UPDATE II: Report: Big East extends six invites
The Big East Conference will invite Boise State, Navy and Air Force for football only and SMU, Houston and Central Florida for all sports, a source with knowledge of the situation told The Associated Press.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7177969/big-east-invite-six-football-according-report
UPDATE: Appears UCF, Houston and SMU are on the way for all sports.
@PeteThamelNYT: Big East announcement appears to mean that at least UCF, Houston and SMU are on the way. Those were the locks.
https://twitter.com/#!/PeteThamelNYT/status/131419623986966530
____________________
NY Post: Big East looking for seventh school to invite
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/football/big_east_looks_for_lucky_th_E77JosPK0O40CcgEVfYeLK#ixzz1cSlWSEl1
SI: Big East Could Add Up to Six Teams Tuesday
http://tracking.si.com/2011/11/01/big-east-could-add-up-to-six-teams-tuesday/?sct=hp_t2_a5&eref=sihp
@PeteThamelNYT: Big East announcement appears to mean that at least UCF, Houston and SMU are on the way. Those were the locks.
Dumb.
Kind of pathetic when the conference has to do the looking. The basketball schools are letting Marinatto and the football schools walk all over them despite having the majority and a better backup plan.
Quote from: chapman on November 01, 2011, 12:02:00 PM
Kind of pathetic when the conference has to do the looking. The basketball schools are letting Marinatto and the football schools walk all over them despite having the majority and a better backup plan.
Football has the money though.
I honestly wouldn't mind adding Houston, Memphis, Temple, UCF and SMU to get to 10 football schools. But the service academies and Boise? I just dont see the value.
There could be a nice little Cincinnati-Louisville-Memphis-Houston rivalry that emerges.
Right now the basketball schools have the majority and they are going to give it away. In a few years when the power conferences need to add a team, where do you think they are going to come looking? Then we will be in the same mess again.
The basketball schools need to break away.
Do all of these schools that are joining get to split the exit fee money as well?
If the BB schools some how ef this up so bad that they are now the minority, then we get what ever we have coming to us in the future, wow.
-
Looks like UCF, Houston, SMU are "on the way
http://j.mp/rtCBjC
This evens the basketball schools and football schools at 8.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 12:48:58 PM
Looks like UCF, Houston, SMU are "on the way
http://j.mp/rtCBjC
This evens the basketball schools and football schools at 8.
How is this "new" conference any better than what MU had in Conference USA?
Quote from: TallTitan34 on November 01, 2011, 12:19:25 PM
Right now the basketball schools have the majority and they are going to give it away. In a few years when the power conferences need to add a team, where do you think they are going to come looking? Then we will be in the same mess again.
The basketball schools need to break away.
Do all of these schools that are joining get to split the exit fee money as well?
This. This is going to go and on and on until we are Conference USA. Or, create a solid conference that does not include football (at least FBS football).
From a basketball standpoint, the Big East has lost one national powerhouse, one perennial Top 25 teams, and one consistent tourney team and replaced it with one team with makes the tourney once every five years, and two teams who nearly never make the tourney.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 11:52:43 AM
UPDATE: Appears UCF, Houston and SMU are on the way for all sports.
OK, this just gets them up to 8 football and 8 basketball right?
I really don't have a problem with this, with the addition of four, football only members. I just don't think basketball can go bigger than 16.
Quote from: Norm on November 01, 2011, 12:51:24 PM
How is this "new" conference any better than what MU had in Conference USA?
UConn, Villanova, Georgetown, ND, Louisville, St. John's, Cincinnati
MSG for the Big East tourney
Nearly all games nationally televised
Continued BCS affiliation
***compare that to CUSA, with
Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnati
Conference tournament held in El Paso this past year
Only select marquee matchups televised nationally
No BCS affiliation
It's not even close to what we had in CUSA. It's not what the Big East was the past three years, but it's still leaps and bounds better than what we had in CUSA and if you can't see that then I don't know what to tell you.
Why would they not admit Memphis, Temple and one of UCF, Houston, SMU? If I'm a basketball school, and in the majority - this is what I dictate happen. At least this way once Lville and UCONN/Cincy leave - you already have Memphis and Temple in the league to absorb those basketball losses...
Basketball is what gave the Big East its name - to have semblance of its brand intact, I can't imagine the conference not letting Memphis and Temple in. Two respectable markets, great recruiting areas, and robust upgrade after losing SU, Pitt and WVU. No inside information, but they'll be in...
Quote from: siliconwarrior on November 01, 2011, 01:39:58 PM
Basketball is what gave the Big East its name - to have semblance of its brand intact, I can't imagine the conference not letting Memphis and Temple in. Two respectable markets, great recruiting areas, and robust upgrade after losing SU, Pitt and WVU. No inside information, but they'll be in...
As fans we want to see the best competition. Maybe the basketball coaches do not. Buzz wins more games, if weaker schools are added. Buzz losses more games, if Memphis and Temple are added. The weaker conference will not get 11 teams in NCAA, probably 6 a year. In most years MU will be in the top 4.
I was surprised to see that Houston has two top 100 recruits coming in for basketball in 2012... #26 Danuel House and #63 Danrad Knowles. James Dickey is on his way to turning things around.
Lose Pitt, Cuse and WVA
Gain Houston, SMU and UCF
Not even close for b-ball. Houston might be OK, but SMU and UCF........ Huge loss for BE hoops.
Add Temple for Football and Memphis for BBALL only. starts to look better. Also remeber that Prov, Rutgers, and ST John are making moves up the ladder.
Just and idea-----Houston, Memphis, Temple and add Xavier, possibly VCU, Ala. Birmingham and Butler. The Question is would VCU and Butler maintan. Ala. B. usually has a good team as does Old Dominion.
We have to take what we can get at this point. Bottom line is we are better off, for now, being a member in a BCS conference than we are trying to break away and start something new. This ensure football money, tv contracts, BEAST name recognition, etc, for at least a few more years. Gotta stay w the best conference we can be in at this point it is the BEAST.
BTW... UCF, Houston and SMU are huge football upgrades over cuse and pitt from a competitive standpoint. Even WVU has gone downhill since Dick Rod left...
Now on ESPN
Big East extends six invites
The Big East Conference will invite Boise State, Navy and Air Force for football only and SMU, Houston and Central Florida for all sports, a source with knowledge of the situation told The Associated Press.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7177969/big-east-invite-six-football-according-report
Andy Katz says:
"Big East should have gone Memphis-Temple in addition or in place of Houston and SMU at least you get hoops and market, not fb&no market"
http://j.mp/u5LPom
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 02:42:17 PM
Andy Katz says:
"Big East should have gone Memphis-Temple in addition or in place of Houston and SMU at least you get hoops and market, not fb&no market"
http://j.mp/u5LPom
Yes, Memphis and Temple for SMU and UCF. Houston is alright.
bleh
Quote from: Jamailman on November 01, 2011, 01:12:53 PM
UConn, Villanova, Georgetown, ND, Louisville, St. John's, Cincinnati
MSG for the Big East tourney
Nearly all games nationally televised
Continued BCS affiliation
***compare that to CUSA, with
Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnati
Conference tournament held in El Paso this past year
Only select marquee matchups televised nationally
No BCS affiliation
It's not even close to what we had in CUSA. It's not what the Big East was the past three years, but it's still leaps and bounds better than what we had in CUSA and if you can't see that then I don't know what to tell you.
Yes, but the Big East has already lost Pitt, Syracuse and West Virginia. Louisville is on its way out and I wouldn't be surprised if UConn and Cincinnati soon follow. And if Notre Dame joins a conference for football it wont be in the Big East.
SyracusePittWest VirginiaLouisvilleUConnCincinnatiNotre DameSouth Florida
Rutgers
Central FloridaHoustonSMUProvidence
Villanova
Seton Hall
St. John's
DePaul
Georgetown
Marquette
I think I'd rather have the basketball only schools break off and hook up with Xavier, Butler and maybe Dayton.
Quote from: Earl Tatum on November 01, 2011, 02:20:38 PM
Just and idea-----Houston, Memphis, Temple and add Xavier, possibly VCU, Ala. Birmingham and Butler. The Question is would VCU and Butler maintan. Ala. B. usually has a good team as does Old Dominion.
I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
Quote from: nyg on November 01, 2011, 02:46:44 PM
Yes, Memphis and Temple for SMU and UCF. Houston is alright.
I would love to have Memphis for basketball, but as long as we want to hold out some hope for BCS-status, Memphis is a huge drain with the WORST football team in all of FBS once again this year. Houston is ranked, Boise State is obviously the one power out there, military academies add something, and SMU may be far enough past the death penalty to return to football power.
We know we will be downgraded in basketball, but you need to try for potential. Houston always has potential to re-emerge as a basketball power, and UCF did sweep S. Florida, Florida and Miami to start 14-0 last year and get ranked before falling apart, so I don't know if someone got hurt or they just came down to earth.
I'm not critical of these moves. The only move that was obviously a huge mistake to this point was turning down the $1.4 billion from ESPN without another deal in hand, but since then it's been a very difficult damage control effort and this plan might be as good as any other.
Quote from: nyg on November 01, 2011, 02:06:55 PM
Lose Pitt, Cuse and WVA
Gain Houston, SMU and UCF
Not even close for b-ball. Houston might be OK, but SMU and UCF........ Huge loss for BE hoops.
Yep. BE basketball will suffer.
Here is what I am wondering. It is clear that the BE is expanded to the benefit of football instead of basketball. And the basketball schools are complicit with this.
Now, we know that the revenue distibution within the BE isn't public information. But what if the bball schools agreed to this, but are getting more $$$ out of the deal in return. The fball schools would go along with this because they don't have a majority, have nowhere else to go, and these moves likely give them a greater pie to divide since they would likely keep their AQ status.
So instead of sitting back and letting the fball schools do something, they actually engineered a deal that would get them a greater %age of the larger pie.
Either way, this blows. The hoops schools need to effing wake up and end this charade. They are being led around by their noses by a football. It's pathetic. The Big East will never be anything in football. The sooner those close to this realize the better off it will be hoops-wise. Just terrible.
Wonder how this will affect ticket sales?
Quote from: Niv Berkowitz on November 01, 2011, 03:56:09 PM
Either way, this blows. The hoops schools need to effing wake up and end this charade. They are being led around by their noses by a football. It's pathetic. The Big East will never be anything in football. The sooner those close to this realize the better off it will be hoops-wise. Just terrible.
Amen. There is ZERO justification for why the basketball schools should have allowed 2 of the 3 in of UCF, SMU and Houston. As Katz pointed out - you take Temple and Memphis - and 1 of the 3 above schools. (Regardless if Memphis's football record would bring down the AQ status of BCS.)
I sure as hell hope that in this arrangement the basketball schools required the exit fee be upped to the $25M range for existing members (primarily to keep Lville, Cincy, and UCONN) in the league...or have to give serious pause to leaving...when it is a known FACT UCONN and Lville have been lobbying to get out.
Mark it down within 5 years Lville, UCONN and Cincy will be gone - and we'll now have UCF, SMU and Houston in the league - instead of say Memphis, Temple, Xavier...when we probably could have had the same without ever having to have the riff raff of SMU, Houston and UCF in the conference.
The only basketball-only fans that like this deal appear to be Georgetown (http://hoyatalk2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general). All others seem to be ready and willing for the basketball-only era to begin.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 02:42:17 PM
Andy Katz says:
"Big East should have gone Memphis-Temple in addition or in place of Houston and SMU at least you get hoops and market, not fb&no market"
http://j.mp/u5LPom
How are Houston and Dallas not markets?
Shoot me now...
Well i guess MU should just transfer to B10, or is it B11 now?
Just Kidding everybody.
Quote from: dpucane on November 01, 2011, 05:02:35 PM
How are Houston and Dallas not markets?
When nobody cares about a team within a market - it doesn't have much value. Houston could evolve into having SOME value. However, SMU has to be National Championship caliber good for any part of Dallas to really care. The only people in Dallas who care about SMU are SMU alum - and their support of SMU athletics is very, very marginal at best - they draw about 1500 per Men's Basketball game...
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 02:42:17 PM
Andy Katz says:
"Big East should have gone Memphis-Temple in addition or in place of Houston and SMU at least you get hoops and market, not fb&no market"
http://j.mp/u5LPom
Andy Katz is right.
Quote from: Ners on November 01, 2011, 05:23:41 PM
When nobody cares about a team within a market - it doesn't have much value. Houston could evolve into having SOME value. However, SMU has to be National Championship caliber good for any part of Dallas to really care. The only people in Dallas who care about SMU are SMU alum - and their support of SMU athletics is very, very marginal at best - they draw about 1500 per Men's Basketball game...
Correctamundo.
Which is why a lot of times market size is vastly overrated.
I got my MBA from SMU. I would say that not only are they an after-thought in Dallas -- college basketball ranks somewhere in between drill team at football games and the minor league baseball in Frisco. Just in case you are keeping score those things are far behind high school football. Dallas is a pro-sports oriented area with an exception for anything football related. Yuck.
Interesting...
PeteThamelNYT, after hinting that Air Force may not be totally on board.
After Big East gets to 12, it will consider the 14/18 notion. Hoops schools have a huge say and want additions
http://bit.ly/tgDs5L
Can;'t wait for basketball season to begin so you all have something else to complain about.
No one hear must realize that UCF had a top 75 RPI last year??
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Interesting...
PeteThamelNYT, after hinting that Air Force may not be totally on board.
After Big East gets to 12, it will consider the 14/18 notion. Hoops schools have a huge say and want additions
http://bit.ly/tgDs5L
Temple/Memphis?
We can only hope...
I'll be the dissenting voice. This is a good move. We solidify football and hopefully appease them enough with a conference championship game. I do think that we need a forfeiture of future revenue clause, and honestly, the one mistake I'd see is if we allowed this without further assurances (other than the paltry $10M exit fee) of conference survival.
Our football is better. Let's face it, Syracuse and Pitt suck. West Virginia doesn't, but I'll take UCF and Houston over WVU. And if we do add Boise State, that's a huge add that will ensure BCS status remains.
Our basketball is worse, but this may not be over. Temple and Memphis may still be in the mix. And if not, UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, that's seven perennially good teams. St. John's, Rutgers, Providence, Houston, and UCF all seem to be on the rise (yes, UCF is improving, they were ranked last year). So Seton Hall, South Florida, DePaul, and SMU suck. Every league has some bottom-feeders. No, it's not the Big East of old, but it's a hell of a lot better than C-USA, and anyone who thinks otherwise is blind or delusional.
Being affiliated with perennial top-tens like UConn and Louisville is a good thing. Being affiliated with Cincinnati and Notre Dame is a good thing. If we go basketball-only, we likely lose those schools. And like it or not, those schools bring in a heck of a lot of the contract revenue. Trying to break away from them would be incredibly stupid. Mind-bogglingly, phenomenally stupid. Leave them, start a 10-team league, within 5 years we are no better than the current A-10. And frankly, they'll probably then add Temple and Memphis end up a better league than our new basketball-only league anyway.
Did I mention that breaking away would be monumentally stupid?
Quote from: MarquetteDano on November 01, 2011, 12:52:27 PM
This. This is going to go and on and on until we are Conference USA. Or, create a solid conference that does not include football (at least FBS football).
From a basketball standpoint, the Big East has lost one national powerhouse, one perennial Top 25 teams, and one consistent tourney team and replaced it with one team with makes the tourney once every five years, and two teams who nearly never make the tourney.
Exactly!
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 01, 2011, 08:16:05 PM
I'll be the dissenting voice. This is a good move. We solidify football and hopefully appease them enough with a conference championship game. I do think that we need a forfeiture of future revenue clause, and honestly, the one mistake I'd see is if we allowed this without further assurances (other than the paltry $10M exit fee) of conference survival.
Our football is better. Let's face it, Syracuse and Pitt suck. West Virginia doesn't, but I'll take UCF and Houston over WVU. And if we do add Boise State, that's a huge add that will ensure BCS status remains.
Our basketball is worse, but this may not be over. Temple and Memphis may still be in the mix. And if not, UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, that's seven perennially good teams. St. John's, Rutgers, Providence, Houston, and UCF all seem to be on the rise (yes, UCF is improving, they were ranked last year). So Seton Hall, South Florida, DePaul, and SMU suck. Every league has some bottom-feeders. No, it's not the Big East of old, but it's a hell of a lot better than C-USA, and anyone who thinks otherwise is blind or delusional.
Being affiliated with perennial top-tens like UConn and Louisville is a good thing. Being affiliated with Cincinnati and Notre Dame is a good thing. If we go basketball-only, we likely lose those schools. And like it or not, those schools bring in a heck of a lot of the contract revenue. Trying to break away from them would be incredibly stupid. Mind-bogglingly, phenomenally stupid. Leave them, start a 10-team league, within 5 years we are no better than the current A-10. And frankly, they'll probably then add Temple and Memphis end up a better league than our new basketball-only league anyway.
Did I mention that breaking away would be monumentally stupid?
+1!
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 01, 2011, 08:16:05 PM
I'll be the dissenting voice. This is a good move. We solidify football and hopefully appease them enough with a conference championship game. I do think that we need a forfeiture of future revenue clause, and honestly, the one mistake I'd see is if we allowed this without further assurances (other than the paltry $10M exit fee) of conference survival.
Our football is better. Let's face it, Syracuse and Pitt suck. West Virginia doesn't, but I'll take UCF and Houston over WVU. And if we do add Boise State, that's a huge add that will ensure BCS status remains.
Our basketball is worse, but this may not be over. Temple and Memphis may still be in the mix. And if not, UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, that's seven perennially good teams. St. John's, Rutgers, Providence, Houston, and UCF all seem to be on the rise (yes, UCF is improving, they were ranked last year). So Seton Hall, South Florida, DePaul, and SMU suck. Every league has some bottom-feeders. No, it's not the Big East of old, but it's a hell of a lot better than C-USA, and anyone who thinks otherwise is blind or delusional.
Being affiliated with perennial top-tens like UConn and Louisville is a good thing. Being affiliated with Cincinnati and Notre Dame is a good thing. If we go basketball-only, we likely lose those schools. And like it or not, those schools bring in a heck of a lot of the contract revenue. Trying to break away from them would be incredibly stupid. Mind-bogglingly, phenomenally stupid. Leave them, start a 10-team league, within 5 years we are no better than the current A-10. And frankly, they'll probably then add Temple and Memphis end up a better league than our new basketball-only league anyway.
Did I mention that breaking away would be monumentally stupid?
Brew - We aren't breaking away from Lville, UCONN, Cincy if we don't add football teams at present - they can still play in the Big East for hoops - but they'll have to figure out their football situation on their own. It is HIGHLY likely that the above schools leave the Big East (even with proposed football team additions) once offered by the ACC, Big 12, SEC, or Big 10. It is unlikely that ALL of those conferences stand pat at their current size. Did adding TCU stop Pitt, Cuse, and WVU from leaving?? NO. Are we really to think UCF, Houston, SMU will make Lville, UCONN, and Cincy stay in the Big East long term??
I doubt any of the above would leave the Big East conference in its present form - to move 100% of their sports to the MAC, or Conference USA for football purposes (assuming none of the other leagues offer them a spot at present)...so we'd continue to get to play them in basketball. If Lville, UCONN, and Cincy aren't willing to agree to a $25M+ exit fee at present - no sense in watering down the basketball brand with teams like UCF, SMU, Houston.
This strategy to me is by far the most "proactive" strategy the basketball schools could take. They have the power - USE IT! Force the hand of of Lville, UCONN, Cincy - and when they don't agree to $25M exit fee...you have your answer as to their commitment long term to the conference. But, let's get Memphis, Temple, and Xavier in the Big East right now...so when Ville, UCONN, and Cincy eventually leave...the Big East is still a strong basketball brand...and not diluted by SMU, Houston and UCF.
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 01, 2011, 08:16:05 PM
I'll be the dissenting voice. This is a good move. We solidify football and hopefully appease them enough with a conference championship game. I do think that we need a forfeiture of future revenue clause, and honestly, the one mistake I'd see is if we allowed this without further assurances (other than the paltry $10M exit fee) of conference survival.
Our football is better. Let's face it, Syracuse and Pitt suck. West Virginia doesn't, but I'll take UCF and Houston over WVU. And if we do add Boise State, that's a huge add that will ensure BCS status remains.
Our basketball is worse, but this may not be over. Temple and Memphis may still be in the mix. And if not, UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, that's seven perennially good teams. St. John's, Rutgers, Providence, Houston, and UCF all seem to be on the rise (yes, UCF is improving, they were ranked last year). So Seton Hall, South Florida, DePaul, and SMU suck. Every league has some bottom-feeders. No, it's not the Big East of old, but it's a hell of a lot better than C-USA, and anyone who thinks otherwise is blind or delusional.
Being affiliated with perennial top-tens like UConn and Louisville is a good thing. Being affiliated with Cincinnati and Notre Dame is a good thing. If we go basketball-only, we likely lose those schools. And like it or not, those schools bring in a heck of a lot of the contract revenue. Trying to break away from them would be incredibly stupid. Mind-bogglingly, phenomenally stupid. Leave them, start a 10-team league, within 5 years we are no better than the current A-10. And frankly, they'll probably then add Temple and Memphis end up a better league than our new basketball-only league anyway.
Did I mention that breaking away would be monumentally stupid?
Brew, West Virginia is a FAR better football school than UCF and Houston. Mountaineer fans are rabid about their team and they follow them to bowl games - which is a big thing to bowls that want fans in attendance.
Also, the way things are going, Marquette will not be affiliated with UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati and Notre Dame - in probably less than 3 years. And I think they'll break away from us, not the other way around.
Quote from: muguru on November 01, 2011, 07:59:02 PM
No one hear must realize that UCF had a top 75 RPI last year??
Indeed, they were better than the bottom third of the present-day conference. Remember, they had a great early streak of undefeated play to get people noticing.
They've got a strong coach with pedigree, and with a move to the Big East and market they have, it'd be no shock to see him stay.
The main issue with the Knights is I believe they've had some NCAA sniffers the last six months.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 04:49:51 PM
The only basketball-only fans that like this deal appear to be Georgetown (http://hoyatalk2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general). All others seem to be ready and willing for the basketball-only era to begin.
You weren't kidding, these guys are loving the idea, and a lot.
For Basketball only, I would want U. Conn. Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Houston, Memphis,
Xavier, Villanova, Temple, Providence, DePaul, Georgetown, Seton Hall and Marquette, and St. John's. There are some good rivalries with the Ohio teams, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, ND and MU. Just a thought..
Looks good.
And for anyone who thinks Houston and WVU are a 'push' for football?? May I offer you some ocean front property in Utah, because you sir are clearly insane.
Quote from: MU_LOL on November 02, 2011, 12:21:10 PM
You weren't kidding, these guys are loving the idea, and a lot.
Reading their boards for the past few months, they really see themselves as better than all bball-onlies. The closest school they view to themselves is Nova, but they really see themselves as a Duke that never moved its football up. They view any formation with the other basketball-onlies as the final nail in the coffin to their program (rather pathetic actually). Not too long ago, many were calling for Georgetown to just go Ivy.
All others, including St. Johns and Providence want the basketball-only era to begin sooner rather than later.
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 01, 2011, 08:16:05 PM
Being affiliated with perennial top-tens like UConn and Louisville is a good thing. Being affiliated with Cincinnati and Notre Dame is a good thing. If we go basketball-only, we likely lose those schools. And like it or not, those schools bring in a heck of a lot of the contract revenue. Trying to break away from them would be incredibly stupid. Mind-bogglingly, phenomenally stupid. Leave them, start a 10-team league, within 5 years we are no better than the current A-10. And frankly, they'll probably then add Temple and Memphis end up a better league than our new basketball-only league anyway.
Did I mention that breaking away would be monumentally stupid?
At what point is this type of overly-negative view (shared by many) become a self-fulfilling prophecy? Jeez, if all fans get this pessimistic and look down so negatively on the situation just because we can't play a UConn or Louisville anymore (once a year! I might add), then yes the programs will tread downhill.
Georgetown, St. John's, Villanova, Providence, Marquette, DePaul, Xavier, Butler, etc are better than the A-10 could ever hope to be, but so many here are freaking out b/c, for whatever reason, view our program's worth (and survival) as tied completely to the football schools.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 02, 2011, 05:29:41 PMAt what point is this type of overly-negative view (shared by many) become a self-fulfilling prophecy? Jeez, if all fans get this pessimistic and look down so negatively on the situation just because we can't play a UConn or Louisville anymore (once a year! I might add), then yes the programs will tread downhill.
Georgetown, St. John's, Villanova, Providence, Marquette, DePaul, Xavier, Butler, etc are better than the A-10 could ever hope to be, but so many here are freaking out b/c, for whatever reason, view our program's worth (and survival) as tied completely to the football schools.
(http://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/gallery/files/3/8/6/7/pot-kettle.jpg)
Really? Seriously? People are freaking out about LEAVING the league? 99.999% of our fanbase seems to think that we are all doomed, the sky is falling, and we MUST get out of the Big East as soon as possible, cut all ties, burn the bridges, and immediately create a basketball-only conference. Every time I blink, it seems there are 2 new threads and 10 new posts about how horrible this is and how we should toss the football schools out.
Yes, I think that deliberately kicking out two perennial top-ten programs is idiotic. And while people love this ten-team idea, how long is that going to produce bids. Five years from now, what will happen to the 9-9 teams? They'll go to the NIT. And that will probably be at least 50-60% of the league. We'll get 3-4 bids a year. Why? Because someone has to lose. And while it may be a league that is getting 7-8 bids a year now, it won't be that when those 7-8 teams are beating up on each other.
We're in the best basketball conference in the country. In 2 years, we'll be in one of the top three basketball conferences in the country, even with Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU gone and replaced. We can always go basketball-only. That option will never go away. We would always be welcome in the A-10, or C-USA, or even the Horizon or MVC. If the Big East splits, the NCAA rules that require 7 teams playing together for 8 years would mean that if they want an AQ spot, they have to bring us along, so whatever conference G'Town, 'Nova, and St. John's would become a part of would almost assuredly include us.
Bottom line, if you take out UConn and Louisville, there are no replacements. Period, point blank. There are no programs in the entire nation we could add that would bring the same value of those two programs. The only programs of that quality are already tied into BCS conferences. Any program that can be a perennial top-ten team and legitimately challenge for national titles regularly is in the ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, or PAC-12. Sorry, Butler doesn't count. Yet we seem to want to be rid of the two best basketball programs we are associated with because maybe, possibly one day in the future they might end up somewhere else? Sorry, but that's damn near the definition of lunacy.
If they go and it all comes down, then we can join whatever basketball-only conference we like. There pretty much isn't a basketball-only in the country that wouldn't have us. Honestly, even the WCC would probably take us if we were interested, geographic footprint be damned. So let's just step off the ledge and accept that even without Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU, we're still in a pretty damn good position and we should enjoy it as long as we can help make it last.
Brew - How do you think Buzz addresses this in recruiting when every one of the sure-fire BCS schools negative recruits aginst MU not having football, and the likelihood of MU being forced into a league like the A-10, Horizon, MVC, WCC, Conference USA??
Living in gray area is the absolute worst place any of us can be. As Al McGuire said about recruiting - the worst answer is "Maybe." You want a "Yes," or a "No." Recruiting is hard enough as it is, but to have to try to sell an unknown, unstable conference situation?? Not good.
On another point - Memphis would be a comparable value add to the conference as Lville. Why are we not extending invites to Memphis and Temple currently and then 1 of the 3 of UCF, SMU, Houston?? The Big East is HOPING (and HOPE is never a strategy) that UCF, Houston and SMU can boost their football profile. At the end of the day, all 3 of these schools will be roughly the 5th best programs in their respective states of Texas/Florida. None of them are going to start to out recruit/perform/draw Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Florida, Florida State, Miami, USF (okay debatable there)..
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 06:08:02 PMBrew - How do you think Buzz addresses this in recruiting when every one of the sure-fire BCS schools negative recruits aginst MU not having football, and the likelihood of MU being forced into a league like the A-10, Horizon, MVC, WCC, Conference USA??
Wow...didn't expect that one from you, Ners. Personally, I have faith in Buzz. I have a feeling he's faced negative recruiting before, people have said he'll leave at the first chance, or that it's just a small school in the middle of nowhere, yet somehow, Buzz has brought in great class after great class. He's earned my faith. So I'm not going to start doubting his ability just because someone has a new negative recruiting approach. Buzz will tell that that he's not going anywhere, that Marquette is in the best basketball conference in the country, and that they are doing everything possible to ensure the highest level of competition.
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 06:08:02 PMLiving in gray area is the absolute worst place any of us can be. As Al McGuire said about recruiting - the worst answer is "Maybe." You want a "Yes," or a "No." Recruiting is hard enough as it is, but to have to try to sell an unknown, unstable conference situation?? Not good.
I thought so too, initially. But if we start to force the divorce, who knows what will happen? If we piss off UConn and Louisville, maybe they force their way out to the ACC or Big 12. Maybe if they have enough initiative, and especially if Cincy goes with UL, we'll lose all of them. And you know what else we'll lose? Any hope we had of an exit fee. They'll all argue that since 2/3 of the conference left simultaneously, it constitutes a dissolution of the Big East as a football league and that the contract is no longer valid. Will they have a leg to stand on? Who knows. But it could well get tied up in court, they could win, and then we'd not only lose our best competition but also all the money we thought we'd have coming to us.
If we are good conference-mates, maybe when it all dissolves, UConn will be left without a home and Cincy will have to park their football in C-USA. Maybe we lose some, but maybe they keep their basketball programs with us because we showed them the good faith that Syracuse and Pitt did not. Right now, even though they have football and we don't, all of us in the Big East are going through this crazy realignment together. It'd be kind of a crappy thing to do to say screw you to our most powerful allies. Sure, they may do the same to us if given the chance, but at least we know it's coming, and we can always go basketball-only.
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 06:08:02 PMOn another point - Memphis would be a comparable value add to the conference as Lville. Why are we not extending invites to Memphis and Temple currently and then 1 of the 3 of UCF, SMU, Houston?? The Big East is HOPING (and HOPE is never a strategy) that UCF, Houston and SMU can boost their football profile. At the end of the day, all 3 of these schools will be roughly the 5th best programs in their respective states of Texas/Florida. None of them are going to start to out recruit/perform/draw Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Florida, Florida State, Miami, USF (okay debatable there)..
Dunno. Memphis and Temple would be my first two choices, with UCF a close third. Then Houston. But UCF has a rising basketball program. Top 75 RPI last year and were ranked for a time. And Houston has a fantastic class coming in next year. There's hope for them. It's certainly better than ECU or some of the other names we were rumored with.
And if it all comes tumbling down, let's be honest. None of these new schools will stick around. They'll slink back to wherever they came from, leaving the Big East to the basketball schools that were here before the chaos, during the chaos, and will be after the chaos. Everyone's afraid that we'll be left in a conference with SMU, Houston, and Boise. Are any of them really going to stay if half the league leaves (again) and the BCS bid goes away? The simple answer is no.
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 02, 2011, 05:50:35 PM
(http://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/gallery/files/3/8/6/7/pot-kettle.jpg)
Really? Seriously? People are freaking out about LEAVING the league? 99.999% of our fanbase seems to think that we are all doomed, the sky is falling, and we MUST get out of the Big East as soon as possible, cut all ties, burn the bridges, and immediately create a basketball-only conference. Every time I blink, it seems there are 2 new threads and 10 new posts about how horrible this is and how we should toss the football schools out.
Yes, I think that deliberately kicking out two perennial top-ten programs is idiotic. And while people love this ten-team idea, how long is that going to produce bids. Five years from now, what will happen to the 9-9 teams? They'll go to the NIT. And that will probably be at least 50-60% of the league. We'll get 3-4 bids a year. Why? Because someone has to lose. And while it may be a league that is getting 7-8 bids a year now, it won't be that when those 7-8 teams are beating up on each other.
We're in the best basketball conference in the country. In 2 years, we'll be in one of the top three basketball conferences in the country, even with Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU gone and replaced. We can always go basketball-only. That option will never go away. We would always be welcome in the A-10, or C-USA, or even the Horizon or MVC. If the Big East splits, the NCAA rules that require 7 teams playing together for 8 years would mean that if they want an AQ spot, they have to bring us along, so whatever conference G'Town, 'Nova, and St. John's would become a part of would almost assuredly include us.
Bottom line, if you take out UConn and Louisville, there are no replacements. Period, point blank. There are no programs in the entire nation we could add that would bring the same value of those two programs. The only programs of that quality are already tied into BCS conferences. Any program that can be a perennial top-ten team and legitimately challenge for national titles regularly is in the ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, or PAC-12. Sorry, Butler doesn't count. Yet we seem to want to be rid of the two best basketball programs we are associated with because maybe, possibly one day in the future they might end up somewhere else? Sorry, but that's damn near the definition of lunacy.
If they go and it all comes down, then we can join whatever basketball-only conference we like. There pretty much isn't a basketball-only in the country that wouldn't have us. Honestly, even the WCC would probably take us if we were interested, geographic footprint be damned. So let's just step off the ledge and accept that even without Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU, we're still in a pretty damn good position and we should enjoy it as long as we can help make it last.
I don't recall any posts on here calling for Louisville, Cincy and UConn to just be "kicked out" or that we should leave the Big East. Thats the last thing anyone has called for. We know we have to wait this out, as the Big East name will mean so much for any version of this bball conference.The only thing people were calling for is to not allow the basketball-onlies to be walked all over and let in whoever (Boise, Navy, UCF, ECU) just to keep the only two basketball programs left that we want to be associated with. The argument was that UConn, Louisville and Cincy would still want their basketball associated with this conference even w/ out football, since there is no better alternative until one of the other 5 BCS conferences comes calling.
I don't necessarily have a problem with adding the 6 schools suggested, but I do if it leaves the basketball schools in a position to be taken advantage of and results in some schools overtime being forced out or marginalized.
And just like Bilsu said in an earlier post, it is not a 100% sure thing that this basketball conference will be there 5 years from now no matter what.
Quote from: bilsu on November 02, 2011, 12:29:02 PM
I do not think it is 100% given that, if the basketball schools broke off that they would all stay together. That is the biggest reason, I would not root for a basketball only conference. There are no guarantees we would end up with who we want. All of a sudden Notre Dame goes one way. Villanova goes somewhere were their football team can develope. ACC decides Georgetown as a basketball only school fits well with Notre Dame and takes them both. Xavier thinks they are better off where they are and Atalntic 10 expands by two taking two former Big East teams that does not include MU. There are alot of things that could go wrong, if basketball schhols decided to go on their own. In the end, just like the football schools, each school is going to do what is best for them and not what is best for Marquette.
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 06:08:02 PM
Brew - How do you think Buzz addresses this in recruiting when every one of the sure-fire BCS schools negative recruits aginst MU not having football, and the likelihood of MU being forced into a league like the A-10, Horizon, MVC, WCC, Conference USA??
I still believe that is offset by having the rare combination of being in a BCS conference but also being able to tell recruits they won't be the 74th most important kid on campus behind all the football players.
When I ran the study last year I believe 94% of four- and five- stars went to BCS conferences and Memphis was the only non-BCS school able to pull any ine. (too tired to go back and search the article, so will stand corrected). I can't pretend to be in a kids head, but with 80% of what they hear on TV being about the BCS football conferences, we are giving up tremendous branding once we go to a basketball-only conference that isn't mentioned much except for teh 2 1/2 months a year between the BCS championship game and the end of March Madness. So the difference is we might be doing it with 3-stars instead of 4-stars if we go basketball-only.
On West Virginia vs. Houston, the only factor that will be considered in the BCS evaluation is the year end BCS ratings, and right now Houston is 13th and West Virginia is 32nd. Sure, WVU is better over the past few years, but even their 37th in 2010 isn't great.
But the problem in compariing is that if you want to take the three teams that left you are comparing the upgrade from West Virginia to Boise State, which is a difference in light years, especially considering that BCS Bowl wins are an additional factor in addition to average BCS ranking. Obviously I wish WVU had stayed, but for BCS evaluation the potential Big East is obviously much better than the old even before getting a 12th team.
Does anyone here really believe that Boise State and Air Force are gong to accept the offer to join the Big East? I just don't see it happening.
I agree with brew completely. Earlier I was all for a bball only breakaway, but he is right. There is absolutely no reason to think we should go in this direction now. As he said, we are essentially going to be in the third best bball league. Yet some people want a bball only conference with the current bball schools, Xavier, etc? Well, that wouldn't be the third best conference in the country - perhaps fifth.
So, if I get this right, people are advocating that we move away from good basketball teams, into a weaker conference, just because those good basketball teams might one day leave the BE? Makes no sense.
And again, let's not get all hung up on the Big East brand. Any value that that brand would give as a bball only conference would be small and frankly short-lived. I've said this before, but if you take those same schools, put them in another conference, it would be the quality of their play that determines the conference's value - not the name on the package.
For instance, look at CUSA. It was essentially formed as a basketbal conference first. Now it is a southern football conference. Does anyone think of it as a basketball conference any longer?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 03, 2011, 08:32:07 AM
I agree with brew completely. Earlier I was all for a bball only breakaway, but he is right. There is absolutely no reason to think we should go in this direction now. As he said, we are essentially going to be in the third best bball league. Yet some people want a bball only conference with the current bball schools, Xavier, etc? Well, that wouldn't be the third best conference in the country - perhaps fifth.
So, if I get this right, people are advocating that we move away from good basketball teams, into a weaker conference, just because those good basketball teams might one day leave the BE? Makes no sense.
And again, let's not get all hung up on the Big East brand. Any value that that brand would give as a bball only conference would be small and frankly short-lived. I've said this before, but if you take those same schools, put them in another conference, it would be the quality of their play that determines the conference's value - not the name on the package.
For instance, look at CUSA. It was essentially formed as a basketbal conference first. Now it is a southern football conference. Does anyone think of it as a basketball conference any longer?
I think where there is misunderstanding is that those of us who want to go in THE DIRECTION of basketball only, are not advocating kicking out Lville, UCONN, or Cincy. But instead, we are saying, let's not try to salvage football at the expense of watered down basketball - due to the eventual likelihood of Lville, UCONN, and Cincy leaving the conference anyway. We can remain playing them as is, until they get offered elsewhere - in the meantime those schools would have to figure out their football situation.
If these schools are unwilling to agree to a STEEP buyout fee, such as $25M to exit the Big East - why on earth would we feel they are committed to the league long term? For the life of me I cannot figure out why Temple and Memphis aren't 2 of the 3 schools being invited - as this would insulate against future good basketball school losses, and provide 2 football teams...give Houston the 3rd invite for their football strength and be on our way.
UConn, UL and UC want to be in a conference that keep their AQ status. They have invested big $$$ in their football programs based upon the expectations of certain revenues. Since the revenue split between fball and bball isn't shared, it could be that the bball schools have a vested interest in staying in a AQ conference too. Yeah they have watered down bball a little - not terribly though. And in return you have kept members happy by almost assuring a future in the BCS.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 03, 2011, 08:32:07 AM
I agree with brew completely. Earlier I was all for a bball only breakaway, but he is right. There is absolutely no reason to think we should go in this direction now. As he said, we are essentially going to be in the third best bball league. Yet some people want a bball only conference with the current bball schools, Xavier, etc? Well, that wouldn't be the third best conference in the country - perhaps fifth.
So, if I get this right, people are advocating that we move away from good basketball teams, into a weaker conference, just because those good basketball teams might one day leave the BE? Makes no sense.
And again, let's not get all hung up on the Big East brand. Any value that that brand would give as a bball only conference would be small and frankly short-lived. I've said this before, but if you take those same schools, put them in another conference, it would be the quality of their play that determines the conference's value - not the name on the package.
For instance, look at CUSA. It was essentially formed as a basketbal conference first. Now it is a southern football conference. Does anyone think of it as a basketball conference any longer?
Have to disagree with you on the name. Nobody thinks anything positively about Conference USA, that is why it is used constantly in jokes about realignment. Nobody knows it is a southern football conference or even who all the teams are. The Big East is an established basketball brand that has been around decades and is nationally recognized and respected. If you think that is easy to replicate, or that it will simply disappear because of no UConn or Cuse, I think you are underestimating the value and power a brand has. There is a reason why the Big 10 never changed its name, and never will no matter how many teams it has. The value is in "Big 10" and people automatically connect that with power college football, even when the league is down.
Look, I know a great deal about branding. I never said there wasn't power behind a brand, but brand without substance decreases over time. IOW, if UL, UConn and UC leave, you don't stick around in a bad basketball conference simply because of the Big East name. *If* those schools leave, I don't think the bball schools can worry about who gets the BE name if they want to split - it would not be a reason *not* to leave. (Not that I would think the remaining football schools would be all that interested in it anyway.)
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 03, 2011, 10:09:43 AM
Look, I know a great deal about branding. I never said there wasn't power behind a brand, but brand without substance decreases over time. IOW, if UL, UConn and UC leave, you don't stick around in a bad basketball conference simply because of the Big East name. *If* those schools leave, I don't think the bball schools can worry about who gets the BE name if they want to split - it would not be a reason *not* to leave. (Not that I would think the remaining football schools would be all that interested in it anyway.)
Oh ok gotcha. I would agree that if somehow the bball-onlies got stuck with all these Conf USA/MWC leftovers (after UConn, Ville, etc left) and couldn't keep the name that they should leave since the conf would turn into whatever basketball conglomeration that is.
I assumed you were saying that the value of the brand would disappear overtime as a bball-only conference (obviously it will a little bit), and therefore we should ditch just to remain with whatever conglomeration gets a BCS bid.
My only issue with everyone here acting like we must do ANYTHING to remain associated with TWO schools. Two, that I might add, will leave at the first chance. Let's face it, there isn't much left of the original Big East as is and we are saying that if we don't do everything to preserve association with 2 schools (one which has as much history in it as MU) we are doomed to mid-major forever.
I still think it is beneficial to remain associated with UConn, Ville, Cincinnati, South Florida, and Rutgers for as long as possible. But at what cost for a few extra years?