Boise withdraws from MWC

[UConnDan97]

Ok well thats our disagreement. I don't think the Big East gave a damn about Temple because they didn't make that move until it was clear Boise couldn't jump early. I believe they took Temple to fill out the schedule in 2012.

You can believe that Villanova took the high road. I believe they couldn't block it and they got a few million to keep their fans quiet as it was earmarked to research and upgrade their fans want but the school doesn't.

And that's fine if we disagree. I'll just add that I don't think that taking a bribe constitutes "taking the high road" and it was public knowledge prior to that moment that Villanova was blocking Temple. Another part of the deal was that Nova would get to share the Linc if they decide to go 1-A. There was a lot of bribery, so it does not appear to be a simple case of the BE saying, "Hey Nova, thanks for being so great about the whole thing!"

 

[UConnDan97]

That is because there weren't any independents that won 9 games that aren't Navy or Notre Dame.

Are you going to argue that an independent 9 win UConn team would have been left out in 2010 or 2011? Do you not see a difference between 56 and 70 bowl teams? The frigging bowls went and got a waiver for a 6-7 team this year. Most seasons now there are
scenarios the last week where not enough teams qualify. That doesn't happen with 56 teams.

Here are the minor conference teams that were in front of UConn that year (ironically, Memphis is one):

Memphis (8-4)
No. Texas (9-3)
New Mex (8-4)
Navy (8-4)
Fres St (8-5)
Colo St (7-5)
Tulsa (8-4)

So it wasn't just a matter of not having enough bowls, if a 7-5 "non-BCS team" is getting in before UConn. I remember the Hartford Courant uproar when it happened, because everyone assumed we were in (especially after drubbing WF). It was a gigantic snub, and I'm not willing to revise history to match your take on it.

 

[UConnDan97]

Just so everyone doesn't think that I am completely full of $#it, recall that WVU left the Big East in February of this year. Now, I want you all to see these reports of Villanova blocking Temple's entrance into the Big East dating all the way back to October of last year!!

http://www.thenovablog.com/2011/10/...nsion-villanova-wildcats-temple-owls-football

http://articles.philly.com/2011-10-15/sports/30283649_1_temple-fans-villanova-big-east-football

http://www.the700level.com/ncaa/news/villanova-blocking-temple-from-full-big-?blockID=576760

http://www.csnphilly.com/sportsnetP...va-blocking-temple-s-bid-for-the-big-east.htm

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ycn-10223365

How were arguments won before the advent of Google?? It's amazingly easy nowadays to recall info in order to drive home a point. I just wish I didn't have to...

 

[lv99]

Regardless of the circumstances of Temple's entry into the Big East, now that we're comfortable because Boise State is on board, we need to kick Temple out again. That will show we're a conference of strength. Weak conferences don't kick people out. It would also be kind of a cool distinction for our conference. Temple would be the only team ever kicked out of a conference twice. It's important for the new Big East to show it still has some character. We don't want Temple in the conference. We've got to keep out the rift-raft.

 

[whaler11]

Here are the minor conference teams that were in front of UConn that year (ironically, Memphis is one):

Memphis (8-4)
No. Texas (9-3)
New Mex (8-4)
Navy (8-4)
Fres St (8-5)
Colo St (7-5)
Tulsa (8-4)

So it wasn't just a matter of not having enough bowls, if a 7-5 "non-BCS team" is getting in before UConn. I remember the Hartford Courant uproar when it happened, because everyone assumed we were in (especially after drubbing WF). It was a gigantic snub, and I'm not willing to revise history to match your take on it.

It was far from a giganic snub and it only showed how little our fanbase understood the sport. Funny about Memphis, CUSA with Ville and Cinci isn't quite as minor as being an independent.

Their leagues had tie ins to games. In 2010 Temple in a conference was the one team of 71 left home. UConn was an independent in a system that had 56 bowl teams.

Defend Temple all you like. They have no fan base and a long storied history of
sucking. If you think a few 8 win seasons in the MAC changes that - well I guess we'll see going forward, but even against the mediocre 2012 Big East they are almost universally a distant 8th.

 

[UCFBfan]

Regardless of the circumstances of Temple's entry into the Big East, now that we're comfortable because Boise State is on board, we need to kick Temple out again. That will show we're a conference of strength. Weak conferences don't kick people out. It would also be kind of a cool distinction for our conference. Temple would be the only team ever kicked out of a conference twice. It's important for the new Big East to show it still has some character. We don't want Temple in the conference. We've got to keep out the rift-raft.

What other conference has kicked a team out? Come on....If "conferences of strength" did such silly things do you think Iowa St or Kansas would still be in the Big-12? Do you think Northwestern would be in the B1G? Would Vandy be in the SEC? Would Duke be in the ACC? All the programs I listed bring different things to the table for the conference, most notably bball. Temple will do the same. They have shown some growth in football and might be decent (I don't have hope but you never know). However, they bring a solid academic profile, a good men's and women's bball team, and a second team in a large market. It's the big picture that needs to be seen here, not just through the football goggles.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Substitute "top 5 leagues" for "top 6 leagues" and you may be on to something.

No organization of any type gets stronger when you add members that are below the median strength that exists before their addition. I don't understand why that concept gives so many here so much trouble. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Memphis. We did not strengthen ourselves by adding Temple. And we will not be strengthening ourselves by adding schools that we didn't look at adding while we still had Temple and Memphis to go to.

I disagree with your point. It's not as black and white as you put it. Yes, we are dilluting our league with lessor perceived programs. However, we're also targeting programs in hopes of finding the next Utah, TCU, and Boise (and Louisville/Cincy)... Schools with upward mobility if you will. That in fact does create a gap between us and the other 'non big 5' leagues (MWC, MAC, etc)... I would agree that this strategy doesn't necessarily get us hooked up to the other Big 5 which I believe is your point. But, if we create a big enough seperation with the other conferences, it makes it harder for the pundits to lump us with them (think A-10 in BB. you have to put them as a major BB conference now. not a mid major anymore).
Based on your point, there would be zero realignment. not one program has left their current conference for a lesser 'perceived' conference. Not one. And, when conferences poach another, it isn't poaching a better or stronger conference. That's why the Big12 poaching the ACC would be so detrimental. It would cement the ACC as the 5th conference and put them at the same table with the BE. Notice that up until now, no ACC team has left. That may change, but until it does, the ACC is alive and doing fine along with the other 'major' conferences.

 

[Marty Jackson]

It was far from a giganic snub and it only showed how little our fanbase understood the sport. Funny about Memphis, CUSA with Ville and Cinci isn't quite as minor as being an independent.

Their leagues had tie ins to games. In 2010 Temple in a conference was the one team of 71 left home. UConn was an independent in a system that had 56 bowl teams.

Defend Temple all you like. They have no fan base and a long storied history of
sucking. If you think a few 8 win seasons in the MAC changes that - well I guess we'll see going forward, but even against the mediocre 2012 Big East they are almost universally a distant 8th.

who cares... one of the biggest issues this league has faced is the lack of seperation. the fact that just about any team can beat another in this league on any give day isn't viewed as a plus. By adding a Memphis, or even a Temple if you will(I laugh at the notion that they are below us as they've been pretty competitive with Uconn for several years now), it only helps to create some seperation. The SEC has 4-5 solid teams each year. The rest are buoyed by the fact that they are in the SEC.
If having a school like Memphis gives us an easy win why are we complaining?

 

[UConnDan97]

It was far from a giganic snub and it only showed how little our fanbase understood the sport. Funny about Memphis, CUSA with Ville and Cinci isn't quite as minor as being an independent.

Their leagues had tie ins to games. In 2010 Temple in a conference was the one team of 71 left home. UConn was an independent in a system that had 56 bowl teams.

Defend Temple all you like. They have no fan base and a long storied history of
sucking. If you think a few 8 win seasons in the MAC changes that - well I guess we'll see going forward, but even against the mediocre 2012 Big East they are almost universally a distant 8th.

I'm still waiting for you to rescind your comment that the Big East only added Temple to fill the schedule, since I provided at least 5 links that stated Villanova had been blocking them since October of last year. I suspect I will continue to wait...

 

[whaler11]

I'm still waiting for you to rescind your comment that the Big East only added Temple to fill the schedule, since I provided at least 5 links that stated Villanova had been blocking them since October of last year. I suspect I will continue to wait...

I'm not going to as that is why they are in the league. They pressured Nova because they needed Temple for 2012.

The new football schools don't give a crap if the Catholics walk. Only UConn and Louisville do.

 

[whaler11]

who cares... one of the biggest issues this league has faced is the lack of seperation. the fact that just about any team can beat another in this league on any give day isn't viewed as a plus. By adding a Memphis, or even a Temple if you will(I laugh at the notion that they are below us as they've been pretty competitive with Uconn for several years now), it only helps to create some seperation. The SEC has 4-5 solid teams each year. The rest are buoyed by the fact that they are in the SEC.
If having a school like Memphis gives us an easy win why are we complaining?

Because easy wins over Memphis don't change anyone's perception. The weak teams in the SEC are nowhere near as bad as the weak teams in the Big East.

 

[UConnDan97]

I'm not going to as that is why they are in the league. They pressured Nova because they needed Temple for 2012.

The new football schools don't give a crap if the Catholics walk. Only UConn and Louisville do.

The point was that they were looking to add Temple 5 months before they knew they would have a scheduling problem, and Villanova said "no". I know it's hard for you to say "I might have been mistaken." No worries.

 

[emshorts]

Because easy wins over Memphis don't change anyone's perception. The weak teams in the SEC are nowhere near as bad as the weak teams in the Big East.

for whatever it's worth, look at these stats
http://louisvillesportslive.net/inside-the-numbersbig-east-vs-sec/#idc-container

 

[whaler11]

The point was that they were looking to add Temple 5 months before they knew they would have a scheduling problem, and Villanova said "no". I know it's hard for you to say "I might have been mistaken." No worries.

I'm fine to admit when wrong.

They didn't care enough to convince Nova until after Boise couldn't get free. If they didn't have the 2012 problem they wouldn't have needed to convince Nova. Once Syracuse and Pittsburgh left the Catholics lost two more programs who care about basketball and the new programs aren't going to give a damn about splitting. Nova's bargaining position and ability to block a school was decreased when the football schools were desperate for 2012 football games. Playing with 7 teams in 2012 would have been a huge issue for the football league in the court of public opinion even for the schools who haven't entered yet.

If they were dumb enough to want Temple before that... That's a separate issue.

 

[whaler11]

for whatever it's worth, look at these stats
http://louisvillesportslive.net/inside-the-numbersbig-east-vs-sec/#idc-container

So going into last year UConn, USF, Cinci and Louisville were 5-6 against the SEC.

Is that a big deal when Louisville plays Kentucky every year?

 

[emshorts]

So going into last year UConn, USF, Cinci and Louisville were 5-6 against the SEC.

Is that a big deal when Louisville plays Kentucky every year?

ok, lets take louisville record out & the BE is 8-4. i'm not naive to think we can dominate the hierarchy of the sec . the fact that the BE is 10-8, 3-1 in bowls games since 2005 is still ok in my book. hence my reply "for whatever it's worth"..

 

[whaler11]

ok, lets take louisville record out & the BE is 8-4. i'm not naive to think we can dominate the hierarchy of the sec . the fact that the BE is 10-8, 3-1 in bowls games since 2005 is still ok in my book. hence my reply "for whatever it's worth"..

Funny. Take out LV against Kentucky but leave in Pitt and WVU. That makes sense.

You've heard WVU isn't in the league anymore right? So clearly it's worth nothing.

Through 2010 SEC versus:
houston 58-28
Cinci. 39-7
Memphis 99-36
LV 21-10

 

[emshorts]

Funny. Take out LV against Kentucky but leave in Pitt and WVU. That makes sense.

You've heard WVU isn't in the league anymore right? So clearly it's worth nothing.

Through 2010 SEC versus:
houston 58-28
Cinci. 39-7
Memphis 99-36
LV 21-10

u made a comment about weak teams sec vs BE. i provided a link that since 2005, i repeat, since 2005 the BE in football has held it's own vs the sec. that's all. i don't know what the above #'s u typed are in reference to, but if they represent anything pre 2005 i don't care. the link i provided has nothing to do with houston & memphis unless i was in a coma when they were in the BE....

 

[whaler11]

u made a comment about weak teams sec vs BE. i provided a link that since 2005, i repeat, since 2005 the BE in football has held it's own vs the sec. that's all. i don't know what the above #'s u typed are in reference to, but if they represent anything pre 2005 i don't care. the link i provided has nothing to do with houston & memphis unless i was in a coma when they were in the BE....

The four teams that are still in the league are 5-6 against the SEC and that includes LV playing Kentucky every year.

UConn beat SC and I think USF beat Auburn. The rest of the wins are against Kentucky and Vandy.

The most important game saw Cinci get beat by Florida by 6,000 points.

Memphis and Temple are in the Big East going forward. WVU and Pitt are not. So why does it matter what WVU did in the last six years when it comes to the perception of the Big East going forward.

It's almost as stupid as including Miami in the BE BCS numbers when people kill the ACC's record.

 

[pj]

Joining the Big East upgrades programs. You can't take a team's record in the C-USA and use it to predict their performance in the Big East.

Just like joining the ACC downgrades programs. You wouldn't take Miami's or BC's record in the Big East and use it to project the performance after joining the ACC. That would be silly.

 

[whaler11]

Joining the Big East upgrades programs. You can't take a team's record in the C-USA and use it to predict their performance in the Big East.

Just like joining the ACC downgrades programs. You wouldn't take Miami's or BC's record in the Big East and use it to project the performance after joining the ACC. That would be silly.

Yeah BC is bad because they are in the ACC. Not because they had a really good coach and got rid of him because he interviewed for an NFL job. It's their conference affiliation - not the coach and AD.

I noticed you omitted VPI. Guess, it didn't happen to them.

 

[pj]

Memphis and Temple are in the Big East going forward. WVU and Pitt are not. So why does it matter what WVU did in the last six years when it comes to the perception of the Big East going forward.

It's almost as stupid as including Miami in the BE BCS numbers when people kill the ACC's record.

So we shouldn’t count team’s records in their prior conferences. Only their records after joining their new conference matter. Got it.

Through 2010 SEC versus:
houston 58-28
Cinci. 39-7
Memphis 99-36
LV 21-10

Wow, Houston went 3-25 versus the SEC pre-1965. http://mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/hou/sec.shtml We’d better count those games from 50 years ago, they really prove the Big East is inferior to the SEC.

What was your argument again?

 

[whaler11]

So we shouldn’t count team’s records in their prior conferences. Only their records after joining their new conference matter. Got it.


Wow, Houston went 3-25 versus the SEC pre-1965. http://mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/hou/sec.shtml We’d better count those games from 50 years ago, they really prove the Big East is inferior to the SEC.

What was your argument again?

Do you not get that the opinions that people have of schools and conferences are based on long history developed over decades?

So yes the fact that the SEC has been hammering Houston, Cinci, Memphis and others for years matters. On top of the obvious visual evidence that the SEC is better than the Big East - a sample of 11 games where there are two wins over teams not named Kentucky or Vanderbilt means nothing. Note Rutgers and Syracuse didn't even play a game against the SEC - I'll spoil it though, they weren't going to beat anyone with a pulse.

If you want to draw conclusions about the Big East going forward based on a handful of games that WVU won that's your business, but it's laughable to anyone in the country who isn't a Big East fan trying to fool themselves about this league.

Would you argue that the Big East is a far superior basketball conference than the SEC? Well that link says they are only 45-40 against the SEC since Louisville joined - I guess that means they are really really close! Let me guess that you don't really believe that because it's nonsense.

 

[UConnDan97]

So we shouldn’t count team’s records in their prior conferences. Only their records after joining their new conference matter. Got it.


Wow, Houston went 3-25 versus the SEC pre-1965. http://mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/hou/sec.shtml We’d better count those games from 50 years ago, they really prove the Big East is inferior to the SEC.

What was your argument again?

You have to understand that Whaler just loves to be a contrarian. Next up, he is going to pull out UConn's records against New Hampshire and Hofstra, because some of those games were in the 90's, and that should reflect who we are now...

 

[pj]

Whaler, all I'm saying is things change. Boise was nothing, now it's respected. Houston is winning respect. Definitely some programs benefit from a long history, and the Big East doesn't have any of them. But that doesn't mean the Big East has no future.