FWIW - According to this article, Louisville will be in the Big East at least through this summer. Rutgers football news' account on twitter postulates that if the ACC pair move, UConn and Rutgers would get into the ACC by summer.
http://www.leatherhelmetblog.com/2012-articles/february/big-12-waiting-on-clemson-and-fsu.html
Discussion on UConn board:
http://the-boneyard.com/threads/fsu-and-clemson-to-big-xii.13119/
If this is true Marquette needs to get proactive in getting out of the Big East in basketball...
The more this shifting goes on the more I like the idea of an all basketball conference..I didn't like the idea at the beginning but if the BEAST loses Uconn and Rutgers to go along with Syracuse Pitt WVU and possibly Louisville Marquette needs to get out before it turns into Conference USA again.
Quote from: icheights on February 08, 2012, 10:27:56 AM
If this is true Marquette needs to get proactive in getting out of the Big East in basketball...
The more this shifting goes on the more I like the idea of an all basketball conference..I didn't like the idea at the beginning but if the BEAST loses Uconn and Rutgers to go along with Syracuse Pitt WVU and possibly Louisville Marquette needs to get out before it turns into Conference USA again.
We go when Georgetown, Nova, Notre Dame, etc. are ready to go. It will happen eventually, but we need to continue to be associated with the traditional BE powers. No need to be premature if the other schools aren't ready.
This. Everyone knows that the all-hoop/all-catholic league is an option. MU needs to stay aligned with the other Big East basketball schools. Eventually, either the BEast tightens up, or they leave as a bloc.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 10:35:04 AM
We go when Georgetown, Nova, Notre Dame, etc. are ready to go. It will happen eventually, but we need to continue to be associated with the traditional BE powers. No need to be premature if the other schools aren't ready.
+1
If we leave early without Georgetown, Nova, Notre Dame etc. we will end up with Cleveland St, Detroit, etc in the Dying American Cities Conference.
This conference realignment has really lost the plot if this happens.
South Carolina, which has one of the lowest levels of disposable incomes in the country, will be playing most of their games in the plain states. Too bad for Clemson fans who can enjoy driving to away games now.
I understand it is about football dollars but the complete lack of caring for the fans who ultimately are the ones contributing the football dollars blows me away. There will be repercussions. Maybe not right away but this will come back to haunt some schools.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 08, 2012, 10:40:37 AM
This conference realignment has really lost the plot if this happens.
South Carolina, which has one of the lowest levels of disposable incomes in the country, will be playing most of their games in the plain states. Too bad for Clemson fans who can enjoy driving to away games now.
I understand it is about football dollars but the complete lack of caring for the fans who ultimately are the ones contributing the football dollars blows me away. There will be repercussions. Maybe not right away but this will come back to haunt some schools.
Honestly, I think college football is getting like the housing bubble. Everybody is making a mad dash because they want the $, and nobody thinks the flow of $ from television will ever stop.
Well, at some point, the $ is going to level off and travel expenses for every sport are going to continue to climb. (example: now your swim team expenses are through the roof because they have to fly everywhere).
It's the law of unintended consequences.
Some of these realignments aren't going to work out.
Quote from: groove on February 08, 2012, 10:37:47 AM
+1
If we leave early without Georgetown, Nova, Notre Dame etc. we will end up with Cleveland St, Detroit, etc in the Dying American Cities Conference.
+2
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 10:35:04 AM
We go when Georgetown, Nova, Notre Dame, etc. are ready to go. It will happen eventually, but we need to continue to be associated with the traditional BE powers. No need to be premature if the other schools aren't ready.
I seriously doubt ND stays with the teams you mentioned.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 08, 2012, 10:40:37 AM
This conference realignment has really lost the plot if this happens.
South Carolina, which has one of the lowest levels of disposable incomes in the country, will be playing most of their games in the plain states. Too bad for Clemson fans who can enjoy driving to away games now.
I understand it is about football dollars but the complete lack of caring for the fans who ultimately are the ones contributing the football dollars blows me away. There will be repercussions. Maybe not right away but this will come back to haunt some schools.
+1000. Conference Realignment is ruining rivalries and the fan experience. I think at some point, once there is a clear football playoff, you may see a reformation to make the geography work out better.
If the major schools separate and form their own league separate from the NCAA and BCS, they will bid on TV contracts as a whole - eliminating the in-fighting of conferences trying to grab other teams to increase their payout. I don't know if they'll be able to get away with some 4 x 16 team conferences, but if they increase it to 80-100 teams they probably eliminate the political backlash by including teams like Wyoming, New Mexico. A 4 x 20+ team conferences divided into 2 division each, would help maintain geographic relevancy.
Quote from: 79Warrior on February 08, 2012, 10:57:44 AM
I seriously doubt ND stays with the teams you mentioned.
They will if they have a place in whatever the football playoff becomes. The only way they join a conference is if its the only way they maintain football relevancy.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 10:35:04 AM
We go when Georgetown, Nova, Notre Dame, etc. are ready to go. It will happen eventually, but we need to continue to be associated with the traditional BE powers. No need to be premature if the other schools aren't ready.
This. Forget being "proactive". We have nothing to gain by being proactive and jumping ship now. Better off letting things play out, we don't lose anything by aligning with the other schools like us.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on February 08, 2012, 10:52:06 AM
Honestly, I think college football is getting like the housing bubble. Everybody is making a mad dash because they want the $, and nobody thinks the flow of $ from television will ever stop.
Well, at some point, the $ is going to level off and travel expenses for every sport are going to continue to climb. (example: now your swim team expenses are through the roof because they have to fly everywhere).
It's the law of unintended consequences.
Some of these realignments aren't going to work out.
+111
Quote from: 2002MUalum on February 08, 2012, 10:52:06 AM
Honestly, I think college football is getting like the housing bubble. Everybody is making a mad dash because they want the $, and nobody thinks the flow of $ from television will ever stop.
Well, at some point, the $ is going to level off and travel expenses for every sport are going to continue to climb. (example: now your swim team expenses are through the roof because they have to fly everywhere).
A couple of things. I do agree with you that at some point the TV money will level off, or at least grow at a slower rate. However, that doesn't mean that schools shouldn't maximize when they can. And the travel costs aren't the problem. It's the coaching and facilities upgrade costs that are the main issue.
For instance, look at some of the schedules for Marquette. Cross Country didn't leave the midwest all year. (The BE meet was in Kentucky.) Men's soccer left the midwest four times. Same with women's. Track and Field is leaving it a bunch, but only a couple of times for BE related commitments...the rest are open invites.
The point is that despite MU being in the BE, most of their competitions are still held locally.
The one thing I do agree with is that it does inhibit their fans from travelling. And in the south for football, that means a lot.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 11:24:08 AM
A couple of things. I do agree with you that at some point the TV money will level off, or at least grow at a slower rate. However, that doesn't mean that schools shouldn't maximize when they can. And the travel costs aren't the problem. It's the coaching and facilities upgrade costs that are the main issue.
For instance, look at some of the schedules for Marquette. Cross Country didn't leave the midwest all year. (The BE meet was in Kentucky.) Men's soccer left the midwest four times. Same with women's. Track and Field is leaving it a bunch, but only a couple of times for BE related commitments...the rest are open invites.
The point is that despite MU being in the BE, most of their competitions are still held locally.
The one thing I do agree with is that it does inhibit their fans from travelling. And in the south for football, that means a lot.
Totally fair about the marquette's current travel schedule. I can't even pretend to know the exact logistics of every sport at every school.
However, on the whole, with the growth of conferences comes with some increased costs of travel. Maybe the costs aren't crippling, but eventually they could be considered burdensome if the athletic budgets start to level off.
Television money looks like it will never stop. I totally get that. ESPN NEEDS programing, and crappy D1 football still draws a decent rating compared to writing, acting and producing a scripted program.
However, in 2006, real estate was a can't lose proposition. The market was spinning so fast that nobody questioned it.
Well, if/when TV advertisers start reducing their spend, it won't matter what ratings ESPN is getting. They are going to have to reduce their own costs, and then the dominoes could start to fall.
Here's an idea (which I like to think is originally my own, but is probably stolen somewhere from someone in the ether with all the realignment talk over the past few years:
If FSU & Clemson leave without adding anyone, the ACC will be:
1. Pitt 7. Ga Tech
2. Cuse 8. Virginia Tech
3. UNC 9. NC St
4. Duke 10. Virginia
5. Maryland 11. The U
6. Wake 12. Boston College
Thats an awesome basketball conference and a meh football conference. Problem is, by adding Rutgers and UConn, do you really improve your football revenue enough to make it worth splitting another two ways? The answer might be yes, but I think there's an alternative that makes more aggregate money from basketball than you add from football with Rutgers and UConn. Why not join up with the basketball only conference for basketball only. In this scenario, the above schools are in the ACC for all sports, and the teams in the below conference are in the "Non Football Conference" for all sports. The only overlap is basketball, which form one 24 team conference with a massive conference tourney. The teams play each of the 11 teams in their respective all-sports conference each year, plus play 6 of the teams from the other conference on a flipping basis. That gives you a 17 game conference sched (the BEast has 18 now). Then, the conference tournament for this monster would be sick as well. I'm not familiar enough with the financial implications of this stuff, but I feel like the increased TV revenue from the mega basketball contract might outweigh the additional football revenue of adding Rutgers and UConn. Also allows ND to keep their football independence, and no one travels much farther than NY to the Mississippi River.
BBall only:
1. MU 7. Villanova
2. DePaul 8. St Johns
3. Gtown 9-12. The same Xavier/Dayton/ SLUwhoever conversation we have all the
4. Providence time around here.
5. Seton Hall
6. Notre Dame
edited because i suck at math
Quote from: MUBurrow on February 08, 2012, 11:51:47 AM
Here's an idea (which I like to think is originally my own, but is probably stolen somewhere from someone in the ether with all the realignment talk over the past few years:
If FSU & Clemson leave without adding anyone, the ACC will be:
1. Pitt 7. Ga Tech
2. Cuse 8. Virginia Tech
3. UNC 9. NC St
4. Duke 10. Virginia
5. Maryland 11. The U
6. Wake 12. Boston College
Thats an awesome basketball conference and a meh football conference. Problem is, by adding Rutgers and UConn, do you really improve your football revenue enough to make it worth splitting another two ways? The answer might be yes, but I think there's an alternative that makes more aggregate money from basketball than you add from football with Rutgers and UConn. Why not join up with the basketball only conference for basketball only. In this scenario, the above schools are in the ACC for all sports, and the teams in the below conference are in the "Non Football Conference" for all sports. The only overlap is basketball, which form one 24 team conference with a massive conference tourney. The teams play each of the 11 teams in their respective all-sports conference each year, plus play 6 of the teams from the other conference on a flipping basis. That gives you a 17 game conference sched (the BEast has 18 now). Then, the conference tournament for this monster would be sick as well. I'm not familiar enough with the financial implications of this stuff, but I feel like the increased TV revenue from the mega basketball contract might outweigh the additional football revenue of adding Rutgers and UConn. Also allows ND to keep their football independence, and no one travels much farther than NY to the Mississippi River.
BBall only:
1. MU 7. Villanova
2. DePaul 8. St Johns
3. Gtown 9-12. The same Xavier/Dayton/ SLUwhoever conversation we have all the
4. Providence time around here.
5. Seton Hall
6. Notre Dame
edited because i suck at math
Would be cool.... BUT what's in it for the ACC? Football would be their issue, and teaming up with BBall strengthens something they'll already be ridiculously strong at.
If this (FSU & Clemson to Big 12) happens, and thats a BIG if...You would have to think Miami and Ga Tech would be itching to jump as as well. Big 12 owns the naming rights to Big 14 and Big 16, and that would really create a formidable rival to the SEC. Plus, the Big 12 could basically surround the SEC.
FSU, Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech, West Virginia, Kansas, K-State, Iowa St
Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU,
Louisville/BYU/Memphis/Cincy?
Quote from: icheights on February 08, 2012, 10:27:56 AM
If this is true Marquette needs to get proactive in getting out of the Big East in basketball...
The more this shifting goes on the more I like the idea of an all basketball conference..I didn't like the idea at the beginning but if the BEAST loses Uconn and Rutgers to go along with Syracuse Pitt WVU and possibly Louisville Marquette needs to get out before it turns into Conference USA again.
Okay, I'll bite. Get out and go where? The A-10? The Horizon league? Or
Conference USA? For the time being the Big East is by far the most competitive place for MU to be.
If and when enough football schools who are also top basketball programs leave the Big East and are to be replaced by football schools with mediocre or bad basketball programs, then the basketball schools will do what they have to do. Until then hanging out in the Big East and collecting the NCAA revenues for tournament appearances by schools who have since left the league isn't so bad.
I kinda hope that Clemson and Florida State do leave the ACC, it would serve the ACC right. I don't think that adding Pittsburgh and Syracuse will look that great to the ACC if it leads to them losing those two schools, especially Florida State football. And it could be the move that finally stabilizes the whole conference setup. After just trading two schools in their conference for two members whose loss actually hurts the ACC's football competitiveness should be a very sobering wakeup call. I think that it would cast a pall over adding UConn and Rutgers. And with 12 members, the Big 12 wouldn't need to add Louisville anymore.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 08, 2012, 10:40:37 AM
This conference realignment has really lost the plot if this happens.
South Carolina, which has one of the lowest levels of disposable incomes in the country, will be playing most of their games in the plain states. Too bad for Clemson fans who can enjoy driving to away games now.
I understand it is about football dollars but the complete lack of caring for the fans who ultimately are the ones contributing the football dollars blows me away. There will be repercussions. Maybe not right away but this will come back to haunt some schools.
Does Clemson really want to go to a conference where they play west Virginia every year after that bowl game?
I'd take temple for rutgers in hoops, obviously hate to lose uconn.
Quote from: icheights on February 08, 2012, 10:27:56 AM
If this is true Marquette needs to get proactive in getting out of the Big East in basketball...
The more this shifting goes on the more I like the idea of an all basketball conference..I didn't like the idea at the beginning but if the BEAST loses Uconn and Rutgers to go along with Syracuse Pitt WVU and possibly Louisville Marquette needs to get out before it turns into Conference USA again.
Losing rutgers for basketball does not matter much to me. I think Uconn is not going to matter either. The wheels have come off their team for this season and I think Calhoun is done. They are going to be irrelavant in basketball very soon in my opinion.
Quote from: bilsu on February 08, 2012, 12:31:04 PM
Losing rutgers for basketball does not matter much to me. I think Uconn is not going to matter either. The wheels have come off their team for this season and I think Calhoun is done. They are going to be irrelavant in basketball very soon in my opinion.
I think you are correct, but no one really knows what a conference change will do for a program. Look what the Big East did for Marquette. Houston has been a basketball and football power in the past, will the change to the big east help them regain that? Some teams will get better some will get worse.
Quote from: bilsu on February 08, 2012, 12:31:04 PM
I think Uconn is not going to matter either. The wheels have come off their team for this season and I think Calhoun is done. They are going to be irrelavant in basketball very soon in my opinion.
Really? Certainly, UCONN is facing a transition period now (or sometime very soon) in regards to Calhoun. And, yes, his replacement will be a critical hire.
However, UCONN is a top-tier name in college hoops, with the resources and commitment to stay a very good program. Perhaps, not elite, but still formidable.
Quote from: RJax55 on February 08, 2012, 12:40:44 PM
Really? Certainly, UCONN is facing a transition period now (or sometime very soon) in regards to Calhoun. And, yes, his replacement will be a critical hire.
However, UCONN is a top-tier name in college hoops, with the resources and commitment to stay a very good program. Perhaps, not elite, but still formidable.
Yeah, it's hard for me to think of a "national power" that has suddenly become irrelevant in the last 30 years. Perhaps the closest I can come up with is Indiana? Or UNLV? But both of those programs are far from being irrelevant.
Quote from: bilsu on February 08, 2012, 12:31:04 PM
Losing Rutgers for basketball does not matter much to me. I think Uconn is not going to matter either. The wheels have come off their team for this season and I think Calhoun is done. They are going to be irrelavant in basketball very soon in my opinion.
Under Mike Rice, Rutgers is definitely on an upswing with a very good recruiting class this year in his first time out. I believe that they will be a consistent top half of the Big East team very soon even without any more programs leaving.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 12:48:12 PM
Yeah, it's hard for me to think of a "national power" that has suddenly become irrelevant in the last 30 years. Perhaps the closest I can come up with is Indiana? Or UNLV? But both of those programs are far from being irrelevant.
I can't think of any either. Certainly, you have programs that have dropped down a rung or two (Indiana, Cincy, UNLV). And I can definitely see that happening to UCONN, but becoming irrelevant, that's like becoming DePaul. I don't see that happening.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 12:48:12 PM
Yeah, it's hard for me to think of a "national power" that has suddenly become irrelevant in the last 30 years. Perhaps the closest I can come up with is Indiana? Or UNLV? But both of those programs are far from being irrelevant.
Irrelevant may not have been the best choice of words to use. Most programs are one coaching change away from a drop to mediocrity or rise to national power status. UNC dropped after Dean left and it took Roy coming home to return them to the national power. Go back to MU. While a downward trend had begun, Dukiet dropped MU into the bowels of the NCAA. KO brought a return.
The next coach at UConn will be an important hire, no doubt, but the most important is for whoever is the AD to recognize quickly if the program is receding and replace the man at the top as quickly as they can. You could argue, to a lesser degree, this is what Cords did when he fired Deane.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 08, 2012, 10:40:37 AM
This conference realignment has really lost the plot if this happens.
South Carolina, which has one of the lowest levels of disposable incomes in the country, will be playing most of their games in the plain states. Too bad for Clemson fans who can enjoy driving to away games now.
I understand it is about football dollars but the complete lack of caring for the fans who ultimately are the ones contributing the football dollars blows me away. There will be repercussions. Maybe not right away but this will come back to haunt some schools.
This move is what brought you to this conclusion? The lack of caring for fans has been around for forever. All of the realignment, even going back to Miami, BC, and VT leaving the Big East has stunk of chasing the money and not caring about the fans one bit. Texas A&M and Missouri's decisions should have tipped you off at least.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on February 08, 2012, 10:52:06 AM
Honestly, I think college football is getting like the housing bubble. Everybody is making a mad dash because they want the $, and nobody thinks the flow of $ from television will ever stop.
Well, at some point, the $ is going to level off and travel expenses for every sport are going to continue to climb. (example: now your swim team expenses are through the roof because they have to fly everywhere).
It's the law of unintended consequences.
Some of these realignments aren't going to work out.
+1
Quote from: TJ on February 08, 2012, 01:01:28 PM
This move is what brought you to this conclusion? The lack of caring for fans has been around for forever. All of the realignment, even going back to Miami, BC, and VT leaving the Big East has stunk of chasing the money and not caring about the fans one bit. Texas A&M and Missouri's decisions should have tipped you off at least.
I don't necessarily agree with that.
Texas Aggies that I know were all for the move to the SEC - they got tired of dealing with UT. Ditto Va Tech to the ACC....Nebraska to the B10, realizing that the ole B8 days are gone...and Colorado to the Pac 12.
That being said, WVU fans aren't real excited about the B12 (rather be in the ACC), but realize that it is a better choice than being in the BE. Ditto Mizzou, who would have preferred a B10 invite.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 12:48:12 PM
Yeah, it's hard for me to think of a "national power" that has suddenly become irrelevant in the last 30 years. Perhaps the closest I can come up with is Indiana? Or UNLV? But both of those programs are far from being irrelevant.
UCLA.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 01:08:11 PM
I don't necessarily agree with that.
Texas Aggies that I know were all for the move to the SEC - they got tired of dealing with UT. Ditto Va Tech to the ACC....Nebraska to the B10, realizing that the ole B8 days are gone...and Colorado to the Pac 12.
That being said, WVU fans aren't real excited about the B12 (rather be in the ACC), but realize that it is a better choice than being in the BE. Ditto Mizzou, who would have preferred a B10 invite.
You may be right. But I would argue that none of these decisions has been motivated by any concern for fan reaction. Even if they didn't garner that bad a reaction, I bet it was barely mentioned in the decision making process and only after did they ask themselves "how can we sell this?"
On a related topic, watching the Kansas-Mizzou game last weekend it was funny listening to the two hour long guilt trip the ESPN guys were putting on Kansas to continue the series with Mizzou. If I were Bill Self it would have to be a really good deal for me to schedule that game. Nothing but downside there. If Mizzou wanted to play KU so badly they could have stayed in the same conference.
Quote from: MUMac on February 08, 2012, 12:59:31 PM
Irrelevant may not have been the best choice of words to use. Most programs are one coaching change away from a drop to mediocrity or rise to national power status. UNC dropped after Dean left and it took Roy coming home to return them to the national power. Go back to MU. While a downward trend had begun, Dukiet dropped MU into the bowels of the NCAA. KO brought a return.
The next coach at UConn will be an important hire, no doubt, but the most important is for whoever is the AD to recognize quickly if the program is receding and replace the man at the top as quickly as they can. You could argue, to a lesser degree, this is what Cords did when he fired Deane.
1. "Dukiet dropped MU into the bowels of the NCAA" Beautifully put, I wish I'd said it.
2. "this is what Cords did when he fired Deane." Deane was an awesome game coach, he had to be because he couldn't recruit talent. I wonder if Cords would have made the decision if he knew at the time it would cost MU the great Krunti Hester?
Quote from: TJ on February 08, 2012, 01:32:34 PM
You may be right. But I would argue that none of these decisions has been motivated by any concern for fan reaction. Even if they didn't garner that bad a reaction, I bet it was barely mentioned in the decision making process and only after did they ask themselves "how can we sell this?"
On a related topic, watching the Kansas-Mizzou game last weekend it was funny listening to the two hour long guilt trip the ESPN guys were putting on Kansas to continue the series with Mizzou. If I were Bill Self it would have to be a really good deal for me to schedule that game. Nothing but downside there. If Mizzou wanted to play KU so badly they could have stayed in the same conference.
If you look at what Mizzou is losing this year, I think Self was very smart. He picked up a few years of guaranteed wins.
Quote from: LittleMurs on February 08, 2012, 01:35:29 PM
If you look at what Mizzou is losing this year, I think Self was very smart. He picked up a few years of guaranteed wins.
I can't find anything - did they sign something? As far as I know the next game between KU and Mizzou is the last unless they meet in the Big 12 Tournament.
Quote from: TJ on February 08, 2012, 01:38:14 PM
I can't find anything - did they sign something? As far as I know the next game between KU and Mizzou is the last unless they meet in the Big 12 Tournament.
I thought you were saying that KU had picked up the Mizzou series. I see now that you meant that the announcers were pulling for KU to do it. Not playing KU won't help with the big job Mizzou will have replacing the talent on this year's team.
Quote from: tower912 on February 08, 2012, 01:32:27 PM
UCLA.
Man if UCLA is irrelevant I don't want to know what that makes Marquette.
The ACC is not a football conference, but a basketball conference. The ACC started all of this to destroy the Big East. I still believe it's all about basketball and not football. As long as we can keep Buzz, our program will be above average and more than just relevant no matter where we wind up. As long as we can qualify for the tournament we will have our shot to be National Champion. Its the coach that attracts the best players. It it were the program then UCLA and Indiana would always be in the NCAAs regardless of the Coach. Even UNC had a few tough years after Dean retired. My point is if the administration wants us to compete at the National level, and I believe they do, MU will be recognized as a top D1 basketball school.
Quote from: Bieberhole69 on February 08, 2012, 01:50:23 PM
Man if UCLA is irrelevant I don't want to know what that makes Marquette.
Going to the dance for the 7th straight year. Not having a massive alumni revolt toward our coach. Getting seen in prime time constantly. Not part of a 1 bid conference. Not having talking heads use us a cautionary tale about how quickly things can go astray. That is what it makes MU.
Quote from: TJ on February 08, 2012, 01:32:34 PM
On a related topic, watching the Kansas-Mizzou game last weekend it was funny listening to the two hour long guilt trip the ESPN guys were putting on Kansas to continue the series with Mizzou. If I were Bill Self it would have to be a really good deal for me to schedule that game. Nothing but downside there. If Mizzou wanted to play KU so badly they could have stayed in the same conference.
The President of KU has said that KU will not play Mizzou in any sport. I believe that is limited to regular season. It will be interesting, though, if they tow the line for sports with invitationals or multiple team participation (eg, track, cross country, golf, tennis, swimming and rowing) or in-season tournaments (specifically basketball)? I think the latter would be easier to enforce internally, the former may be more difficult.
Quote from: tower912 on February 08, 2012, 01:58:53 PM
Going to the dance for the 7th straight year. Not having a massive alumni revolt toward our coach. Getting seen in prime time constantly. Not part of a 1 bid conference. Not having talking heads use us a cautionary tale about how quickly things can go astray. That is what it makes MU.
That's all nice and I like where MU stands, but i think i'd take the three consecutive Final Fours from 06-08
Quote from: muwarrior69 on February 08, 2012, 01:55:46 PM
The ACC is not a football conference, but a basketball conference. The ACC started all of this to destroy the Big East. I still believe it's all about basketball and not football. As long as we can keep Buzz, our program will be above average and more than just relevant no matter where we wind up. As long as we can qualify for the tournament we will have our shot to be National Champion. Its the coach that attracts the best players. It it were the program then UCLA and Indiana would always be in the NCAAs regardless of the Coach. Even UNC had a few tough years after Dean retired. My point is if the administration wants us to compete at the National level, and I believe they do, MU will be recognized as a top D1 basketball school.
In a world where money didn't matter, this could be true.
If the Big 12 pulls off bringing in Florida State and Clemson, then the big winner will be Texas for proving that you can be greedy, refuse to share and still have your major conference affiliation, too.
Quote from: hairyworthen on February 08, 2012, 12:39:36 PM
I think you are correct, but no one really knows what a conference change will do for a program. Look what the Big East did for Marquette. Houston has been a basketball and football power in the past, will the change to the big east help them regain that? Some teams will get better some will get worse.
Well, the closest team to UConn that moved from the Big East to the ACC was Boston College. How's that working out? They were a solid program nationally in both basketball and football while in the Big East. Their football has gone steadily downhill and their basketball program is now wretched, one of the handful of worst in power conferences. But at least their women's cross country team gets to fly to North Carolina a lot. In their continued stupidity, they are desperately trying to keep UConn out of the Big East in a misguided attempt to keep the ACC in New England to themselves (not that anyone notices or cares). One would think the idea of having an actual rival in the conference would appeal to them.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on February 08, 2012, 01:55:46 PM
The ACC is not a football conference, but a basketball conference. The ACC started all of this to destroy the Big East. I still believe it's all about basketball and not football.
Which could be why Clemson and FSU would be the ones looking elsewhere....two of the ACC schools that care much more about football than bball.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 02:54:35 PM
Which could be why Clemson and FSU would be the ones looking elsewhere....two of the ACC schools that care much more about football than bball.
From a football perspective, it seemed like Rutgers was a better choice than Syracuse too.
Quote from: LittleMurs on February 08, 2012, 02:09:23 PM
In a world where money didn't matter, this could be true.
If the Big 12 pulls off bringing in Florida State and Clemson, then the big winner will be Texas for proving that you can be greedy, refuse to share and still have your major conference affiliation, too.
I don't think the ACC really cares if those schools bolt. They would get 50 million in exit fees and probably ask Rutgers, UConn or WVU (Big XII would rather have the football schools and let WVU go to the ACC IMHO). For the ACC its all about basketball and killing the Beast, don't kid yourself.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on February 08, 2012, 12:48:12 PM
Yeah, it's hard for me to think of a "national power" that has suddenly become irrelevant in the last 30 years. Perhaps the closest I can come up with is Indiana? Or UNLV? But both of those programs are far from being irrelevant.
UCLA is pretty irelevant right now. How about NC St. ?
NC State is a good choice and I had thought of them. UCLA just went to three final fours in three straight years though...06-08.
Quote from: Bieberhole69 on February 08, 2012, 02:04:12 PM
That's all nice and I like where MU stands, but i think i'd take the three consecutive Final Fours from 06-08
Please, don't confuse him with facts.
How soon I forgot.