The future Big East

[HuskyHawk]

I've posted it before, but WVU is just another crappy program in a crappy league before they leave for the Big12. Now before they even play one down, people are suggesting they can rival Texas and OK for the leagues top spot year in and year out.

The amount of hypocracy in CFB is why you'll never have any of the big 4/5 conferences commit to an objective system like winning your conference. Instead, we're on this death-march to develop a system that will find the 4 best programs (regardless of on-field performance).

On field performance is if middling value. WVU's rep is because it is from a back-assward state, and nobody cares about it. The teams have been good, and I've certainly seen them get lots of press over the years, BE or not. So you can all talk about Houston and Boise forver. Houston at 11-1 is less relevant than A&M at 7-5. It's less relevant than UT at 3-9. Boise is only slightly more interesting. You look at TCU as an upgrade on A&M in the Big 12 when it is a huge downgrade in fan appeal.

The NBE is a problem because there is not a single team in the whole league that is of interest at a national level. Boise has some slight appeal as a rebel with a blue field. In basketball, UConn, Louisville and Georgetown are national brands. The big conferences are made up of major brands in football, basketball and baseball. With few execptions (USC, Duke, Vandy) these are major state universities (lacking geographic qualifiers that limit appeal, like "central" Florida, or city names, like Cincy, Memphis, Houston or Louisville, that limit appeal). Those are our peers as universities, if not football programs, and we should be in a conference with them.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Do you mean more people will be moving back to the cities? You moving to Hartford or Bridgeport within 10 years?

This prediction has proved false. The reverse has been occuring, and even the relatively young continue to flock to the suburbs. Technology will increase this effect if anything. http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2011/07/20/why-americas-young-and-restless-will-abandon-cities-for-suburbs/

 

[Adios]

This prediction has proved false. The reverse has been occuring, and even the relatively young continue to flock to the suburbs. Technology will increase this effect if anything. http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2011/07/20/why-americas-young-and-restless-will-abandon-cities-for-suburbs/

It really depends where. Even if that is the case, suburbs are located around cities.

 

[Marty Jackson]

On field performance is if middling value. WVU's rep is because it is from a back-assward state, and nobody cares about it. The teams have been good, and I've certainly seen them get lots of press over the years, BE or not. So you can all talk about Houston and Boise forver. Houston at 11-1 is less relevant than A&M at 7-5. It's less relevant than UT at 3-9. Boise is only slightly more interesting. You look at TCU as an upgrade on A&M in the Big 12 when it is a huge downgrade in fan appeal.

The NBE is a problem because there is not a single team in the whole league that is of interest at a national level. Boise has some slight appeal as a rebel with a blue field. In basketball, UConn, Louisville and Georgetown are national brands. The big conferences are made up of major brands in football, basketball and baseball. With few execptions (USC, Duke, Vandy) these are major state universities (lacking geographic qualifiers that limit appeal, like "central" Florida, or city names, like Cincy, Memphis, Houston or Louisville, that limit appeal). Those are our peers as universities, if not football programs, and we should be in a conference with them.

Disagree... The ACc is comprised of several private schools or schools named after a city... And dont forget ND, UCLA, And Stanford. And sorry to say but college baseball doesn't drive anything let alone defining a major conference...
Outside of regurgitating the biggest issues people have with the NBE, not sure what your point is.

 

[Jimdish255]

Boise has been consistently in the national discussion for years now. If your universe consists of who will ESPN promote, then it's easy to predict it won't be the BE.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Disagree... The ACc is comprised of several private schools or schools named after a city... And dont forget ND, UCLA, And Stanford. And sorry to say but college baseball doesn't drive anything let alone defining a major conference...
Outside of regurgitating the biggest issues people have with the NBE, not sure what your point is.

The ACC has four private schools, all of which have national reputations, with Wake being the least well known. It has no public school that is city named or regional within its own state. It does have two "Techs", but those are still statewide in scope and not regional. For example, Ohio State owns OH. Cincy is only relevant in Cincy. UK owns Kentucky, Louisville is only relevant in Louisville. UT and A&M dominate TX, Houston only matters in Houston. UT and Vandy for TN, with Memphis being just of local relevance. The NBE is littered with programs, other than UConn and Rutgers, that are only regionally relevant even within their own state. That greatly limits their appeal. Note that CUSA has the same problem. Southern Miss instead of Ole Miss or Miss St. UAB, UTEP, and of course the ones we've adopted in Memphis, Houston and UCF. UCLA and Cal are the two flagships of the UC system and are by far the best known nationally. Unless you think the UCSC Banana Slugs are joining the Pac 12.

 

[metsfan2323]

The ACC has four private schools, all of which have national reputations, with Wake being the least well known. It has no public school that is city named or regional within its own state. It does have two "Techs", but those are still statewide in scope and not regional. For example, Ohio State owns OH. Cincy is only relevant in Cincy. UK owns Kentucky, Louisville is only relevant in Louisville. UT and A&M dominate TX, Houston only matters in Houston. UT and Vandy for TN, with Memphis being just of local relevance. The NBE is littered with programs, other than UConn and Rutgers, that are only regionally relevant even within their own state. That greatly limits their appeal. Note that CUSA has the same problem. Southern Miss instead of Ole Miss or Miss St. UAB, UTEP, and of course the ones we've adopted in Memphis, Houston and UCF. UCLA and Cal are the two flagships of the UC system and are by far the best known nationally. Unless you think the UCSC Banana Slugs are joining the Pac 12.

and yet Auburn won the Championship two years ago. That school has zero national appeal and is a distant second in its own state but they won and so can Houston, Louisville etc. Most sports teams have only regional appeal. Most people in CT don't give a rats you know what about Bama. I couldn't name one player on next years Bama team, not one. Sports in general is a regional business. Cal is a flagship university in California, but when is the last time anyone east of the rockies watched a CAL game? Just thinking about Cal football made me yawn.

 

[Marty Jackson]

The ACC has four private schools, all of which have national reputations, with Wake being the least well known. It has no public school that is city named or regional within its own state. It does have two "Techs", but those are still statewide in scope and not regional. For example, Ohio State owns OH. Cincy is only relevant in Cincy. UK owns Kentucky, Louisville is only relevant in Louisville. UT and A&M dominate TX, Houston only matters in Houston. UT and Vandy for TN, with Memphis being just of local relevance. The NBE is littered with programs, other than UConn and Rutgers, that are only regionally relevant even within their own state. That greatly limits their appeal. Note that CUSA has the same problem. Southern Miss instead of Ole Miss or Miss St. UAB, UTEP, and of course the ones we've adopted in Memphis, Houston and UCF. UCLA and Cal are the two flagships of the UC system and are by far the best known nationally. Unless you think the UCSC Banana Slugs are joining the Pac 12.

are you really squabbling over me stating the ACC has several private schools and/or schools named after a city, and you coming up with four?
And, out of curiousity, if you're going on about how these private ACC schools are national brands, then I'm really confused about your earlier post about national brands being big state universities with only a few exceptions...
also, you forgot about Syracuse which gives the ACC 5 private schools.

 

[HuskyHawk]

are you really squabbling over me stating the ACC has several private schools and/or schools named after a city, and you coming up with four?
And, out of curiousity, if you're going on about how these private ACC schools are national brands, then I'm really confused about your earlier post about national brands being big state universities with only a few exceptions...
also, you forgot about Syracuse which gives the ACC 5 private schools.

I was treating Cuse as Big East at the moment, just as I included Memphis, UCF and Houston as CUSA. I'm not saying anything about the ACC...you brought that up. Brand-wise, the ACC, due in part to the private schools (although Miami and Duke have good name recognition), and the fact that GT is always behind UGA, is weaker than the B1G, SEC, B12, Pac12. Essentially I think UT and A&M will always be more important than Houston or SMU, no matter what happens on the field. Tennessee will always attract more fans and attention than Memphis, no matter what. Florida and FSU will always have more appeal than UCF and USF. SDSU will never match USC or UCLA in appeal, no matter what they do on the field. The NBE has a host of programs that are permanently limited in appeal. By the way, this analysis suggests that the ACC should have preferred UConn and Rutgers to Syracuse and Pitt. Our upside is higher. Pitt is permanently second tier in their own state. Syracuse at least has no big state U to compete with in NY, and is a national name in basketball. BC was in a similar situation in MA.

Think of it this way, if you went state by state, and picked just one program, which would you pick? The B1G and Pac would have the chosen school in every state they are in (excluding ND as they are not in a conference). The SEC would other than Texas (and has a strong #2 in TX). The B12 in every state but Iowa (has the #2). The future ACC is lower tier in FL, GA, SC, and PA. The NBE would have 3 dominant states, CT, NJ and Idaho and would be lower tier (often 3rd or 4th) in CA, FL, TX, KY, OH, TN and PA.

 

[whaler11]

I was treating Cuse as Big East at the moment, just as I included Memphis, UCF and Houston as CUSA. I'm not saying anything about the ACC...you brought that up. Brand-wise, the ACC, due in part to the private schools (although Miami and Duke have good name recognition), and the fact that GT is always behind UGA, is weaker than the B1G, SEC, B12, Pac12. Essentially I think UT and A&M will always be more important than Houston or SMU, no matter what happens on the field. Tennessee will always attract more fans and attention than Memphis, no matter what. Florida and FSU will always have more appeal than UCF and USF. SDSU will never match USC or UCLA in appeal, no matter what they do on the field. The NBE has a host of programs that are permanently limited in appeal. By the way, this analysis suggests that the ACC should have preferred UConn and Rutgers to Syracuse and Pitt. Our upside is higher. Pitt is permanently second tier in their own state. Syracuse at least has no big state U to compete with in NY, and is a national name in basketball. BC was in a similar situation in MA.

Think of it this way, if you went state by state, and picked just one program, which would you pick? The B1G and Pac would have the chosen school in every state they are in (excluding ND as they are not in a conference). The SEC would other than Texas (and has a strong #2 in TX). The B12 in every state but Iowa (has the #2). The future ACC is lower tier in FL, GA, SC, and PA. The NBE would have 3 dominant states, CT, NJ and Idaho and would be lower tier (often 3rd or 4th) in CA, FL, TX, KY, OH, TN and PA.

While I agree with most of your point in this post, Utah and South Carolina are up for debate.

Clemson is more attractive to me than South Carolina, and if you are talking about actual athletic accomplishments BYU is ahead of Utah.

 

[rw005]

Not sure why I am so hung up on East Carolina so much, but I really would like them in all-sports, their basketball can show some good improvement being in the BE.

Since their baseball is nearly a Top 15-25 each year then football is a silent Top 25, other athletics are pretty decent at best.

 

[mattp]

Think of it this way, if you went state by state, and picked just one program, which would you pick? The B1G and Pac would have the chosen school in every state they are in (excluding ND as they are not in a conference). The SEC would other than Texas (and has a strong #2 in TX). The B12 in every state but Iowa (has the #2). The future ACC is lower tier in FL, GA, SC, and PA. The NBE would have 3 dominant states, CT, NJ and Idaho and would be lower tier (often 3rd or 4th) in CA, FL, TX, KY, OH, TN and PA.

the ACC, like the BE is made up primarily of 2nd in their market schools, but so what? we're talking about college football, not a popularity contest. even though Louisville isn't the #1 team in it's own state fan-wise I'd take them in a heartbeat over Indiana or Illinois. ultimately it's the quality of the institution that determines who does well. and then there's some schools like South Carolina that try harder than anybody but for some reason can never get it right (i know they had 11 wins last season, but considering they've spent the last 13 years coached by HoF coaches, two bowl games is weak). now that i think about it Clemson may be higher up than USC in terms of fans which would buck the trend. it's close either way.

 

[ZooCougar]

The future of the Big East? Not sure if I care, but I sure hope UConn is not part of it.

 

[HuskyHawk]

the ACC, like the BE is made up primarily of 2nd in their market schools, but so what? we're talking about college football, not a popularity contest. even though Louisville isn't the #1 team in it's own state fan-wise I'd take them in a heartbeat over Indiana or Illinois. ultimately it's the quality of the institution that determines who does well. and then there's some schools like South Carolina that try harder than anybody but for some reason can never get it right (i know they had 11 wins last season, but considering they've spent the last 13 years coached by HoF coaches, two bowl games is weak). now that i think about it Clemson may be higher up than USC in terms of fans which would buck the trend. it's close either way.

College sports is a popularity contest. That's about all it is. Lots of college sports "fans" are not really fans of the sport, they are fans of the school. Schools that are seen as representing their states have broader appeal beyond their alumni base. Focusing on current success in a given sport is of limited value. I guarantee the B1G wouldn't take Louisville over Indiana or Illinois. Their overall fanbase doesn't even compare.

By the way, I do think Clemson and BYU are pretty close to USC and Utah respectively. BYU has a religious link that widens its fan base (although lots of Mormons go to Utah) like Notre Dame. Clemson has the paw print (first to use it as far as I know) and some major past football success that eluded USC. They've been better at basketball too. USC is saddled with a lousy mascot.

 

[Sean]

I love that someone in this thread said Auburn has no national appeal, and admitted to not knowing a single players name on Alabama.

Speaking of national appeal, though, getting BYU would be a huge/huge/huge win for the New Big East. They would become the only school with any real tradition, other than the fly-by-night Boise State. Getting BYU in here every 4 years or so would be interesting, and BYU has a national following - albeit concentrated mostly in the midwest.

If some combination of BYU/Boise could win the West division almost every year, the East division would have to feel decent about its chances of being considered in the 4 team playoff if it went undefeated. Without BYU, I'm not sure this is the case.

Also - in Nelson's pod system, UConn would shape up really well - getting 3 weak teams in their pod, and being in the weaker division, to boot.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I love that someone in this thread said Auburn has no national appeal, and admitted to not knowing a single players name on Alabama.

Speaking of national appeal, though, getting BYU would be a huge/huge/huge win for the New Big East. They would become the only school with any real tradition, other than the fly-by-night Boise State. Getting BYU in here every 4 years or so would be interesting, and BYU has a national following - albeit concentrated mostly in the midwest.

If some combination of BYU/Boise could win the West division almost every year, the East division would have to feel decent about its chances of being considered in the 4 team playoff if it went undefeated. Without BYU, I'm not sure this is the case.

Also - in Nelson's pod system, UConn would shape up really well - getting 3 weak teams in their pod, and being in the weaker division, to boot.

I don't know any Auburn players right now either. But there's a guy named Cam Newton that was briefly in the news a few years ago. And if I gave him just two letters, Bo, does that poster know who I mean? Auburn is not the top program in the SEC by a longshot, but has more name recognition in football than any program in the NBE. UConn and Louisville are probably better known overall. I doubt that most of America even knows that Rutgers is effectively, "The University of New Jersey".

 

[metsfan2323]

I don't know any Auburn players right now either. But there's a guy named Cam Newton that was briefly in the news a few years ago. And if I gave him just two letters, Bo, does that poster know who I mean? Auburn is not the top program in the SEC by a longshot, but has more name recognition in football than any program in the NBE. UConn and Louisville are probably better known overall. I doubt that most of America even knows that Rutgers is effectively, "The University of New Jersey".

So a Cam Newton can never come to a Big East School? Pat White was our Cam Newton, and if he didn't get hurt WV beats Pitt and probably wins the national title for the Big East. How many years ago was that? 4.

Oh how quick we forget. And you are the guy who stresses academics. Maybe you should go read a history book.

 

[UCFBfan]

So a Cam Newton can never come to a Big East School? Pat White was our Cam Newton, and if he didn't get hurt WV beats Pitt and probably wins the national title for the Big East. How many years ago was that? 4.

Oh how quick we forget. And you are the guy who stresses academics. Maybe you should go read a history book.

Are you really comparing Pat White to Cam Newton? Pat White couldn't throw the ball nearly as well as Newton can. This is even more evident as they went into the NFL. Newton is a star while White never materialized. While they are both mobile QBs, the comparisons stop there.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[HuskyHawk]

So a Cam Newton can never come to a Big East School? Pat White was our Cam Newton, and if he didn't get hurt WV beats Pitt and probably wins the national title for the Big East. How many years ago was that? 4.

Oh how quick we forget. And you are the guy who stresses academics. Maybe you should go read a history book.

The accusation was that Auburn has no name recognition. I think that is inaccurate, though they are below several others in the SEC. If you want to throw out Big East QBs, don't use White, who was good in college (so was Chris Redman), use McNabb or Hasselback or Ryan. But that's not the point. Recruiting is not the issue, we were talking about name recognition among the viewing public. The NBE strikes out in that regard.