So What Happens to BE Football if . . .

[freescooter]

So you're point is thaat basketball only conferences can't compete?

Butler, Gonzaga, VCU, Xavier, etc have all been successful recently without the aid of football.

To say name brand programs like. Nova and Geoergetown would fade into oblivion without the association with the likes of Rutgers football is ridiculous.

The fact that a few individual schools have made it to the Final Four doesn't mprove that a basketball only league can succeed. And indeed, none have. Not one. Look at the A-10. it has programs in comparable cities to the Big East. Programs with good tradition. Can't succeed. name me a mid-major conference, not a one off team somewhere, that has competed at this level. Who was the last national champ, not Final four participant...that can be just luck in a 1 and done event, but last national champion from a mid-major conference? Maybe UNLV in 1990. Yes, on occassion a mid-major team makes a run. But reading it as more than it is the success of an individual program's success is a huge mistake.

 

[businesslawyer]

The fact that a few individual schools have made it to the Final Four doesn't mprove that a basketball only league can succeed. And indeed, none have. Not one. Look at the A-10. it has programs in comparable cities to the Big East. Programs with good tradition. Can't succeed. name me a mid-major conference, not a one off team somewhere, that has competed at this level. Who was the last national champ, not Final four participant...that can be just luck in a 1 and done event, but last national champion from a mid-major conference? Maybe UNLV in 1990. Yes, on occassion a mid-major team makes a run. But reading it as more than it is the success of an individual program's success is a huge mistake.

If you really, reall think you can compare the history, tradition and resources of LaSalle, Fordham, GW and Rhodey to, in the same markets, 'Nova, St. Johns, Georgetown and Providence there is no point in this discussion. We both know you are a bright guy. Does your background in public institutions make you less friendly to religious ones? Do you have a blind spot on this? You are taking a 100% doubt free position that does not make sense.

No one is saying a Big East Catholic league is as good as a Big East football league in hoops. No one. But to dismiss the basketball onlies compared to the SEC, or the Pac Ten, and to dismiss them as just the A-Ten but for their alliance with us, is absurd. Among other reasons, when the Big East started, and made its splash into the Big Time, it was a conference of schools that didn't play big time football. Of the first 8 members, 6 didn't. And, as someone else said, for all the football money 'Bama and USC and Nebraska make, where has that made them basketball powers?

 

[freescooter]

If you really, reall think you can compare the history, tradition and resources of LaSalle, Fordham, GW and Rhodey to, in the same markets, 'Nova, St. Johns, Georgetown and Providence there is no point in this discussion. We both know you are a bright guy. Does your background in public institutions make you less friendly to religious ones? Do you have a blind spot on this? You are taking a 100% doubt free position that does not make sense.

No one is saying a Big East Catholic league is as good as a Big East football league in hoops. No one. But to dismiss the basketball onlies compared to the SEC, or the Pac Ten, and to dismiss them as just the A-Ten but for their alliance with us, is absurd. Among other reasons, when the Big East started, and made its splash into the Big Time, it was a conference of schools that didn't play big time football. Of the first 8 members, 6 didn't. And, as someone else said, for all the football money 'Bama and USC and Nebraska make, where has that made them basketball powers?

Again, name me a non-football affiliated conference that has been able to compete year in year out. You can't because they can't do it. the world has changed since 1979. You couldn't put together a basketball conference today like the Big East of that time. In part it is about content, and the football schools provide it for the entire tv season...Labor day to St Patricks Day. that alone is one reaosn they are getting such high dollars. You can make a single deal and fill your content needs for the entire tv season. The Catholic League, if you want to call it that, can't do that. So right away they are at a disadvantage. As far as 'Bama and USC, in large part they aren't as successful because they never really focussed on basketball. It simply isn't that important. But if you look at some schools who have increased its priority, as Texas and Tennessee have, they have been much more successful. Florida has and won 2 national championships. I'm pretty comfortable that a league with the Big East basketball onlies and a couple of others wouldn't be much more than a high mid-major in a relatively few years. they wouldn't have the viewership, they wuldn't have the marketing power. Maybe the A-10 is a bit of an exaggeration, though not too much. Depite having teams during the late 90s and early 2000s that were ranked near the top, Temple for several years during the Chaney years and St Joes for a few years, and UMass during the Calipari years,Xavier and Temple more recently, it has never been able to make the step up to major status. Nor has a single other "mid-major" conference.

 

[businesslawyer]

Again, name me a non-football affiliated conference that has been able to compete year in year out. You can't because they can't do it. the world has changed since 1979. You couldn't put together a basketball conference today like the Big East of that time. In part it is about content, and the football schools provide it for the entire tv season...Labor day to St Patricks Day. that alone is one reaosn they are getting such high dollars. You can make a single deal and fill your content needs for the entire tv season. The Catholic League, if you want to call it that, can't do that. So right away they are at a disadvantage. As far as 'Bama and USC, in large part they aren't as successful because they never really focussed on basketball. It simply isn't that important. But if you look at some schools who have increased its priority, as Texas and Tennessee have, they have been much more successful. Florida has and won 2 national championships. I'm pretty comfortable that a league with the Big East basketball onlies and a couple of others wouldn't be much more than a high mid-major in a relatively few years. they wouldn't have the viewership, they wuldn't have the marketing power. Maybe the A-10 is a bit of an exaggeration, though not too much. Depite having teams during the late 90s and early 2000s that were ranked near the top, Temple for several years during the Chaney years and St Joes for a few years, and UMass during the Calipari years,Xavier and Temple more recently, it has never been able to make the step up to major status. Nor has a single other "mid-major" conference.

Well, in all likelihood we will know soon enough. I suggest you save this thread.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

BL, all other comparisons aside, at the time of the formation of the BE, LaSalle could claim to have bneen the equal to any of the other Big Five and being left out of not only the BE (Nova) but also the A-10 (Temple & St Joe's), and being relegated to a third tier (MAAC) conference is what killed them. By the time they were able to get into the A-10 (more than a decade after St Joe's) it was too late.

 

[businesslawyer]

By the 70s, my recollection is Nova had far surpassed LaSalle as a year-in year-out basketball program. From the (erased) final four run with Porter and Siemientowski forward, I don't think LaSalle was on that level.

I understand that there was a time that LaSalle was better, and I understand that LaSalle was badly hurt by the way the rush to conferences in the northeast played out, but with all due respect I will elect to stand by my earlier statement.