Well, I disagree. The Big East started as a basketball conference and eventually grew into a basketball powerhouse. As teams shuffled in and out, the financial focus of the league, if not its interest, skewed towards football. It's neither a right nor a wrong thing that this happened, it's simply a reflection of the way that college athletics has been evolving (or devolving, depending on your point of view).
The Big East added Cincy, DePaul, Louisville and Marquette with the intention of eventually splitting into two leagues - one for bball onlies and one for football. The real shame here isn't that the Big East is finally doing it, it's that the Big East has dragged its feet on reorganizing and let other leagues make decisions for it.
i don't disagree with the first half of your post, but did the BE really drag it's feet? they did add TCU thinking it made it's football footprint stronger, but not strong enough as Syracuse and Pitt were aggressive in looking elsewhere.Well, I disagree. The Big East started as a basketball conference and eventually grew into a basketball powerhouse. As teams shuffled in and out, the financial focus of the league, if not its interest, skewed towards football. It's neither a right nor a wrong thing that this happened, it's simply a reflection of the way that college athletics has been evolving (or devolving, depending on your point of view).
The Big East added Cincy, DePaul, Louisville and Marquette with the intention of eventually splitting into two leagues - one for bball onlies and one for football. The real shame here isn't that the Big East is finally doing it, it's that the Big East has dragged its feet on reorganizing and let other leagues make decisions for it.
i don't disagree with that at all. however what schools do you add? even if we'd split 5 years ago, the BE was NEVER going to get any teams from the ACC, Big 12, Big 10, SEC or Pac 10. that leaves schools like TCU, Eastern Carolina, Central Florida, Houston, Temple, Boise State, Memphis, Army, Navy, and maybe a few others. what would you have had the BE do? who would you have had them go after to make the conference strong enough? if the Big 12 couldn't stay together, how did you expect the BE to?I think the Big East has been slow on the uptake with this whole thing from the start. They failed to understand the situation with Miami and BC and then lost VA Tech to boot with them. They failed to place any real deep pocket restricitions like the ACC did to really detain anyone deciding to continue to seek new relationships. 5 million is nothing in today's market and the ACC's 20 million may not be enough. Louisville was added and USF but clearly that was not enough or Pitt and Syracuse would have found more reason to stay. The football schools should have compeltely gone their own way 5 years ago and worked hard to strengthen their numbers. Instead we now stand where we are.
i don't disagree with the first half of your post, but did the BE really drag it's feet? they did add TCU thinking it made it's football footprint stronger, but not strong enough as Syracuse and Pitt were aggressive in looking elsewhere.
I totally agree with you - adding TCU took too long, but even if they actively pursued any of the schools you and/or I mentioned, how does that make the conference strong enough? let's say 5 years ago the BE football program splits off completely and becomes the Eastern Conference. you have the 8 schools. TCU is looked at 5 years ago and is added 4 years ago. who else makes the conference strong enough to withstand a raid?It took 5 years for the Big East to secure another football school into the league. And now what was the Big East supposed to do with 9 teams? Where there any negotiations with other schools? If so, those discussions were better kept secrets than the D-Day planning sessions. There are schools that were begging to be let into the Big East - Memphis, ECU and Central Florida, for example. Even if the Big East didn't want those schools, couldn't they parlay that interest as a kind of lure to other schools, kind of what the ACC is doing now?
Meanwhile, a couple years ago, the league brings in a football guy, Paul Tagliabue, who apparently was working to keep the ungainly 16 team football/basketball mish-mash together. What a boondoggle! Of course the basketball onlies don't want to lose the football schools - the payout for one BCS bowl is huge and they get to share the rewards without investing in an expensive sport.
According to today's Boston Globe, Marinatto's performance as BEast commissioner is coming under scrutiny, and rightfully so. To say he has been inept is a pretty generous assessment of his "accomplishments" to date.
It took 5 years for the Big East to secure another football school into the league. And now what was the Big East supposed to do with 9 teams? Where there any negotiations with other schools? If so, those discussions were better kept secrets than the D-Day planning sessions. There are schools that were begging to be let into the Big East - Memphis, ECU and Central Florida, for example. Even if the Big East didn't want those schools, couldn't they parlay that interest as a kind of lure to other schools, kind of what the ACC is doing now?
Meanwhile, a couple years ago, the league brings in a football guy, Paul Tagliabue, who apparently was working to keep the ungainly 16 team football/basketball mish-mash together. What a boondoggle! Of course the basketball onlies don't want to lose the football schools - the payout for one BCS bowl is huge and they get to share the rewards without investing in an expensive sport.
According to today's Boston Globe, Marinatto's performance as BEast commissioner is coming under scrutiny, and rightfully so. To say he has been inept is a pretty generous assessment of his "accomplishments" to date.
i don't disagree with that at all. however what schools do you add? even if we'd split 5 years ago, the BE was NEVER going to get any teams from the ACC, Big 12, Big 10, SEC or Pac 10. that leaves schools like TCU, Eastern Carolina, Central Florida, Houston, Temple, Boise State, Memphis, Army, Navy, and maybe a few others. what would you have had the BE do? who would you have had them go after to make the conference strong enough? if the Big 12 couldn't stay together, how did you expect the BE to?
I'd be very curious to read something from Pitt and Syracuse as to why now. if the BE wasn't so married to the hoops schools (ie. a culture that gave equal weight to hoops and football), if this would have been avoided. or if there was nothing the BE could have done to prevent this. we may never know...
It took 5 years for the Big East to secure another football school into the league. And now what was the Big East supposed to do with 9 teams? Where there any negotiations with other schools? If so, those discussions were better kept secrets than the D-Day planning sessions. There are schools that were begging to be let into the Big East - Memphis, ECU and Central Florida, for example. Even if the Big East didn't want those schools, couldn't they parlay that interest as a kind of lure to other schools, kind of what the ACC is doing now?
Meanwhile, a couple years ago, the league brings in a football guy, Paul Tagliabue, who apparently was working to keep the ungainly 16 team football/basketball mish-mash together. What a boondoggle! Of course the basketball onlies don't want to lose the football schools - the payout for one BCS bowl is huge and they get to share the rewards without investing in an expensive sport.
According to today's Boston Globe, Marinatto's performance as BEast commissioner is coming under scrutiny, and rightfully so. To say he has been inept is a pretty generous assessment of his "accomplishments" to date.
But I think we all realize that the beginning of the end started when the ACC took Miami and VTech. Those were traditional, reliable FB TV/Bowl guarantees that the BE had. At that point, the BE became like the step-sister to the other 5 in general---regardless of the men's and women's BB successes. AND they made NO known attempts to try to fill that revenue gap left solely due to FB. Instead, the BE chose to ignore the revenue loss and contributed to this attitude by having God only knows how many teams in any given season JUST for basketball. That, at the very least, gave the appearance of focus on BB--both to members and other schools and fans..
well yes that is 100% correct IMHO as well. shoulda, woulda, coulda right? at this point now, we are left scrambling as is RU, LVille and WVU. i have a feeling USF and Cinci will be completely left out... and i'm not sure about L'ville...Eric, my feelings are that the BE should have been on top of the situation before they ever lost Miami, VA Tech and BC. If they had made the split with the hoops schools right then and there and brought in lville and USF right then and there the conference would have been stronger than the ACC. Miami, VA Tech, Pitt , WVU, BC, UConn, Louisville, Syracuse, Rutgers, USF. A nice ten teams to start with.
Well, I disagree. The Big East started as a basketball conference and eventually grew into a basketball powerhouse. As teams shuffled in and out, the financial focus of the league, if not its interest, skewed towards football. It's neither a right nor a wrong thing that this happened, it's simply a reflection of the way that college athletics has been evolving (or devolving, depending on your point of view).
The Big East added Cincy, DePaul, Louisville and Marquette with the intention of eventually splitting into two leagues - one for bball onlies and one for football. The real shame here isn't that the Big East is finally doing it, it's that the Big East has dragged its feet on reorganizing and let other leagues make decisions for it.
But the issue being discussed was the BE dragging their feet and so woulda, coulda, shoulda is the topic. And they dropped the ball.well yes that is 100% correct IMHO as well. shoulda, woulda, coulda right? at this point now, we are left scrambling as is RU, LVille and WVU. i have a feeling USF and Cinci will be completely left out... and i'm not sure about L'ville...
i think everyone agrees the beginning of the end was 5 years ago when they let Miami, BC, and Va Tech go. that was when the ball was dropped. they replaced them with Cinci and L'ville for football. in light of being unable go to back and change history from 5 years ago, but learning from the past, what would you have had the BE do in the past few years? how would you have stopped Pitt and Syracuse from leaving? of course they dropped the ball. but would splitting off 2 years ago, adding TCU then, have kept Syracuse and Pitt?But the issue being discussed was the BE dragging their feet and so woulda, coulda, shoulda is the topic. And they dropped the ball.
so the problem was 5 years ago, not the recent foot dragging...