At this point, I would invite army and navy as football only schools. i would then invite memphis. Finally, i would invite butler and xavier. This gives us 10 football schools and 18 basketball schools if the conference stays together. However, if the conference splits in the future, we already have our 10 team basketball conference in house. It's win-win for everyone by protecting both the football interests as well as the basketball interests.
Army and Navy as football-only works for me. So does Memphis as a full member. But you also should invite UCF as a full member. They are the crown jewel of the non-BCS leagues, especially when you look at their rapid growth. That gets us to 11 football and 17 basketball. I think the ideal would be 12 football (for the conference championship and to give the football schools some semblance of security) and 19 basketball, so you need 1 more football and 2 more basketball.
You could invite Air Force as a full member and add either Xavier or Butler, or either Air Force or Houston as football-only and Xavier and Butler as basketball-only. However, I have heard that Xavier may not come without Dayton. Not sure if there's any truth to that, but it's worth bearing in mind.
Just go to 12 and 20. I'd be down with inviting air force, memphis and UCF as full members, army and navy as football only, and xavier and butler as basketball "only".
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on September 21, 2011, 10:54:28 AM
Just go to 12 and 20. I'd be down with inviting air force, memphis and UCF as full members, army and navy as football only, and xavier and butler as basketball "only".
The problem with 20 is you don't play everyone every year, no matter how you slice it. Then do you break into divisions of 5 teams? It sounds nice and neat, but it's more unwieldy than 19.
Add Army and Navy with TCU and Villanova for next season, and the BE has 12 football schools and a conference championship heading into the expiration of their ESPN deal (no waiting for any of these four schools to exit their conferences). When SUPU leave (or others), then add in from: CFU, Air Force or E. Carolina. Army and Navy are no brainers because they are football only and their additions enable the BE to add championship game revenue. Nova at least keeps some of the PA college market tuned to BE football as they get their sea legs--better to get started now rather than later.
Don't underestimate Army's and Navy's pull either. They will be rock solid with their word and keep the conference stable as they compete well in football. Army is 40 miles from NYC (they just sold out against Northwestern), and Navy puts the BE in a new football market (Baltimore/DC has a local interest in the armed forces). I am not trying to overestimate their pull, but, like ND, they have a national following and a tradition.
Quote from: brewcity77 on September 21, 2011, 10:49:10 AM
Army and Navy as football-only works for me. So does Memphis as a full member. But you also should invite UCF as a full member. They are the crown jewel of the non-BCS leagues, especially when you look at their rapid growth.
Let's not get carried away about UCF. They're a distant third in their own community (compare the coverage they get in their hometown newspaper against that of UF ans FSU) and have very little national profile.
If distance weren't such an issue, Boise State would be a far greater coup and certainly more of a "crown jewel." the new Big East could do worse than UCF, but I don't think anybody will (or should) be popping champagne if they're admitted.
Quote from: Pakuni on September 21, 2011, 11:08:59 AM
Let's not get carried away about UCF. They're a distant third in their own community (compare the coverage they get in their hometown newspaper against that of UF ans FSU) and have very little national profile.
If distance weren't such an issue, Boise State would be a far greater coup and certainly more of a "crown jewel." the new Big East could do worse than UCF, but I don't think anybody will (or should) be popping champagne if they're admitted.
If you look at things over the next 5 years, sure. If you look at things 10 years and beyond, I'd disagree. Boise State is doing phenomenal at the moment, but I'm not sure there are any indicators they can keep it up in a fairly mediocre recruiting area with a student population that is less than 40% of what UCF's is and their alumni base isn't growing very fast (4-year graduation rate is only 6%).
Even as the fourth-best option in Florida, UCF still has a better recruiting pool locally than BSU does. And like Brad Stevens, the odds are Chris Petersen will test the waters before too long.
Quote from: brewcity77 on September 21, 2011, 11:00:18 AM
The problem with 20 is you don't play everyone every year, no matter how you slice it. Then do you break into divisions of 5 teams? It sounds nice and neat, but it's more unwieldy than 19.
Someone had a great idea in another thread on how to do a 19 game schedule so you could play everyone. Have a kick-off weekend event at neutral sites where all the teams would be matched up for 1 game. Lot's of possibilities, and it would be a made-for-TV event to grab people's attention at the start of the year. They could run it like the opening weekend of the NCAA tourney with games starting one after the other. 2 games Fri. night, 4 games on Sat., and 4 games on Sun.
Marquette needs to lead the charge among all of the non-football playing schools, and form the foundation of a basketball only league with G'Town, Villanova, St. John's, Providence, Xavier, Butler, Notre Dame (remains independent in other sports), DePaul, Dayton, St. Joe's....
It is only a matter of time before the L'villes, Cincinnati's, WVU's get offers from other BCS conferences to join. Why not just bite the bullet now, and establish the above league - hopefully still under the banner of the Big East? The L'villes, Cinci's, WVU's all remain in the league at present - but their defection is imminent...They'd lose their AQ status as a BCS league remaining in the raided Big East - recent history suggest Lvile, Cincy, WVU won't be in the mix for a BCS Bowl game on their own merit - yet if they did - just like TCU and Boise last year....they could still earn their way in..
Quote from: Ners on September 21, 2011, 11:32:36 AM
Marquette needs to lead the charge among all of the non-football playing schools, and form the foundation of a basketball only league with G'Town, Villanova, St. John's, Providence, Xavier, Butler, Notre Dame (remains independent in other sports), DePaul, Dayton, St. Joe's....
I don't disagree with the idea, but "lead the charge" is kind of a joke.
MU Has:
- No leverage or strong history in the Big East (a handful of nice years, yes. But, they are not a charter member)
- No athletic director
- A good young coach, but nothing like Boehim, Pittino or Calhoun.
- A market that is a geographic outlier (at this time).
MU is along for the ride right now. We need to strap ourselves to Georgetown and St. John's and hold on for dear life. If/when there is an opportunity for MU to speak, then they should do so.
Quote from: brewcity77 on September 21, 2011, 11:16:06 AM
If you look at things over the next 5 years, sure. If you look at things 10 years and beyond, I'd disagree. Boise State is doing phenomenal at the moment, but I'm not sure there are any indicators they can keep it up in a fairly mediocre recruiting area with a student population that is less than 40% of what UCF's is and their alumni base isn't growing very fast (4-year graduation rate is only 6%).
I'm not sure what student population has to do with the ability to recruit, or even succeed, in big-time college sports. It never held back Duke or Miami.
And I'm not sure what you mean about Boise State's success "in the moment." Nine straight bowl appearances (and 11 in 12 seasons) with three coaching administrations seems to be fairly indicative of consistent success, not catching lightning in the bottle with one coach or a couple of good recruiting classes.
Also, I think you're making an error in assuming that a large student population/alumni base is the same as a large fan base. DePaul is the largest Catholic school in the country, but has arguably the worst fan base in the Big East. South Florida and Rutgers are both bigger than Tennesse and Kentucky ... but have a fraction of the fan base.
QuoteAnd like Brad Stevens, the odds are Chris Petersen will test the waters before too long.
Sure, just like Dirk Koetter and Dan Hawkins did. Boise State survived because the school and community has a commitment to the program. UCF as a university has committed more to football than it had in the past, but unlike in Boise, where BSU is the only show in town, UCF will never be the big dog - or even Dog 2 - in its hometown.
Edit: I'm not necessarily arguing against the inclusion of UCF - though it doesn't exactly send a tingle down my leg either - but I just don't see them as the grand prize/great coup you're making them out to be.
Quote from: Pakuni on September 21, 2011, 11:41:27 AM
Also, I think you're making an error in assuming that a large student population/alumni base is the same as a large fan base. DePaul is the largest Catholic school in the country, but has arguably the worst fan base in the Big East. South Florida and Rutgers are both bigger than Tennesse and Kentucky ... but have a fraction of the fan base.
UWM is another example, enrollment of 30,000 and no fan support.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 21, 2011, 11:40:47 AM
I don't disagree with the idea, but "lead the charge" is kind of a joke.
MU Has:
- No leverage or strong history in the Big East (a handful of nice years, yes. But, they are not a charter member)
- No athletic director
- A good young coach, but nothing like Boehim, Pittino or Calhoun.
- A market that is a geographic outlier (at this time).
MU is along for the ride right now. We need to strap ourselves to Georgetown and St. John's and hold on for dear life. If/when there is an opportunity for MU to speak, then they should do so.
I see your point - yet, just because of the above factors - that is no reason for MU to NOT start the discussion, actively engage the dialogue etc. No reason for MU to think it has to be a follower type of school due to the above.
What kills MU is if any of Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's were invited to join the ACC. That could happen down the road - but if MU and these teams formed a league now, with Xavier, Butler, and the other Basketball-only schools still under the Big East name - they could very likely establish themselves as a very strong conference..whereby all members benefit and feel secure moving forward. This is a utilitarian type of position among these similar type of schools/programs - great good prevails versus perhaps the benefit of 1 or 2 (most likely GTown and Nova potentially being added to ACC)
Suggestion for Brewcity:
Just copy and paste your 3-4 paragraph argument for why UCF is a no-brainer for a BCS conference. Then you can paste it into every single string without wearing out your keyboard and finger tips.
Quote from: Canadian Dimes on September 21, 2011, 12:00:37 PM
Suggestion for Brewcity:
Just copy and paste your 3-4 paragraph argument for why UCF is a no-brainer for a BCS conference. Then you can paste it into every single string without wearing out your keyboard and finger tips.
And here I thought you were ignoring me ?-(
How cute...I seem to have a stalker :)
Quote from: brewcity77 on September 21, 2011, 11:00:18 AM
The problem with 20 is you don't play everyone every year, no matter how you slice it. Then do you break into divisions of 5 teams? It sounds nice and neat, but it's more unwieldy than 19.
I dont understand why not playing everyone every year is such a big deal.
As talked about earlier, the only way a basketball-only conference remains relevent is with the Big East name. So the basketball schools are forced to wait it out. What they must do is vote in unison to add new members as football only.
It may take a few years. I doubt any conference goes to 16 before ND or Texas makes its move. Once they do, most of our remaining football schools (Louisville, WVU, Cincy, Rutgers, Uconn, ) will leave for one of the super conferences. At that point, the basketball schools will have leverage over the football schools that got passed over. Move forward with the Big East name, the exit fees, and pick up 3 basketball schools for a 10 team league that will still be relevent.
If you're gonna add football only members, why not add basketball schools like butler and xavier NOW. It would prevent you from scrambling later...
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on September 21, 2011, 01:54:51 PMIf you're gonna add football only members, why not add basketball schools like butler and xavier NOW. It would prevent you from scrambling later...
I have to imagine that the football schools still want to get to 12. Even with Army and Navy, they still need 3 more to get there. Will they want 18 basketball (assuming 3 full members like UCF, Memphis, and Houston) or accept going to 19 or 20 basketball?
Of course, there's also still the chance Villanova goes FBS which lessens the need for a football school.
I admit, I'm a bigger fan of having a basketball-only pool that includes Xavier and Butler than having to add them 2-3 years down the road.
I'd rather wait until the super conferences are established, in case someone like Cincy is left without a seat at the big boy table. Then we'd only need to add 2 teams. As long as we still have the brand name will we be able to be selective in who we add. Xavier and Butler will still want in at that point.
My point is for the 7 basketball schools to work together to keep us from getting to 12 football schools. The 7 football schools already have one foot out the door and will cut each other's throats to get into a super conference first.
Quote from: Freeway on September 21, 2011, 02:05:42 PM
I'd rather wait until the super conferences are established, in case someone like Cincy is left without a seat at the big boy table. Then we'd only need to add 2 teams. As long as we still have the brand name will we be able to be selective in who we add. Xavier and Butler will still want in at that point.
My point is for the 7 basketball schools to work together to keep us from getting to 12 football schools. The 7 football schools already have one foot out the door and will cut each other's throats to get into a super conference first.
In every possible scenario, you will need at least two basketball schools. Adding them now only gives the basketball schools more leverage. There is no downside I can see (for MU).
Quote from: Freeway on September 21, 2011, 02:05:42 PM
I'd rather wait until the super conferences are established, in case someone like Cincy is left without a seat at the big boy table. Then we'd only need to add 2 teams. As long as we still have the brand name will we be able to be selective in who we add. Xavier and Butler will still want in at that point.
My point is for the 7 basketball schools to work together to keep us from getting to 12 football schools. The 7 football schools already have one foot out the door and will cut each other's throats to get into a super conference first.
I don't see any advantage to not getting to 12 football schools. I think the league lasts until the football schools break apart. I doubt right now they'll dismiss us if they get to 12. There's not enough football power there to offset that they could really use us for basketball, which is still the bread and butter of this league. If they dismissed the basketball schools as soon as they hit 12, they'd have a 10-team basketball league (assuming Army & Navy) of:
Connecticut, Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Memphis, Rutgers, USF, UCF, Houston, and East Carolina (or something similar)
Do you think the basketball powers in that league would be anxious to get rid of the likes of Marquette, Georgetown, and Villanova in favor of playing East Carolina twice a year? I doubt it.
12 football schools helps us because it likely preserves the league a couple years longer and buys us time to get the automatic qualifier bid if we do have to go basketball-only at some point.
A potential problem with getting to 12 for football could be voting rights. As mentioned several times before, it's absolutely critical that the bball schools retain the "Big East" name, autobid status, and MSG conference tourney rights. If a split eventually occurs, we need it to be the football schools leaving us, not the other way around. If there are 12 football and 8 basketball, the football schools would have a majority and could try voting out the bball schools, or voting to disband the league so they don't have to pay exit fees.
Pipe Dream Plan...The Big East and Big 12 combine. This is based on the assumption that UConn will leave the BE (I have a hunch that will happen).
East
Cincinnati
Louisville
Rutgers
South Florida
West Virginia
Oklahoma
Okla St
Villanova*
Providence*
St. John's*
Seton Hall*
West
Baylor
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas St
Missouri
Texas
Texas Tech
DePaul*
Marquette*
Notre Dame*
Georgetown*
The * means it's a basketball only school. It doesn't matter how Oklahoma and Texas get split but they won't want to be on the same side for football so that they can play in the Big Tweast Championship Game. If the conference is split into divisions for basketball, Georgetown and ND could potentially switch with Okla and OK St to give a more accurate East/West breakdown.
Football schedule: 8 games (6 vs. intradivision, 1 vs. rotating opp, 1 vs. previous year's standings equivalent i.e. 1st vs. 1st, 2nd vs. 2nd - similar to NFL scheduling).
Basketball schedule: 18 games (10 vs. intradivision, 8 vs. rotating opps)
If the football schools eventually leave, you'd still have a solid, albeit relatively small, basketball conference that could take on the likes of Xavier, Butler, etc.
EDIT: I forgot to add TCU to the mix. For argument's sake, let's say that Missouri goes to the SEC and TCU takes their spot here.
Quote from: Litehouse on September 21, 2011, 02:36:18 PM
A potential problem with getting to 12 for football could be voting rights. As mentioned several times before, it's absolutely critical that the bball schools retain the "Big East" name, autobid status, and MSG conference tourney rights. If a split eventually occurs, we need it to be the football schools leaving us, not the other way around. If there are 12 football and 8 basketball, the football schools would have a majority and could try voting out the bball schools, or voting to disband the league so they don't have to pay exit fees.
+1
Quote from: brewcity77 on September 21, 2011, 11:16:06 AM
If you look at things over the next 5 years, sure. If you look at things 10 years and beyond, I'd disagree. Boise State is doing phenomenal at the moment, but I'm not sure there are any indicators they can keep it up in a fairly mediocre recruiting area with a student population that is less than 40% of what UCF's is and their alumni base isn't growing very fast (4-year graduation rate is only 6%).
Even as the fourth-best option in Florida, UCF still has a better recruiting pool locally than BSU does. And like Brad Stevens, the odds are Chris Petersen will test the waters before too long.
Brew, everything you state is the exact same that was said about USF. They are very similar schools in many regards. Both, likely, will continue to be the same. Having lived in Tampa for 5 years, I can tell you that no one really cares about USF. It is Florida and FSU. The same holds true about UCF in Orlando.
Be careful what you wish for.