Don't know why he proposes USF, or VCU since he adds Richmond, but it doesn't look too bad to me. Replace USF and VCU w/ Butler and St. Louis.
http://www.beyondusports.com/convince-big-east-hoops-conference/
I've already pleaded the case for the Big East to quit football and to focus on basketball. By trying to save the football league they will destroy the basketball league. They are attempting to have both and will end up with neither. The West Virginia departure was enough of a sting. Now the WVU lawsuit against the conference is opening up some serious wounds.
West Virginia is claiming that the conference leadership is dysfunctional and failed at their fiduciary responsibilities. We aren't sure if their allegations are true, but it paints a picture of a clear division between the basketball interests and the football interests. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a clash between the two factions was bound to occur at some point during conference realignment. At the Big East basketball media day you got the sense from some of the coaches that they want to be basketball only. Louisville coach Rick Pitino has been the most outspoken, blasting Pitt and Syracuse for leaving the conference high and dry.
The Big East brass ought to listen to the hoops contingent because they have a point. The schools they want to bring in for basketball and football won't make their league any stronger in either. They are better off fortifying one and shutting down the other. If Louisville, Rutgers, Cincinnati and UCONN find new homes, trying to convince the basketball schools that Houston, SMU and UCF are worthy replacements will fold the basketball conference.
There's a very easy solution if the current members on the football side bail. Pick up Memphis, Temple Xavier, Richmond, UMASS, Dayton, Charlotte and VCU. Here is what the news Big East would look like:
Georgetown
Marquette
Seton Hall
St. John's
Villanova
Providence
Depaul
South Florida
Memphis
Temple
Xavier
Richmond
VCU
UMASS
Dayton
Charlotte
Notice that I left out Notre Dame as they may end up bolting for another conference for basketball. Nine teams in the conference would have made the final four in the last 25 years. That's more than 50% of this proposed line up. That doesn't include Temple and Xavier who are elite basketball programs. The new lineup stretches into important recruiting grounds such as Hampton Roads and North Carolina. It's the only shot for the conference to be viable at all. As a long time Big East fan, I don't get excited about Houston, UCF and SMU. This set up I can watch. It's time to convince the Big East to go this route or else they we will watch them sink into oblivion.
16 team hoop league, with some on your list that play football. Not going to happen.
For whatever reason, football, and in particular the AQ position the Beast currently holds, is driving the bus. I can see the case for going basketball only. The powers that be in the BEast don't. MU does not have the leverage necessary to successfully push for it. Sad state of affairs.
Ville, Uconn, ND, and Cincy are bigger stronger BBALL programs then any you want to add. Houston, Temple, and UCF are solid programs and large schools in Big Metro areas, and would probably make a move up in the Big east. If you could end up adding 2 BBALL only teams Like Xavier and Mem (both are strong now and historically) That would give you a 19 team Conf that would put 1/2 there teams in the NCAA you would play everyone once.
I will take SMU, and some solid programs to keep ville, uconnn, ND and Cincy.
Houston, Temple, UCF are better then USF, Depaul and Seton hall.
Quote from: mupanther on November 01, 2011, 03:37:08 PM
16 team hoop league, with some on your list that play football. Not going to happen.
First, not my list. Anyways, I disagree that a Temple and Memphis would not be interested in this league since those schools value basketball above football. UMass and Temple already do this exact same thing.
Anyone who thinks we'd be in a better situation without UConn, Louisville, and Cincinnati should be given a lobotomy.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 01, 2011, 03:21:21 PM
Don't know why he proposes USF, or VCU since he adds Richmond, but it doesn't look too bad to me. Replace USF and VCU w/ Butler and St. Louis.
Why does SLU continue to get mentioned as bringing any sort of basketball value nowadays? I grew up and currently live in St. Louis and SLU basketball has been such a non-entity in this city for as long as I can remember. They have had a few decent seasons in the past 20 years but nothing of note. Someone please explain to me how SLU would positively impact the basketball conference we are talking about convincing the Big East to become other than as a schedule filler?
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 01, 2011, 08:17:25 PM
Anyone who thinks we'd be in a better situation without UConn, Louisville, and Cincinnati should be given a lobotomy.
I'm starting to think anyone who thinks UConn, Louisville and Cincy will be around for more than a few years needs a lobotomy...
Quote from: avid1010 on November 02, 2011, 07:44:07 AM
I'm starting to think anyone who thinks UConn, Louisville and Cincy will be around for more than a few years needs already had a lobotomy...
FTFY
Quote from: avid1010 on November 02, 2011, 07:44:07 AM
I'm starting to think anyone who thinks UConn, Louisville and Cincy will be around for more than a few years needs a lobotomy...
First of all, I don't think they are going anywhere, anytime soon.
But second, what if they do leave in 5 years? You adjust and move on then.
Quote from: avid1010 on November 02, 2011, 07:44:07 AM
I'm starting to think anyone who thinks UConn, Louisville and Cincy will be around for more than a few years needs a lobotomy...
+1000
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 02, 2011, 08:15:20 AM
First of all, I don't think they are going anywhere, anytime soon.
But second, what if they do leave in 5 years? You adjust and move on then.
Sure - but now you have Houston, UCF, and SMU in your league - so you've already devalued your basketball brand by virtue of that...and then who are you going "adjust" with and add to the conference for football purposes? UAB? Ball State? Central Michigan? Western Michigan? Akron? Ugh...
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 08:19:58 AM
Sure - but now you have Houston, UCF, and SMU in your league - so you've already devalued your basketball brand by virtue of that...and then who are you going "adjust" with and add to the conference for football purposes? UAB? Ball State? Central Michigan? Western Michigan? Akron? Ugh...
Or the bball schools break off then. Seriously, one would think with all the conference shuffling over the past 20 years that people would realize that who you are in bed with now doesn't mean you are in bed with a decade from now.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 02, 2011, 08:34:25 AM
Or the bball schools break off then. Seriously, one would think with all the conference shuffling over the past 20 years that people would realize that who you are in bed with now doesn't mean you are in bed with a decade from now.
That's a fair enough point, but that doesn't mean it's wise to wait for last call before you start trying to find a companion. Rather than waiting until after Louisville, Cinci and UConn leave to "adjust," why not take some proactive steps right now to try to avoid rolling over some morning three years from now and saying, "how the hell did I end up in bed with you?"
Quote from: tommyc6 on November 02, 2011, 12:15:02 AM
Why does SLU continue to get mentioned as bringing any sort of basketball value nowadays? I grew up and currently live in St. Louis and SLU basketball has been such a non-entity in this city for as long as I can remember. They have had a few decent seasons in the past 20 years but nothing of note. Someone please explain to me how SLU would positively impact the basketball conference we are talking about convincing the Big East to become other than as a schedule filler?
EXACTLY
Quote from: StillAWarrior on November 02, 2011, 09:00:08 AM
That's a fair enough point, but that doesn't mean it's wise to wait for last call before you start trying to find a companion. Rather than waiting until after Louisville, Cinci and UConn leave to "adjust," why not take some proactive steps right now to try to avoid rolling over some morning three years from now and saying, "how the hell did I end up in bed with you?"
Because I am assuming that the BE is made up of smart people making smart, informed decisions. There are seven bball schools (not including ND) that are apparently going along with this. They're not dumb - they know the landscape better than we do.
IOW, I trust that they are making smart decisions on behalf of the bball schools.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 02, 2011, 08:34:25 AM
Or the bball schools break off then. Seriously, one would think with all the conference shuffling over the past 20 years that people would realize that who you are in bed with now doesn't mean you are in bed with a decade from now.
I agree that there has been a lot of shuffling of teams over the last 20 years, however, it really seems to be crystallizing that there are going to be 5 main leagues: Pac 12, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC. Every Lville, UCONN, Cincy, Rutgers out there is going to aspire to get into those leagues.
The issue I have, is that I don't ever recall in all of the conference realignment - a conference kicking out a school(s), that they don't want anymore. And I'm quite certain SMU, Houston, and UCF aren't going to be in high demand as the above leagues expand. Lville, UCONN, Rutgers, Cincy would all get offered to the BCS leagues before SMU, Houston, UCF...
So therefore you are left with a Big East that no longer has Lville, UCONN, Cincy - but has SMU, UCF, Houston - and then whatever band aid schools you try to add once Lville, UCONN, and Cincy leave...like Akron, Central Michigan, Buffalo, UAB, etc..
I could be wrong, but if the basketball only schools chose to "break away" on their own down the road - how could they possibly retain the Big East name/brand/Madison Square Garden tourney...when you have these other schools in the league? (Perhaps the admins have this worked into the invitation/offers to SMU, Houston, UCG - that they can be kicked out of the Big East should Lville, UCONN, Cincy leave?) (Though highly unlikely those schools would agree to such.)
I think the Big East has one shot to Salavage this deal. There contract is coming up and they have some leverage with the Big 12 and the ACC. If they can get to 12 football teams, My hope would be BYU in football only over temple or Mem in all sports. My 2nd choice is Temple in football and Xavier in Mem in non football.
They could get a deal from the ACC and Big 12 to not litigate and allow the teams to go quickly with a no poach clause. I don't see the SEC needing any of the teams and the Big 10/12, Does Uconn and rutgers add enough? They may decide that without ND its not worth it. Sign a grant of rights for 5 years and see where the conference is at that point.
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 09:26:33 AM
I could be wrong, but if the basketball only schools chose to "break away" on their own down the road - how could they possibly retain the Big East name/brand/Madison Square Garden tourney...when you have these other schools in the league? (Perhaps the admins have this worked into the invitation/offers to SMU, Houston, UCG - that they can be kicked out of the Big East should Lville, UCONN, Cincy leave?) (Though highly unlikely those schools would agree to such.)
If UL, UC and UConn leave, what really is the BE "brand?" I'm not all that worried about that - new brands can be developed.
As for MSG, the breakaways would probably keep that location. It's not as though the remaining schools from TX and FL would want to play their basketball tournament there. Hell, they might not even want to keep the name in the first place.
Quote from: tommyc6 on November 02, 2011, 12:15:02 AM
Why does SLU continue to get mentioned as bringing any sort of basketball value nowadays? I grew up and currently live in St. Louis and SLU basketball has been such a non-entity in this city for as long as I can remember. They have had a few decent seasons in the past 20 years but nothing of note. Someone please explain to me how SLU would positively impact the basketball conference we are talking about convincing the Big East to become other than as a schedule filler?
Because they are very similar in identity to the current Big East schools and are in pretty good market. Its not much more than that. Why people keep throwing out VCU, GW, G Mason, etc makes less sense. If the basketball-only schools are wanting to add in more non-football schools ( as per Pete Thamel and other reporters have hinted at), they are not bringing in schools that don't identify with them as they will need to vote as a block to retain that power.
If the Big East survives as the hybrid, the only non-football schools going to be added are ones that fit with the current members (i.e., religious, private, in major market). Memphis and Temple are not going to be added as bball-only, b/c once a UConn or Ville leave, it will take 2 seconds for those two to ditch the bball school block and bump up their football to the Big East.
You could've said that statement about almost any school the basketball-onlies will want to add. Hell SMU is a non-entity in Dallas. What about DePaul? Seton Hall? Some Milwaukee residents would probably try to argue that Marquette is pretty much a non-entity in their market as well. SLU is a good school, with plenty of support and upside in a pretty desirable market that expands a footprint.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 02, 2011, 09:12:52 AM
Because I am assuming that the BE is made up of smart people making smart, informed decisions. There are seven bball schools (not including ND) that are apparently going along with this. They're not dumb - they know the landscape better than we do.
IOW, I trust that they are making smart decisions on behalf of the bball schools.
You might be right; I really hope you are. But it sure seems like they're reacting, and not taking a proactive approach. Their primary focus (perhaps with good reason) seems to be to preserve the BCS bid. They're scrambling, and I am concerned that this may be a short-sighted goal. I don't doubt that they're smart, or that they know the landscape. But you know as well as I do that even smart people make bad decisions some times.
Were they smart, and did they know the landscape when they turned down $1 Billion from ESPN? I suspect that some might say that they didn't know that Pitt, Syracuse and WVa were leaving, so they didn't know the landscape. But what don't they know now?
Quote from: Ners on November 02, 2011, 09:26:33 AM
I agree that there has been a lot of shuffling of teams over the last 20 years, however, it really seems to be crystallizing that there are going to be 5 main leagues: Pac 12, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC. Every Lville, UCONN, Cincy, Rutgers out there is going to aspire to get into those leagues.
The issue I have, is that I don't ever recall in all of the conference realignment - a conference kicking out a school(s), that they don't want anymore. And I'm quite certain SMU, Houston, and UCF aren't going to be in high demand as the above leagues expand. Lville, UCONN, Rutgers, Cincy would all get offered to the BCS leagues before SMU, Houston, UCF...
So therefore you are left with a Big East that no longer has Lville, UCONN, Cincy - but has SMU, UCF, Houston - and then whatever band aid schools you try to add once Lville, UCONN, and Cincy leave...like Akron, Central Michigan, Buffalo, UAB, etc..
I could be wrong, but if the basketball only schools chose to "break away" on their own down the road - how could they possibly retain the Big East name/brand/Madison Square Garden tourney...when you have these other schools in the league? (Perhaps the admins have this worked into the invitation/offers to SMU, Houston, UCG - that they can be kicked out of the Big East should Lville, UCONN, Cincy leave?) (Though highly unlikely those schools would agree to such.)
A couple of things to remember. Just because the league is focusing on football teams right now, doesn't mean we won't add non football programs.
I would prefer to stick with Louisville, UConn and Cincy as long as possible. I don't feel there are any better or equal basketball programs out there other than Xavier and is Xavier really better than UConn.
If Louisville, UConn and the like do leave, we can split off at that point in time and still probably get a Xavier in a basketball only league.
Why would Boise State, SMU, Houston want to retain the Big East name, play in MSG if all of the east coast teams leave? Also if we do add basketball only schools and some football schools leave, won't the basketball teams outnumber the football teams?
Wasn't Temple kicked out of the Big East?
In addition to the Big East name and MSG tourney rights, the other keys for keeping continuity in the conference are retaining the left-behind NCAA tourney credits and the automatic bid for the conference tourney champ. If the basketball schools break-away later, they could lose those. We also may need to stick together for a few years under the Big East name to collect all the exit fees.
I'd like to think there are smart people making sure all of this is taken care of, but I'm not so sure.
Quote from: avid1010 on November 02, 2011, 07:44:07 AM
I'm starting to think anyone who thinks UConn, Louisville and Cincy will be around for more than a few years needs a lobotomy...
You may be right, but so what? A George Costanza pre-emptive breakup does nothing for Marquette or any of the other basketball-only schools, except perhaps save some future teeth-gnashing over the whole realignment process. Seriously, some of you guys sound like you want to dump those programs now only to prevent them from dumping us in the future.
Even if MU remains in a conference with UConn, Louisville and Cincy for only 3-5 more years, that 3-5 more years is still better for Marquette than 3-5 years without those programs. Maybe another breakup is inevitable, but there's no real benefit in rushing it.
Quote from: mufanatic on November 02, 2011, 10:31:42 AMWhy would Boise State, SMU, Houston want to retain the Big East name, play in MSG if all of the east coast teams leave? Also if we do add basketball only schools and some football schools leave, won't the basketball teams outnumber the football teams?
Wasn't Temple kicked out of the Big East?
Exactly! If UConn, Louisville, and Cincy leave and we lose the AQ, why would Houston, SMU, or especially any of the new football-only schools stay? They'd sooner head back to the CUSAs or Mountain Wests from whence they came. Without those schools, sure, we lose basketball quality, but we also lose the BCS viability that is bringing them in in the first place.
There is no sense in divorcing from these schools just for kicks. Basketball-only will ALWAYS be there. Say there's a 25% chance that this new Big East works, we get a future revenue forfeiture clause, and football stays. Isn't it worth it to stay here for 2-4 years to find out, especially since the basketball-only we'd create then would probably be pretty much the same basketball-only we'd create now?
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: 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.
This is good point. It really just comes down to staying in the Big East for now, and seeing what happens. I just really hope the bball schools push to add 2, or even better, 3 of Temple, Xavier, Butler, Memphis or Richmond. Football got their upgrade at the expense of the basketball. Now, let's even it back out and add some solid basketball schools.