My Two Cents!

[ctchamps]

I've always wondered if the dilution of the bb programs hurt the major bb programs. If the major bb programs divorced themselves from the NCAA and formed their own version of the BCS they would have had similar negotiating powers as the football teams in the BCS conferences. But that opportunity has come and gone. So basketball makes money but football makes more because of supply and demand.​

The move by Cuse and Pitt doesn't guarantee anything for them or the ACC. The first poaching by the ACC proved that. And a super strong football conference doesn't guarantee anything. The B12 proved that. There is no way of knowing if the football schools had split from the bb schools what would have happened. There is no way of knowing if the BE accepted the ESPN contract what would have happened. In the end most of us are placing logic on a situation that is as much driven by emotion.​

Many fans targeted the ACC, Miami and BC for backstabbing the BE conference. And many of the same people are hoping UConn can do the same thing. So many of us hate greed, but in the end most people are looking for the most $$ and don't see the cup half full. If a conference lags behind other conferences in $$, even if the conference is doing very well, it isn't good enough. The BE was a good conference and made money. But jealousies, envy, insecurity, desire and intolerance will win out every time.​

Almost every poster enjoyed seeing the failure that the additions of Miami and BC brought to the ACC. That move did not hurt the BE in football and ended up allowing the BE to leap ahead of the ACC in basketball. But some of the BE football schools were convinced that the bb only schools were to blame for the weakness with their football programs. That's the excuse they needed to bolt. But they will fail if they believe their shortcomings can be overcome by just going to a new environment.​

Syracuse, and to a lesser extent Pitt, are trying to regain their glory days and are hoping the jump to the ACC will be the fix for their downward slide. But the ACC will give them nothing that the BE already provided to make up for bad coaching and bad recruiting.​

I'm happy it was reported UConn had worked to maintain the BE. IMO this was the higher ground. The extra millions that JC turned down after the 2001 season, or JoePa giving back his salary to the University are anomalies in this day and age. Everybody wants the quick buck and the extra buck. And everybody justifies their entitlement to it. UConn may have no choice in seeking other conferences. But I'm not sure ending up in any new or altered conference will significantly change the outcome of its sports or academics in spite of all our protestations otherwise.​

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

IMO, there is no "higher ground" here...financial self interest, a clear and brazen money grab, will rule and structure the day, for fans, Universitity/Academic Priorities, and student athletics/athletes...indeed, as Pogo foretells, "we have met the enemy and he is us."

I await the PR spin as UCONN exits The Forsaken East.

 

[ctchamps]

IMO, there is no "higher ground" here...financial self interest, a clear and brazen money grab, will rule and structure the day, for fans, Universitity/Academic Priorities, and student athletics/athletes...indeed, as Pogo foretells, "we have met the enemy and he is us."

I await the PR spin as UCONN exits The Forsaken East.

For me, the higher ground means that UConn saw the benefits they derived from the BE affiliation and downplayed the detriments. Detriments certainly existed. But schools like Miami, BC, Pitt and Syracuse saw things differently.

Apparently the University bucked some of the other football schools in trying to hold the BE together. Perhaps they should stick with the basket ball only schools and sacrifice football, but suggesting that would be just as selfish by anyone who could care less about football. We all are coming from our own perspectives about what is decent and what isn't. That is a long way from knowing the absolute right from wrong. I would say there are higher and lower grounds and that I was wrong to use this term in my original post. I should have stated it is my preferential choice in dealing with people and institutions.

And in no way am I condemning Pitt or Syracuse. They are doing what they think is in their Universities best interest. That isn't selfish. That is their responsibility. Everyone should be advocating for themselves even as they advocate for others.

I do believe that there is a perspective that has got out of balance regarding monies. Making enough money is overlooked if it gets compared with others making more money. This then drives people, institutions or societies to want more. The problem is knowing if we have enough. And that question will be answered differently by different people.

IMO the BE members were making enough money and had they stuck together, the upcoming contract would have been a significant upgrade over the current one. So I question the need for Pitt or Syracuse to have made the jump. But circumstances could have evolved where other schools left the BE and then Pitt and Syracuse could have been left in a non BCS conference when the dust settled. And for many current and past students, the football traditions were a big part of their association with the schools. So who am I to judge their decision as being bad. I can't. I hope things work out for them and for all the Universities in whatever direction they take.

 

[willtalk]

These conference TV contracts are just the beginning. The real public interest and money is in the playoffs. It's about the schools being able to deal directly with the media in marketing themselves. If and when the Super Conferences become a reality they would be able to create their own National Champianship Playoff system dealing directly with the media. The BCS will cease to exist and eventually the NCAA will follow. Think it's not possible. Many years ago the winner of the NIT was considered the National Champion until the NCAA surplanted them. The power the NCAA holds over the colleges is that they dictate who plays in the bowls and playoffs. Through their collective weight, the four Super Conferences would have enough power to surplant the NCAA.
Footballs TV marketing is what's fueling the new conference alinements but basketball will also feel the same effects. You could be in a basketball conference but the big TV contracts are dictated by football. So those that are not in a major football conference are at a major disadvantage in maintaining a high level program. Money and TV exposure plays a major role in recruiting. College athletics is becoming more and more like big business with the larger fish eating the smaller ones. It is the football TV money that feeds the fish in the Super Conferences enabling them to grow big enough to eat the rest.

 

[willtalk]

I've always wondered if the dilution of the bb programs hurt the major bb programs. If the major bb programs divorced themselves from the NCAA and formed their own version of the BCS they would have had similar negotiating powers as the football teams in the BCS conferences. But that opportunity has come and gone. So basketball makes money but football makes more because of supply and demand.---------------------------------------------------------​

The move by Cuse and Pitt doesn't guarantee anything for them or the ACC. The first poaching by the ACC proved that. And a super strong football conference doesn't guarantee anything. The B12 proved that. There is no way of knowing if the football schools had split from the bb schools what would have happened. There is no way of knowing if the BE accepted the ESPN contract what would have happened. In the end most of us are placing logic on a situation that is as much driven by emotion.----------------------

The Basketball programs don't have the same power that the football programs have. It's tied into national interest. The only time there is even simular national interest in basketball as college football is during the playoffs. What really hurt team interest was all the early entrys into the pro's. Basketball is more personality driven than football. College basketball doesn't come close to the interest in the NBA. Interest in college football is far greater in relation to their professional counterparts. I think that most basketball fans don't get that. I am a basketball fan, (hay I am posting on a womens site) but I recognize the reality.

I disagree about Cuse, Pitt and the ACC. Their entrance ensured the survival of the ACC not only as a BCS AQ, but as one of four potential Superconferences. Even being an AQ won't mean much if the BCS doesn't exist anymore. The Super Conferences will dictate who gets in the playoffs. The reason the Big12 went under is because of the lack of unity that split the conferences marketing power. Basically caused by Texas's greed and "I'll get mine and to h*ll with everyone else" additude which p*ssed everyone else off. Other wise they could have been the fourth Super Conference. There are not enough quality teams around to have more than that. A major reason Big East dessolved was because of the division between the football and basketball interests in the conference. Also your conference had fewer football teams than the ACC so you were more at risk. Basketball people just don't get that most people in this country are not enamored of the game as they are. The major problems that some schools have now is that they failed to see the future. Once the future is upon us it is often to late to act.

 

[ctchamps]

The Basketball programs don't have the same power that the football programs have. It's tied into national interest. The only time there is even simular national interest in basketball as college football is during the playoffs. What really hurt team interest was all the early entrys into the pro's. Basketball is more personality driven than football. College basketball doesn't come close to the interest in the NBA. Interest in college football is far greater in relation to their professional counterparts. I think that most basketball fans don't get that. I am a basketball fan, (hay I am posting on a womens site) but I recognize the reality.

I disagree about Cuse, Pitt and the ACC. Their entrance ensured the survival of the ACC not only as a BCS AQ, but as one of four potential Superconferences. Even being an AQ won't mean much if the BCS doesn't exist anymore. The Super Conferences will dictate who gets in the playoffs. The reason the Big12 went under is because of the lack of unity that split the conferences marketing power. Basically caused by Texas's greed and "I'll get mine and to h*ll with everyone else" additude which p*ssed everyone else off. Other wise they could have been the fourth Super Conference. There are not enough quality teams around to have more than that. A major reason Big East dessolved was because of the division between the football and basketball interests in the conference. Also your conference had fewer football teams than the ACC so you were more at risk. Basketball people just don't get that most people in this country are not enamored of the game as they are. The major problems that some schools have now is that they failed to see the future. Once the future is upon us it is often to late to act.

We are saying the same thing but looking at it in different ways. Interest by fans creates viewership, and media creates contracts dependent upon viewership. I'm totally aware of that and aware that college football is followed by more fans than college basketball.

So my opening statement was made as a potential marketing ploy for college basketball. If the major powerhouses in college basketball combined to form their own conferences about the same time the football schools chose to do this they would have been less diluted and viewership could have increased. Would this result in equal interest to football. Absolutely not. But fans would have had less number of games to divide their attention and viewership would have increased, giving these bb conference more leverage for media contracts.

Fan interest is the same reason the ACC is not a slam dunk for stability. If the football product the ACC offers is of poor quality the sports fans won't be tuned into their games and the networks will offer contracts accordingly. Currently the ACC is weak in football. The addition of Syracuse and Pittsburgh doesn't necessarily create a football powerhouse. Neither will the addition of Rutgers or UConn. The conference is anchored by only two teams, VT and FSU. That won't keep interest in the product and is the reason the ACC has such a poor media contract relative to the other BCS conferences not named BE. If the ACC loses FSU (and this is a very likely possibility) it could end up being a BB conference with a token football BCS conference which will fall further and further behind the other three (or four BCS conferences). So I still question why Pitt and Cuse jumped to the ACC. If the B1G or the SEC were interested in them, that would be a different story. But if football is dictating market value, these teams jumped from Newark to Detroit imo.