road in the Mountain West, but they solidify a Western Division.
 
I say we add Hawaii and Andersen Airforce Base in Guam to round out the Western Division of the NBE.

I know we're all trying to right a sinking ship, seeing as how we're currently onboard. But, does anyone else secretly hope the powers that be at UConn are planning our exit to a more stable, BCS friendly conference?
 
UConnDan97 said:
You're not?? This is the first you've heard of Big East "travel partners" for football???

Dec. 5th 2011: http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/201...e-boise-state-san-diego-state-smu-ucf-houston

"the Big East is prepared to go forward with a plan that includes San Diego State as the western travel partner for Boise State and helps create a west division with SMU, Houston, UCF and eventually Navy and Air Force."

Four months ago: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-the-big-west-adds-the-broncos-olympic-sports

"One overlooked angle in this whole Big West and Big East dilemma is San Diego State. Remember, they were added to the Big East to be Boise State's western travel partner."

November 7, 2011: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...07_1_temple-and-memphis-bronco-mendenhall-byu

"UCF President John Hitt said Conference USA candidates UCF, SMU and Houston all wanted to announce their transition to the Big East as a group with Mountain West member Boise State, but the Broncos are waiting for the Big East to add another western travel partner before formally announcing their move to the new conference."

Seriously?? This is your first time hearing it....wow...
Expand ...

Dan, that's because you and all those articles are misusing the term 'travel partner'.

A travel partner, would be for instance UCF and USF. If UConn volleyball flies to Florida during the week, they can play UCF in Orlando and USF in Tampa in one trip. Or take SMU and Houston, and if we play them in basketball, it just means one trip to Texas.

For football only schools, the idea of a travel partner is irrelevant. You play one football game a week and you fly to one destination, wherever it is, across the country one time a week. Also, the idea that Boise, Idaho and San Diego, CA are remotely close enough to be considered a partner, even if they were in for all sports, is bogus as well.

So, basically 95% of the media missuses the term, when they should just be saying, traditional geographic rivals.

Sorry for the rant, but for whatever reason that misnomer bothers me haha.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Dan, that's because you and all those articles are misusing the term 'travel partner'.

A travel partner, would be for instance UCF and USF. If UConn volleyball flies to Florida during the week, they can play UCF in Orlando and USF in Tampa in one trip. Or take SMU and Houston, and if we play them in basketball, it just means one trip to Texas.

For football only schools, the idea of a travel partner is irrelevant. You play one football game a week and you fly to one destination, wherever it is, across the country one time a week. Also, the idea that Boise, Idaho and San Diego, CA are remotely close enough to be considered a partner, even if they were in for all sports, is bogus as well.

So, basically 95% of the media missuses the term, when they should just be saying, traditional geographic rivals.

Sorry for the rant, but for whatever reason that misnomer bothers me haha.
Expand ...

No, unfortunately, you are the one misunderstanding the term "travel partner." The reason that I know that you are misunderstanding the term is because it was specifically requested by Boise State and their AD (Kustra) as a condition of joining the conference. He was quite clear about its meaning...
 
whaler11 said:
If the league somehow comes up with non-geographical divisions I may go blind with rage. It's idiotic to the point of questioning the sanity of the people who run these universities.
Expand ...

Whaler, network demographics define divisions, not universities.
 
formerlurker said:
I say we add Hawaii and Andersen Airforce Base in Guam to round out the Western Division of the NBE.

I know we're all trying to right a sinking ship, seeing as how we're currently onboard. But, does anyone else secretly hope the powers that be at UConn are planning our exit to a more stable, BCS friendly conference?
Expand ...

Hell to the Flippin Yes!
 
.-.
UConnDan97 said:
No, unfortunately, you are the one misunderstanding the term "travel partner." The reason that I know that you are misunderstanding the term is because it was specifically requested by Boise State and their AD (Kustra) as a condition of joining the conference. He was quite clear about its meaning...
Expand ...

Dan, Boise wants a conference partner that's closer than a 3.5 hour flight. That's not a "travel partner".
 
UConnDan97 said:
In my opinion there is really only one way to do the divisional split, and that is East and West. I know they are trying like hell to avoid it because of the fact that the "Big East East" and the "Big East West" names will become a running joke. So call them something else!!!

Big East Colonial (or whatever): UConn, Rutgers, Louisville, Cincy, USF, Temple, UCF
Big East Frontier (or whatever): Boise, SDSU, BYU, Navy, SMU, Houston, Memphis

Your rivalry games are now within your own division, and you get 3 rotating cross-over games (almost half the other side). The "original" Big East members (Temple included) are on the same side. Travel is cut down on, and each conference's power is evenly distributed (Colonial might be tougher top to bottom and the Frontier is a little top-heavy). Simple! Do it! Jesus! Help me!
Expand ...

This is exactly how this should shake out. Screw ESPN if they don't like it. Connectict should put up tolls in and out of that campus. Single booths so as to slow the traffic down with long lines. ESPN has never been a "good corporate neighbor" to Connecticut football.

This arranging divisions is not that hard. ESPN and others need to stop making it so.
 
gars44 said:
Whaler, network demographics define divisions, not universities.
Expand ...

Actually people define divisions. Why would network demographics define divisions - they can play whatever inter division games they want.
 
vowelguy said:
I cannot understand the desire to add Army. Terrible horrible miserable idea.
Expand ...

Great destination for a game, but I agree.
 
Part of the reason to have Boise in the conference is to mesh their FB prestige with the BE name. You need them regularly in the eastern media for that to happen. Having them play in the New WAC (aka, the Big East: West) doesn't do it.
The new members need to be integrated.
 
As soon as the ESPN exclusivity period is over, we'll know about the next few years. If there is enough money from NBC that the conference remains a threat, and Navy and Boise will join, ESPN will make sure that Louisville and/or UConn is invited somewhere else, thus causing the split of the basketball onlies and the remaining football schools being a new CUSA plus.

If it's not enough money to threaten ESPN, we are stuck where we are until Notre Dame becomes a football member of the ACC, and nothing will happen for a while.

You'll know in the next ninety days.
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
As soon as the ESPN exclusivity period is over, we'll know about the next few years. If there is enough money from NBC that the conference remains a threat, and Navy and Boise will join, ESPN will make sure that Louisville and/or UConn is invited somewhere else, thus causing the split of the basketball onlies and the remaining football schools being a new CUSA plus.

If it's not enough money to threaten ESPN, we are stuck where we are until Notre Dame becomes a football member of the ACC, and nothing will happen for a while.

You'll know in the next ninety days.
Expand ...

I hope you're right about UConn and joining either the ACC or the Big 12.
 
businesslawyer said:
As soon as the ESPN exclusivity period is over, we'll know about the next few years. If there is enough money from NBC that the conference remains a threat, and Navy and Boise will join, ESPN will make sure that Louisville and/or UConn is invited somewhere else, thus causing the split of the basketball onlies and the remaining football schools being a new CUSA plus.

If it's not enough money to threaten ESPN, we are stuck where we are until Notre Dame becomes a football member of the ACC, and nothing will happen for a while.

You'll know in the next ninety days.
Expand ...
A C-USA with Rutgers. Who'd ever have imagined that? This is a mesh of elite C-USA and Mountain West teams and a couple of old Big East teams. We are not new in FBS football anymore. This is our 10th season at the Rent. Our tradition looks good. Navy is giving up it's independence for the first time in it's history. That has to mean something. I would definitely prefer to get the **** out as soon as possible.
 
vowelguy said:
The Big12? That seems pretty remote to me.
Expand ...
I think the Big 12 makes sense for a few reasons, but it would have to be a package deal.

UConn, RU, Louisville, and Boise St (or USF). BYU could be an obstacle. Or USF and BYU for 16, but I'm still of the opinion that 16 doesn't make sense financially until I see otherwise.

I think we could be part of an attractive package to the Big 12 which can expand their footprint, add up and coming football programs, and 2 basketball powerhouses. That would bring them to 14. With the $50mm ACC exit fee, I think if they want to expand they are going to have to consider who in the big east is most attractive. That's us, RU, and Ville.
 
businesslawyer said:
As soon as the ESPN exclusivity period is over, we'll know about the next few years. If there is enough money from NBC that the conference remains a threat, and Navy and Boise will join, ESPN will make sure that Louisville and/or UConn is invited somewhere else, thus causing the split of the basketball onlies and the remaining football schools being a new CUSA plus.

If it's not enough money to threaten ESPN, we are stuck where we are until Notre Dame becomes a football member of the ACC, and nothing will happen for a while.

You'll know in the next ninety days.
Expand ...

I hope there will still be interest from NBC (and hopefully Comcast will be a bit more forceful than prior NBC regimes had been) but I've had experience with their sports department nearly two decades ago and my gut feeling is that the loss on ND (and the stark realization on NBC's part that dealing in this business will require some hands getting dirty, perhaps even a bit bloody) ended any aspiration of a 24/7 sports network attempting to compete with ESPN. I also don't believe that it is coincidence that ESPN's peer review will be conducted by Ohlmeyer, the man who helped build the modern version of NBC sports and someone still well enough connected with those within NBC to cause some trouble if the sleeves need to be rolled up.
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
Dan, Boise wants a conference partner that's closer than a 3.5 hour flight. That's not a "travel partner".
Expand ...

I'm just not sure how I can be any more clear for everyone here. San Diego State was an important part of Boise joining the league, whether you want to believe it or not. This was an article from the Bronco beat-writer (Brian Murphy) on November 3rd of last year:

http://voices.idahostatesman.com/20...ss_state_board_education_phone_todays_meeting

"Kustra said it was important that the Boise State have a "Western partner" in the new-look Big East, which is planning to split into two six-team divisions. The league is planning to invite Boise State, Air Force and Navy for football only and add Central Florida, Houston and SMU in all sports.
"Air Force has not indicated it's ready to make that move," Kustra said. "... We made it very clear to them, if I was going to go in, if Boise State was going to go in, we would go in with a Western partner."
Kustra said under the current plan Boise State would be in a Western Division with Air Force, Houston, SMU, Louisville and Cincinnati. He said the league is in discussions with other Western schools about possibly joining the league. He did not name those schools, but reports have surfaced that BYU is a possibility. San Diego State has indicated it would have some interest in joining a Western Division of the Big East."

I hope that I've made it clear for everyone now...
​
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,326
Messages
4,564,167
Members
10,462
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom