The first order of business for the New New Big East | Page 3 | The Boneyard

The first order of business for the New New Big East

Status
Not open for further replies.
SAMCRO said:
Carl, you asked toppencil for an explanation as to why Nova, SJU, PC, Gtown, aren't in the ACC. The answer is they don't need to be. They are in a great league today, playing long time regional rivals at the highest level of their primary sport (BB). It would make no sense for them to be in the ACC.
Expand ...

True, that's a good answer. But why don't they need to be? Football. They need us more than we need them.

Another question would be - and I know it's been asked by others ad naueseum without decent answer, but that question would be:

If the 7 catholics metro schools are so valueable - why has the ACC gone after and acquired Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.....instead of Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, Seton Hall and Providence? Depaul and Marquette don't really count in this, because they woldn't be in the big east, if it wasn't for football.
 
I said it earlier in the thread, but replacing the hoops only programs with ECU, UCF and Houston and splitting off would destroy the basketball league. It would be the stupidest move possible. You don't turn a mild loss on the football side into a massive loss on the basketball side. That is idiotic.
 
The bottom line is that a STABLE all sports BCS conference based on the 6 remianing big east all sports schools, TCU and whatever other program they can find will be more profitable long term than remaining in the mess the big east has created.

You have to remember the scheduling, travel time, rivalry and academics around scholarship athletes is actually a pretty important thing in recruiting.

THere's a ton of money that's involved in all of that, and it's going down the tubes in this mess of a conference right now.

I think the schools would take a hit initially becase the basketball revenue in a new broadcasting contract would be less, but they'd have football, and the BCS income to distribute, and less schools.
 
What the BB apologistas (I think we can now use that term) should explain is how much value do the BBonlies really bring beyond GTown, ND and Nova.

Should the BE split, any hit in TV revenue would be largely due to the departure Of Pitt and Cuse, plus whomever else (Uconn, Wvu, UL) might find a more stable situation. SH, PC, Depaul, and St. Johns have only provided an inventory of filler games. Few of which have been picked up nationally. Pitino might be whining about which teams get home and home dates, but he knows its driven by TV.

An argument can be made that a FB split could up the TV contract for BB because it would provide more marquee conference and OOC matchups.

But, splitting is only an option if all of the FB schools agree to stick together. That can't happen right now as only USF and Cincy are willing to do that right now and only because they are not being considered by other conferences.

The ground has shifted beneath the Big East. It is time for every school to reassess its position. To not do so would be foolish. We'll just have to wait to see if a new BE makes any sense.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
 
I have said a dozen times in other threads, this round of expansion is about MARKETS not football, as most of you seem to think. If it was about football, Oklahoma would be in another conference right now, and Colorado would be grasping on for dear life. Instead, Colorado and Utah are appealing expansion candidates and BYU is the current crown jewel, whereas schools like Oklahoma and WVU don't get their calls returned despite lots of football success.

So how does cutting New York City x2, DC, Philly, Chicago, Marquette and Providence from the league help us?
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
I have said a dozen times in other threads, this round of expansion is about MARKETS not football, as most of you seem to think. If it was about football, Oklahoma would be in another conference right now, and Colorado would be grasping on for dear life. Instead, Colorado and Utah are appealing expansion candidates and BYU is the current crown jewel, whereas schools like Oklahoma and WVU don't get their calls returned despite lots of football success.

So how does cutting New York City x2, DC, Philly, Chicago, Marquette and Providence from the league help us?
Expand ...


Are you serious? Who is us? If you're talking about the small colleges w/ basketball and no football as "us", then removing UConn, Rutgers, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinatti and USF fromt he league is potentially devastating for revenue streams. It's got nothing to do with markets - for the big east/acc, it's about stability and revenue and costs of running major college athletic programs. Out west, midwest, the markets and broadcasting are driving things, not in the east. Your premise is flawed.

If those basketball schools are so valueable, and the markets are so valueable? the ACC as a predator to the big east would have been going after them instead of the schools they did take - Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Syracuse and Pittsburgh.

For some reason, you don't want to be able to accept that. I don't get it.
 
The problem, really, is that the big East needed to split before this happened. Now I'm not sure you can put together a league that will work as a basketball league, at least for a while. Much like the aftermath of the last raid, the big East football schools need the basketball ones for stability right now. They did in 2004 as well. What really needed to happen then, was that there needed to be a plan for seperating football from basketball and creating two leagues. The football schools need to be able to make decisions that benefit them in the long run, be it media deals, or additonal members. Who knows whether a seperate league would have kept Pitt and Syracue in the fold. No way to say for sure, but what we do know is that the existing setup has resulted in 5 of the original BE football members leaving for the ACC.
 
SubbaBub said:
What the BB apologistas (I think we can now use that term) should explain is how much value do the BBonlies really bring beyond GTown, ND and Nova.

Should the BE split, any hit in TV revenue would be largely due to the departure Of Pitt and Cuse, plus whomever else (Uconn, Wvu, UL) might find a more stable situation. SH, PC, Depaul, and St. Johns have only provided an inventory of filler games. Few of which have been picked up nationally. Pitino might be whining about which teams get home and home dates, but he knows its driven by TV.

An argument can be made that a FB split could up the TV contract for BB because it would provide more marquee conference and OOC matchups.

But, splitting is only an option if all of the FB schools agree to stick together. That can't happen right now as only USF and Cincy are willing to do that right now and only because they are not being considered by other conferences.

The ground has shifted beneath the Big East. It is time for every school to reassess its position. To not do so would be foolish. We'll just have to wait to see if a new BE makes any sense.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
Expand ...
Your post and some others here are about as factual as a tea party flyer. And since we're name calling now; I think the FB tards (I think we can use that term now) should explain how a football only league would have prevented Syracuse and Pitt from jumping to the ACC. They left for a conference with a stronger hold on a BCS bid; that's what they mean by "stability".

Maybe Cuse and Pitt left because their alums were embarressed to be playing newcomers like USF and UConn. Kind of the attitude some here have towards a potential Villanova or UMass opponent. Where does that arrogance come from? From years and years of IAA failure? From playing IA ball for almost 11 years? Or maybe from going to one major bowl and getting obliterated?

So good luck splitting off, go for it.
 
freescooter said:
The problem, really, is that the big East needed to split before this happened. Now I'm not sure you can put together a league that will work as a basketball league, at least for a while. Much like the aftermath of the last raid, the big East football schools need the basketball ones for stability right now. They did in 2004 as well. What really needed to happen then, was that there needed to be a plan for seperating football from basketball and creating two leagues. The football schools need to be able to make decisions that benefit them in the long run, be it media deals, or additonal members. Who knows whether a seperate league would have kept Pitt and Syracue in the fold. No way to say for sure, but what we do know is that the existing setup has resulted in 5 of the original BE football members leaving for the ACC.
Expand ...

This is exactly the situation we find ourselves in once again. Once again the Big East doesn't have to die and hopefully it won't, whether we remain in it or not. However, right now the first order of business has to be making sure we have enough football teams to make an attempt to keep our BCS bid. The good thing is that we already have it and will have it for the next few years . However that will change if we do not add teams that are already beating BCS level competition. It's really pretty simple guys.

We do need the basketball schools in essence to prop up the football league right now as they honestly have been doing since 2003. I don't have a problem with trying to make the hybrid model work since it really is our only option and does add value to the league, really it's our only value right now, but they have to let us add more all sport members. If we can add Temple and UCF and keep TCU, Louisville, WVU, and Cinci that will be a victory as far as I'm concerned. That will put us back at the number nine we all expected to have going into 2012. After that my preference would be to add Houston and ECU because on field success is going to matter when BCS evaluation time comes. After that I don't really care. Navy, Air Force, and Army would get us to 14 FB schools and 19 basketball schools.

The service academies would bring prestige and tradition along with national followings, so that would really be helpful and make sense. If Army won't come then we should seriously look at bringing in Memphis, who could help bolster the basketball conference and could improve in football by getting into a BCS league. They do have that FedEx guy willing to throw money at their situation as well so that wouldn't hurt. If we do stay in the Big East I really hope that we can still be perceived as the best basketball conference ever and that the ACC won't be able to take that from us. Unless or until we make our way over there.
 
toppencil said:
Your post and some others here are about as factual as a tea party flyer. And since we're name calling now; I think the FB tards (I think we can use that term now) should explain how a football only league would have prevented Syracuse and Pitt from jumping to the ACC. They left for a conference with a stronger hold on a BCS bid; that's what they mean by "stability".
Expand ...

I think the time to split has long since passed. However, I'm not crazy about UConn working hard to rebuild the BE while it looks for a softer landing place. The BE has always been headed down this path. anyone and everyone said this day would come and it has. I have more thoughts on this but have already posted them. It's water under the bridge at this point.

Maybe Cuse and Pitt left because their alums were embarressed to be playing newcomers like USF and UConn. Kind of the attitude some here have towards a potential Villanova or UMass opponent. Where does that arrogance come from? From years and years of IAA failure? From playing IA ball for almost 11 years? Or maybe from going to one major bowl and getting obliterated?
Expand ...

Villanova can't even get a decent sized stadium to play in and I can't help but feel that they have been pushed into this. UMass? The school that can't draw flies anymore? Bad choice there.

So good luck splitting off, go for it.
Expand ...

I don't see splitting off as option anymore. I'd like to see the bb only schools have some consideration for the football schools and make Cuse and Pitt meet the 27 month obligation. That would be a clear sign that those schools care about someone other than themselves.
 
toppencil said:
Your post and some others here are about as factual as a tea party flyer. And since we're name calling now; I think the FB tards (I think we can use that term now) should explain how a football only league would have prevented Syracuse and Pitt from jumping to the ACC. They left for a conference with a stronger hold on a BCS bid; that's what they mean by "stability".

Maybe Cuse and Pitt left because their alums were embarressed to be playing newcomers like USF and UConn. Kind of the attitude some here have towards a potential Villanova or UMass opponent. Where does that arrogance come from? From years and years of IAA failure? From playing IA ball for almost 11 years? Or maybe from going to one major bowl and getting obliterated?

So good luck splitting off, go for it.
Expand ...

this is an example of what the apologistas don't get. the stabiltiy issue has very little to do with BCS. The Big East as it was structured was in no danger of losing its BCS bid, regardless of what a bunch of so called experts blathered on ESPN. The problem was exactly what happened. With only 8 members, losing any one puts the whole league's existance in jeopardy. The B-12 lost two and carried on with 9-10. If the ACC loses two, it carries on with 10-12. If the Big East loses two, it is left scambling to get to some reasonable number. Lose 3 like the B-12 and you're done. The opposition to Villanova was driven by the fact that they were not interested in developing a serious program. They wanted to play their home games in an 18500 seat stadium with no expansion plan. They wanted a financial deal that put them at no risk.The worry Syracuse and Pitt had is that by staying in the Big East, it would be they, not UCONN who would be dealing with the whole question of what is next. There is no way to say that a 10 or 12 team all-sports league would have kept them in the fold, but it is clear that the hybrid model failed to keep them, just as it failed ot keep BC, Miami, Virginia Tech before them. It won't keep UCONN or Rutgers or West Virginia or probably Louisville either. What is it they call doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?
 
.-.
toppencil said:
Maybe Cuse and Pitt left because their alums were embarressed to be playing newcomers like USF and UConn.
.
Expand ...
They were embarrassed by playing Uconn or getting beaten several times by the Huskies? LOL
 
The faith of some that the BE can survive a second and potential more crippling shots is I think dated and fails to recognize the current landscape. It reminds me of the scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail where the lords father tells of continually rebuilding his after it keeps sinking into the swamp. Noble yes, but misguided.

We are six years into the new league. Should we have split then? I think the facts then said sticking was a better option due to the lack of viable schools. We took the best remaining teams in the east and were doing OK. I doubt we can do it again. Especially since the ACC beating, hoped for, TV deal looks dead.

Maybe the 7 can make it work by staying with the basketball schools. That would require the 7 to commit. If you think anyone other than USF and Cincy would do that as anything other than a fallback position, you're just wrong. At least one team is leaving for the Big 12 or the ACC because the SEC will add #14 if not this year than soon thereafter.


Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
 
The available options and the short timeline I think prevented any split. They only thing I can think of that would have prevented this would have been for someone smart to develop a media rights academic research consortium similar to the CIC that would have been attractive to AQ schools in the NE that may not have been completely happy with there current arrangement.

I have to believe there is a number that would have attracted kept BC, UM, and VT, in the fold and attracted UConn,Maryland, and on a wild heave Penn State to the league in the 90's. That's about the only time frame I can think of that a split would have made sense other than 2003. But, it would have been pretty scary to add 6 Non-Aqs and one FCS (us).

Subsequent history is just the inevitable runout. The FB side of the league was never strong enough to split. In 2-3 years maybe the FBs would have announced UCF Navy or whoever to get to 12 once they had a better TV deal. We'll never know.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
 
freescooter said:
this is an example of what the apologistas don't get. the stabiltiy issue has very little to do with BCS. The Big East as it was structured was in no danger of losing its BCS bid, regardless of what a bunch of so called experts blathered on ESPN. The problem was exactly what happened. With only 8 members, losing any one puts the whole league's existance in jeopardy. The B-12 lost two and carried on with 9-10. If the ACC loses two, it carries on with 10-12. If the Big East loses two, it is left scambling to get to some reasonable number. Lose 3 like the B-12 and you're done. The opposition to Villanova was driven by the fact that they were not interested in developing a serious program. They wanted to play their home games in an 18500 seat stadium with no expansion plan. They wanted a financial deal that put them at no risk.The worry Syracuse and Pitt had is that by staying in the Big East, it would be they, not UCONN who would be dealing with the whole question of what is next. There is no way to say that a 10 or 12 team all-sports league would have kept them in the fold, but it is clear that the hybrid model failed to keep them, just as it failed ot keep BC, Miami, Virginia Tech before them. It won't keep UCONN or Rutgers or West Virginia or probably Louisville either. What is it they call doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?
Expand ...

Ok FB tards try again, why have the following schools changed leagues; Texas A&M, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah. The hybrid model, as you call it has nothing to do with schools moving. It's about schools moving to better conferences for themselves. If the FB tards had formed their own league in 2000, all the schools that left would still have left. Miami moved for geographic reasons, Virginia Tech wanted to be in the ACC for years, BC is insane. Who would Syracuse and Pitt rather play in football, Clemson, Florida State and Miami or UConn, USF and Cincy?

Being part of the Big East or not, the football league was at the bottom of the BCS totem pole. The Big East was formed for basketball; to emulate what the ACC did in basketball. It has been wildly succesful. UConn has benefited enormously. Moving up in football was a big risk; taken by choice. If it doesn't work out, blame the schools that left or yourselves not the basketball schools.
 
toppencil said:
Ok FB tards try again, why have the following schools changed leagues; Texas A&M, Nebraska, Colorado, and Utah. The hybrid model, as you call it has nothing to do with schools moving. It's about schools moving to better conferences for themselves. If the FB tards had formed their own league in 2000, all the schools that left would still have left. Miami moved for geographic reasons, Virginia Tech wanted to be in the ACC for years, BC is insane. Who would Syracuse and Pitt rather play in football, Clemson, Florida State and Miami or UConn, USF and Cincy?

Being part of the Big East or not, the football league was at the bottom of the BCS totem pole. The Big East was formed for basketball; to emulate what the ACC did in basketball. It has been wildly succesful. UConn has benefited enormously. Moving up in football was a big risk; taken by choice. If it doesn't work out, blame the schools that left or yourselves not the basketball schools.
Expand ...

You miss the fact that UConn moving up has been pretty damn successful. We have had the quickest success of any school that has ever made the jump from FCS to FBS and us having moved up is the only reason why we are even in the conversation for joining the ACC or Big 10 or being part of a core group that merges with the Big 12. Without Football being FBS we would be infinitely more vulnerable. Period. Would you rather our plight being mentioned with Nova, Georgetown, Providence, and DePaul or WVU, Rutgers, and Louisville? That is the only question to ask yourself.
 
Your post and some others here are about as factual as a tea party flyer

Is this your tryout as a writer for the Daily Show or Letterman? And it clearly destroys your credibility, whether you agree with them or not, but I guess it was a shot at displaying your cunning wit.
 
.-.
You realize of course that you are using a derrogatory term, one that is no longer used among civil people...but ok. In point of fact, though there is no way of knowing what would have happened if the football schools had formed their own league rather than remained a part of the Big East. It is certainly possible that some would have left. But it is at least as likely, I think more likely, that Georgetown, Villanova St Johns et al would now be competing with the A-10 for talent and coverage, not the ACC. They managed to get the benefits of playing with BCS football schools without the investment those schools made. You're absolutely right about one thing, though. the Big East was formed for basketball. But it is a different era. As I posted before, having the best basketball league in 2011 is like producing the best typewriter. I suppose its nice, but it isn't all that valuable. And in fact, I suspect that Syracuse would far prefer to be playing BC, Pitt,Maryland, West Virginia, Penn State, Rutgers-- largely the teams that it has had long histories with. I doubt they are particularly excited about games with Clemson and NC State. The ACC lets them play a number of long time opponents at least some degree.
 
freescooter said:
The problem, really, is that the big East needed to split before this happened. Now I'm not sure you can put together a league that will work as a basketball league, at least for a while. Much like the aftermath of the last raid, the big East football schools need the basketball ones for stability right now. They did in 2004 as well. What really needed to happen then, was that there needed to be a plan for seperating football from basketball and creating two leagues. The football schools need to be able to make decisions that benefit them in the long run, be it media deals, or additonal members. Who knows whether a seperate league would have kept Pitt and Syracue in the fold. No way to say for sure, but what we do know is that the existing setup has resulted in 5 of the original BE football members leaving for the ACC.
Expand ...

Not entirely true. What they needed in 2003 was the assurance to retain the BCS bid. If that assurance was to be had, the schools would have split. They couldn't get it with only Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Rutgers and West Virginia and UCOnn set to join two years later. The mechanism to add the other teams for 2005 went into effect after that decision.

We're in a different situation right now. We've got TCU lined up for 7 teams. The retention of the BCS bid by a new conference should be in play this time around. last time around it was syracuse that took the point in trying to lead a split, and pulled back when the BCS bid was not assured to the 4 teams and made a big call in staying with loyalty to the conference at the time. I hope somebody is actively pursuing what it takes to retain that BCS status in case of split right now.

Having the catholic basketball schools involved certainly isn't a financial detractor to anything, and losing them certainly puts a big chink in the next broadcasting contract for an all sports conference.

Here's the thing.

Do we want to be part of a basketball oriented conference that is constantly a revolving door for BCS football programs and increasing numbers of basketball teams? the cost of doing so is instability, the loss of natural rivalries, schools leaving the conference, scheduling headaches in all sports with increasing numbers of teams, increased athletic department expenses that the basketball colleges don't incur, and forever looking over our shoulder at the next conference problem, and potential loss of BCS affiliation.

OR:

Do we want to be part of an actual BCS conference.

You could actually run a full fledged, priority straight BCS conference with the basketball only programs attached.

That's not happening with Providence leadership though.

So - need to separate.
 
HartbeatHusky said:
You miss the fact that UConn moving up has been pretty damn successful. We have had the quickest success of any school that has ever made the jump from FCS to FBS and us having moved up is the only reason why we are even in the conversation for joining the ACC or Big 10 or being part of a core group that merges with the Big 12. Without Football being FBS we would be infinitely more vulnerable. Period. Would you rather our plight being mentioned with Nova, Georgetown, Providence, and DePaul or WVU, Rutgers, and Louisville? That is the only question to ask yourself.
Expand ...

South Florida is working real hard at taking the point on being the fastest and highest rising football program. That whole top 25 thing. They continue on the path their on, and they'll be looking elsewhere as hard as we are if things don't change.
 
buckley503 said:
Your post and some others here are about as factual as a tea party flyer

Is this your tryout as a writer for the Daily Show or Letterman? And it clearly destroys your credibility, whether you agree with them or not, but I guess it was a shot at displaying your cunning wit.
Expand ...
Ouch that hurts.
 
.-.
Carl Spackler said:
South Florida is working real hard at taking the point on being the fastest and highest rising football program. That whole top 25 thing. They continue on the path their on, and they'll be looking elsewhere as hard as we are if things don't change.
Expand ...

UConn and USF have been doing things at a similar pace. However, we have been comptetitive with and beat them numerous times and have had more in conference success and a BCS berth.
 
toppencil said:
I think you seriously underestimate the value of BB in the northeast and vastly over estimate what the football schools bring to the table. Try researching the facts about the Big East and money, basketball does pretty well for everyone.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebask...32138/big-east-hoops-money-outstrips-football
Expand ...

We all know this fact, but how many of the top hoops schools also play football? The football playing schools with a hoops tradition by and large have larger national appeal and land the top recruits over all of the basketball schools with the exceptions being Georgetown and Nova. Even if it is just the Northeast that we need to concern ourselves with (which doesn't make sense when you are trying to have national appeal) national media outlets are not going to pay good money for a hoops only conference so without a BCS/FBS football component the Big East is only 1 step up from the A10. I don't see how that could not be understood by anyone.
 
HartbeatHusky said:
We all know this fact, but how many of the top hoops schools also play football? The football playing schools with a hoops tradition by and large have larger national appeal and land the top recruits over all of the basketball schools with the exceptions being Georgetown and Nova. Even if it is just the Northeast that we need to concern ourselves with (which doesn't make sense when you are trying to have national appeal) national media outlets are not going to pay good money for a hoops only conference so without a BCS/FBS football component the Big East is only 1 step up from the A10. I don't see how that could not be understood by anyone.
Expand ...

The situation you describe in BB recruiting is fluid. Recruits go to schools for lots of reasons. Playing for a certain coach is probably the biggest reason. Every school has rebuilding years, good years and bad years. The Big East has been fortunate to have a number of big name coaches stay were they are for awhile. ESPN broadcasting Big East basketball nationally makes it possible for schools to recruit nationally. When Calhoun retires, UConn may struggle to land recruits.

Clearly a BB only league will not bring in the same kind of money but it would do very well given the locations and traditions of the schools. And yes it would be 1 step above the A10 in certain ways. But TV ratings will determine what the networks will pay for BB broadcast rights; the same holds true for everything on TV.

I hope the Big East finds a way to survive with a 12 team football league because it's better for all the schools. But I also think schools jumping to other leagues will happen again because Big East football is number 6 in the ranking of big time football leagues. I don't think creating a new league from the football members will change that dynamic.
 
UConn's stock will rise once Pasqualoni gets the football program straightened out. Keep in mind he was hired about 2 weeks before National Signing Day so no one should be judging him till next year. Once that happens the team will be more appealing to other conferences. A little patience people. Please!
 
The longer this whole thing plays out I just have sinking suspicion that we're going to be in a lot of trouble.

Louisville to the Big12 makes too much sense not to happen, and WV either tags along to the Big12 or makes perfect sense as the SEC's 14th team.
If ESPN is controlling this like we all suspect, all things being relatively equal, the SEC will be 'encouraged' to take a BE team, not an ACC team.

Preparing for the worse:

UConn, Rutgers, Cincy, USF, then pick 4 or 5 out of: Temple, East Carolina, Central Florida, Houston, SMU, Navy, Air Force, Army, UMass, Buffalo, etc. etc.

Then we'll have the basketball onlies as that will be the only marquee property left to promote for the conference.

I hope I'm wrong. I'm just not feeling as optimistic the longer this drags out.
 
Carl Spackler said:
I asked the question in response: please explain to me why Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Miami, Virginia Tech are in the ACC and not Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, Seton Hall and Providence?

Haven't gotten an answer yet.
Expand ...
It's simple Carl, no other major conference has yet been intelligent enough to realize the value that Nova, Georgetown, St John's et al bring to a conference.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,249
Messages
4,559,857
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom