MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: SERocks on September 23, 2015, 01:46:59 PM
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25312472/college-hoops-mailbag-ohio-states-retooling-big-east-expansion
Interesting comments on the dilution of money. I don't recall seeing that anywhere else that the contract will expand to count for expansion of the league.
SE
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25312472/college-hoops-mailbag-ohio-states-retooling-big-east-expansion
Interesting comments on the dilution of money. I don't recall seeing that anywhere else that the contract will expand to count for expansion of the league.
SE
thanks for posting. I still think SLU & Gonzaga are the two that should be added. The incremental $100M more than covers any non-revenue sports travel costs.
Add the best teams available!
-
thanks for posting. I still think SLU & Gonzaga are the two that should be added. The incremental $100M more than covers any non-revenue sports travel costs.
Add the best teams available!
SLU is a likely candidate. Gonzaga will never join. Every road game for them would be a journey.
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25312472/college-hoops-mailbag-ohio-states-retooling-big-east-expansion
Interesting comments on the dilution of money. I don't recall seeing that anywhere else that the contract will expand to count for expansion of the league.
Yeah that was mentioned however I do think that it isn't as simple as the BE can add whomever it wants. I am sure that Fox does get some say in this.
Right now I don't think adding anyone makes a great deal of sense. It's not as though any schools are going to get snapped up by another conference. I do think if Dayton continues to perform they would make sense. SLU is another market so that's good.
One school not mentioned is Denver. If they can improve their basketball program, and since they are LAX members already, they might be a decent addition. (But only if they SUBSTANTIALLY get better on the basketball court.)
-
thanks for posting. I still think SLU & Gonzaga are the two that should be added. The incremental $100M more than covers any non-revenue sports travel costs.
Add the best teams available!
As much as I would love having Gonzaga, it's never going to happen. The geography is just too much of a hurdle.
I would love to add Wichita State now that it seems Gregg Marshall may stick around awhile. Other than them, I would take Richmond, UCONN (if they ditch football or play in another conference), Temple (same as UCONN), or Dayton. Not a big fan of adding SLU.
-
Oh and I should add, let's see what happens to UConn, Temple and Memphis in the next 5-6 years. If the football landscape substantially changes, they would be great additions.
There simply is no reason to rush.
-
It's also a private Catholic school like seven of the other [Big East] member institutions.
Somebody just earned a spot on Benny's "Myron" list.
-
I would take Archie Miller and the ghost of Rick Majerus -- SLU and Dayton though? No thanks.
-
Oh and I should add, let's see what happens to UConn, Temple and Memphis in the next 5-6 years. If the football landscape substantially changes, they would be great additions.
There simply is no reason to rush.
You could add 2 now (SLU and Dayton) and add 2 more later if UConn, Temple or Memphis if the opportunity presents itself.
There isn't a reason to rush, but there isn't a good reason to wait either.
-
You could add 2 now (SLU and Dayton) and add 2 more later if UConn, Temple or Memphis if the opportunity presents itself.
There isn't a reason to rush, but there isn't a good reason to wait either.
SLU and Dayton being the best current options is a good reason to wait, IMHO.
-
Gonzaga and a western travel partner. I originally thought st. Mary's but they went the wrong way fast. Sultans suggestion of Denver is interesting. I would want to see massive improvements in basketball before we go down that road. They have a large endowment and are pretty dominant in other sports. Not to mention a large market. I think BYU makes the most sense right now. Great bball program, independent football, strong academics, and a fanatical worldwide fan base.
-
If Nova (Philly) is already in the Beast, why would we want Temple (Philly)? Who is next LaSalle.......Drexel......Penn?
-
If Nova (Philly) is already in the Beast, why would we want Temple (Philly)? Who is next LaSalle.......Drexel......Penn?
Because they are a good basketball program. We have two teams in the NYC metro area. Other major conferences have schools that share television markets.
-
I can only think of one person connected to MU hoops who might be excited about adding UD to the Big East.
I'm on-board with DU, however. Love that campus, the best sushi restaurant in America (not within 50 miles of an ocean) is nearby, and honestly, tell me what could be better than a weekend road trip to Colorado in Jan/Feb?
Skiing, craft beer, sushi and MU hoops... if this happens, don't wake me because I'm already dead.
Dibs on Rocky's couch.
-
Gonzaga and a western travel partner. I originally thought st. Mary's but they went the wrong way fast. Sultans suggestion of Denver is interesting. I would want to see massive improvements in basketball before we go down that road. They have a large endowment and are pretty dominant in other sports. Not to mention a large market. I think BYU makes the most sense right now. Great bball program, independent football, strong academics, and a fanatical worldwide fan base.
I obviously like the Gonzaga idea, and the idea of bringing a western travel partner along with them.
BYU, San Diego State, UNLV and New Mexico would all be good basketball options. But they all have D1 football - why would they be interested in joining a basketball conference and alienate the spot the probably makes them more $$?
-
BYU is a football independent though.
That being said, I don't quite understand the notion of a "travel partner." It's not as though these teams travel together. It just means you have one road trip shorter than the rest.
-
Since Majerus left SLU isn't the same team and I don't think they"ll bring much to the conference. I'd rather have Dayton than Slu
-
Another BE Expansion discussion...
(http://media.giphy.com/media/Mn1GL1hzehlsI/giphy.gif)
Fiiiiiiiine. I'll join in. (Full disclosure: I believe my first Scoop post was about BE Expansion)
Good Adds, Actually Possible
*Nobody
*I like the round robin (Richmond is not worth giving it up )
Good Adds, Not Possible
*UCONN
-Good: they are a blueblood (yes, yes they are)
-Not Possible: they won't drop fball
*Temple
-Good: solid history, Philly is TV numbers and recruiting, plus we can stake a claim (ACC may want a school like Temple, seeing as how the ACC doesn't have Philly-based school)
-Not Possible: Nova would certainly block this
*Zags
-Good: academics, Catholic, great program, new recruiting ground
-Not Possible: mileage and four time zones away from half the conference
*Memphis
-Good: history, commitment to program
-Not Possible: IIRC, they have had two decent seasons of football
*Cincy
-Good: history, commitment to program
-Not Possible: they have all but begged the ACC to join, X would block
Bad Adds, Possible
*VCU
-Bad: Come on. You saw their fanbase. Plus, Shaka is gone.
*SLU
-Bad: I like that they're Catholic and have solid academics. Basketball not yet proven IMO
*Richmond, Detroit, Duquesne, Fordham, and all the rest of "these types of schools"
Bad Adds, Possible
*Dayton
-Bad: Hot towels!! WINE LIST!
-Not Possible: X is in Cincy, which is like 55 miles from Dayton. They would block the add
-
Yeah that was mentioned however I do think that it isn't as simple as the BE can add whomever it wants. I am sure that Fox does get some say in this.
Right now I don't think adding anyone makes a great deal of sense. It's not as though any schools are going to get snapped up by another conference. I do think if Dayton continues to perform they would make sense. SLU is another market so that's good.
One school not mentioned is Denver. If they can improve their basketball program, and since they are LAX members already, they might be a decent addition. (But only if they SUBSTANTIALLY get better on the basketball court.)
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/c0934b72b93efa5ca63871afc159bbad/tumblr_mqy65jnd9v1rrcahvo2_r1_250.gif)
-
Because they are a good basketball program. We have two teams in the NYC metro area. Other major conferences have schools that share television markets.
Good may be a little bit of a stretch regarding Temple.
If UConn would move football somewhere else.....they would be the choice.
-
BYU is a football independent though.
That being said, I don't quite understand the notion of a "travel partner." It's not as though these teams travel together. It just means you have one road trip shorter than the rest.
Exactly... if you play on the road in Spokane on Tuesday night, the NCAA doesn't allow you to fly to San Fran afterwards for your Saturday afternoon game.
-
Exactly... if you play on the road in Spokane on Tuesday night, the NCAA doesn't allow you to fly to San Fran afterwards for your Saturday afternoon game.
That's why the BE would schedule every team's road trips to these schools back to back and on a shorter turnaround. Nonrevenue sports do this even for "short" trips (SoCal to NorCal).
-
Good may be a little bit of a stretch regarding Temple.
If UConn would move football somewhere else.....they would be the choice.
They have the 5th most victories all time and the same number of NCAA appearances as us.
-
UConn, Memphis and/ or Wichita State would make BE stronger.
-
Clarify-----The aforementioned three if they drop football.
-
That's why the BE would schedule every team's road trips to these schools back to back and on a shorter turnaround. Nonrevenue sports do this even for "short" trips (SoCal to NorCal).
This. Also, its another game closer to their recruiting base. Doesn't help much but it is something teams try to sell recruits on.
-
None. I doubt Fox wants to pay more for the privilege of airing DePaul vs. SLU. If we have to, BU for cool road trip and little other reason.
-
No one who plays or aspires to have D1 football. Top teams from the A-10. IMO, St. Louis and Dayton. Gonzaga is a non-starter due to geography until they develop teleportation.
-
Good may be a little bit of a stretch regarding Temple.
If UConn would move football somewhere else.....they would be the choice.
Temple has a better basketball history than half the schools of the big east.
-
Dayton has had a reliably solid program for years with excellent fan support. With or without Archie, they are the only no-brainer. Yes, their UDPride fans are obnoxious, but the program even in down years is usually as top 100 program. Both Oliver Purnell and Brian Gregory won there.
The problem is who to add with them. SLU has been in a downward spiral since Rick passed despite the renewed commitment to the program. Gonzaga, the geography just doesn't work. Look at all the issues WVU has had in the Big 12 and Gonzaga is more of an outlier.
Who else? Wichita State and VCU are questionable philosophical fits with no league history. Richmond and Davidson are just too small in my opinion.
I like Dayton, but they aren't worth taking on their own and I don't see anyone else worth joining them. I hope we wait to see what happens with other schools. Maybe if another perfect fit like Dayton became available, then go for it. Otherwise, the league is fine as is.
-
They have the 5th most victories all time and the same number of NCAA appearances as us.
Indeed--we got the best team in Philly already....don't need another Philly team as others have suggested.
-
Indeed--we got the best team in Philly already....don't need another Philly team as others have suggested.
Why not? Why not put the best basketball programs together regardless of their location? At one point the old Big East has three New York teams and was set to have two in Philadelphia before the break up. Its not about getting a team, and only one team, in each market.
-
We don't need to add any team. We can choose. That being said--Things will soon change, as they have in the past.
UConn is the best bball program in the country that is in semi-limbo situation.
This conference/MU needs rivalries/hatred/fight--at least UD would bring some passion as Brew said. Other than these teams, why?
-
Exactly... if you play on the road in Spokane on Tuesday night, the NCAA doesn't allow you to fly to San Fran afterwards for your Saturday afternoon game.
No one in Northern California calls it San Fran.
Re: Gonzaga...We need to lobby the Jesuits to open a university in Minnesota and/or Montana!
Seattle U would be a good candidate for the Zags as a dance partner into an expanded BE.
But adding those two would mean a new name for the League.
So, #fuggedaboutit
-
I'm not in love with any of the legit prospects.
Gonzaga and UConn if there were no travel, geographical or football considerations ... but there are ... so they aren't legit prospects. Memphis, Temple, Cinci? Same deal.
I keep reading and hearing that Dayton is the absolute best fit. Well, that says all anybody needs to say about expansion.
For the foreseeable future, I vote a very strong NO.
-
Temple has a better basketball history than half the schools of the big east.
And yet, they are now irrelevant.
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25312472/college-hoops-mailbag-ohio-states-retooling-big-east-expansion
Interesting comments on the dilution of money. I don't recall seeing that anywhere else that the contract will expand to count for expansion of the league.
SE
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=48083.msg744168#msg744168
-
SLU is a likely candidate. Gonzaga will never join. Every road game for them would be a journey.
Is this truly that huge of a deal? (I b1tch about bidniz travel over an hour, but...)
-
Since Majerus left SLU isn't the same team and I don't think they"ll bring much to the conference. I'd rather have Dayton than Slu
Left, died. Potato, potato (doesn't really work in writing).
-
Gonzaga and a western travel partner. I originally thought st. Mary's but they went the wrong way fast. Sultans suggestion of Denver is interesting. I would want to see massive improvements in basketball before we go down that road. They have a large endowment and are pretty dominant in other sports. Not to mention a large market. I think BYU makes the most sense right now. Great bball program, independent football, strong academics, and a fanatical worldwide fan base.
I'm glad someone finally mentioned BYU in this context. They'd be a great fit. Arena/Fans/Money and an excellent program.
-
And yet, they are now irrelevant.
I think we better be careful about who we brand as "irrelevant" based on a couple sub par seasons. I mean, at least they made the NIT last year right?
-
BYU is a football independent though.
That being said, I don't quite understand the notion of a "travel partner." It's not as though these teams travel together. It just means you have one road trip shorter than the rest.
The Big East has started using travel partners for Women's Basketball. For example, St. John's plays Marquette on Friday night, while Seton Hall plays DePaul. Flip flop for another game on Sunday afternoon.
-
I'm glad someone finally mentioned BYU in this context. They'd be a great fit. Arena/Fans/Money and an excellent program.
BYU has its own television network already. I'm skeptical as to how that would play out with FS1.
-
The Big East has started using travel partners for Women's Basketball. For example, St. John's plays Marquette on Friday night, while Seton Hall plays DePaul. Flip flop for another game on Sunday afternoon.
I understand that. The Pac 12 still uses them for men's basketball.
But if Gonzaga joins, and the BE implements something similar, it doesn't really matter if that "partner" is someone out west or someone in the east. Gonzaga is still going to have to travel to those places by themselves. The only "savings" would be the one time per year they make the trip to BYU instead of Dayton. (Looking at men's basketball in isolation.)
So yes, the travel partner concept does save money. However it would have a negligible impact on savings if the Zags travel partner is out west, or in the midwest.
-
I understand that. The Pac 12 still uses them for men's basketball.
But if Gonzaga joins, and the BE implements something similar, it doesn't really matter if that "partner" is someone out west or someone in the east. Gonzaga is still going to have to travel to those places by themselves. The only "savings" would be the one time per year they make the trip to BYU instead of Dayton. (Looking at men's basketball in isolation.)
So yes, the travel partner concept does save money. However it would have a negligible impact on savings if the Zags travel partner is out west, or in the midwest.
Also, adding Gonzaga and a western partner doesn't solve the Providence/Creighton pairing that the Big East is using for WBB. What a terrible weekend that has to be.
-
Also, adding Gonzaga and a western partner doesn't solve the Providence/Creighton pairing that the Big East is using for WBB. What a terrible weekend that has to be.
Yeah I was trying to draw up travel partners as an example, but kept hitting a stumbling block. When you have five distinctly east coast schools, and five distinctly midwest schools, it is hard to do! And when all of the logical, *current* expansion candidates are from the midwest, it just makes it more difficult.
-
My preference would be -
1. Stick with 10
2. Add Dayton and SLU (I could probably live with Davidson if there was a preference for another East Coast team)
3. Anything else
-
I have mentioned it in previous Big East-expansion topics before, but the fact that the Big East, for the first time since the 80's, can look at expansion from a position of power and decision - rather than reactionary and need to survive. The Old Big East was always the feast at the dinner table, with the ACC always chomping at the bit to take a bite out of the league (Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Louisville). The Big 12 took West Virginia (and tried to take Louisville. The B1G even joined in by snagging Rutgers, although I think a lot of people with agree that the loss didn't hurt anyone.
The Presidents, Fox, and Val Ackermann can lead from a position of strength - knowing that none of the current schools will be leaving. We are the top dog in the basketball-only conferences. If, and that's a big if, the league wanted a Gonzaga - they would get them. The money that the league makes and the contract that we have can absolutely compensate for that.
The league will absolutely expand in the next 10 years (all conferences are about growth). The question is who do they want to join their inner-circle. My guess is a like-minded institution with no football and a large endowment towards basketball (Gonzaga, Saint Louis, Dayton and Duquesne are the top ones that come to mind).
-
Some would argue that the very founding of this iteration of the Big East was a sound decision, but early (not a bad thing per se).
Who knows what is going to happen on the football side over the next 5-10 years, but I would bet that there will be more like minded candidates in that time frame rather than less. So in my mind I would let things play out for a few years, see what the next shoe is that drops in football - then pounce when it happens. You can always add the candidates that are being thrown about today (as referenced above they don't have a better choice) -- however once you add them you lose some flexibility to add some more attractive schools down the road.
-
It would be nice if Fordham could get its act together... aside from their athletic program, there's a lot to like there.
From Wikipedia:
"The university's men's basketball program also has an impressive heritage, boasting four NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship and 16 National Invitational Tournament appearances."
Four NCAAs and 16 NITs. I forgive the boastfulness.
I still think Duke drops football someday... be it five or twenty-five years from now. At least we'll keep Wojo in the Big East.
-
Some would argue that the very founding of this iteration of the Big East was a sound decision, but early (not a bad thing per se).
Who knows what is going to happen on the football side over the next 5-10 years, but I would bet that there will be more like minded candidates in that time frame rather than less. So in my mind I would let things play out for a few years, see what the next shoe is that drops in football - then pounce when it happens. You can always add the candidates that are being thrown about today (as referenced above they don't have a better choice) -- however once you add them you lose some flexibility to add some more attractive schools down the road.
This is a very solid point.
-
Also, adding Gonzaga and a western partner doesn't solve the Providence/Creighton pairing that the Big East is using for WBB. What a terrible weekend that has to be.
Sure, but most guys who play high level D1 hoops have NBA aspirations. So my guess is the travel wouldn't be that big of a deal, and if it is, they're really gonna hate the NBa.
-
Okay...absolute unrealistic dream scenario, the only two schools I see in the country that are worth going out of the way for are UConn and Notre Dame. I don't see UConn dropping football and ND is now pretty soundly tied to the ACC.
I suppose Temple and Memphis have the history to warrant inclusion, but I'm not sure either are particularly good philosophical fits. Both are public schools with football.
If one of those became available, I'd say go for it. Ideally two of those, but if UConn suddenly (never will happen) dropped football (they won't, pipe dream) then I would say grab them and take Dayton along with to balance numbers. UConn would be worth it, and Dayton, no matter what any critics may say, is a good (albeit divisive) fit.
The idea of Gonzaga and BYU joining as travel partners is kind of ludicrous. Why? Okay...for starters, Spokane and Provo are 763 miles apart. If that makes for ideal travel partners, let's get Pitt back into the league and have them be travel partners with Marquette, because Milwaukee and Pittsburgh are geographically closer. And that's not factoring how far they both will have to go once they get together. The closest Big East destination is another 948 miles from Provo (Omaha for Creighton). These aren't pro teams, these are religious schools out west. It is a complete non-starter. Not to mention the time zone differences that will have Gonzaga playing games at 4 pm local time (while on the East Coast) or East Coast teams tipping off at 10 pm local time (when visiting the Zags).
Expansion only makes sense if the circumstances are right. No one west of Creighton makes sense. St. Louis may as well be Fordham for how good they are right now. Public schools are pretty much a non-starter. The only right move is to wait and expand when it's a clear, no-brainer team that you have to have.
The only team I see out there that might ever fit that mold is UConn. If you can get UConn, I'd even let them park football (as long as there's a $40M league exit fee) and then take Dayton. Don't take Dayton for their own sake, but if that perfect team comes up, let Dayton be the compliment addition.
Beyond that, 10 teams and a round-robin schedule is perfect.
-
Some would argue that the very founding of this iteration of the Big East was a sound decision, but early (not a bad thing per se).
Who knows what is going to happen on the football side over the next 5-10 years, but I would bet that there will be more like minded candidates in that time frame rather than less. So in my mind I would let things play out for a few years, see what the next shoe is that drops in football - then pounce when it happens. You can always add the candidates that are being thrown about today (as referenced above they don't have a better choice) -- however once you add them you lose some flexibility to add some more attractive schools down the road.
I agree with you in philosophy, but I think 5-10 years is too short a timeframe to discuss schools dropping football. Right now, across all of the NCAA and NAIA, there are a record number of schools with football. Over 770. There are 128 in FBS, with four programs making their full transition this year.
The financial model is going to have to fall awfully hard and fast to fit that 5-10 year timeframe, and I just don't see it.
However 5-10 years is going to have to be when the BE has to look at expansion in preparation for its next TV deal.
-
I agree with you in philosophy, but I think 5-10 years is too short a timeframe to discuss schools dropping football. Right now, across all of the NCAA and NAIA, there are a record number of schools with football. Over 770. There are 128 in FBS, with four programs making their full transition this year.
The financial model is going to have to fall awfully hard and fast to fit that 5-10 year timeframe, and I just don't see it.
However 5-10 years is going to have to be when the BE has to look at expansion in preparation for its next TV deal.
I think you are interpreting my thought to be a little more linear than what I intended. Will Football fall apart for some schools in the next decade....maybe -- who knows. Will we know more about the next round of football consolidation, who are the winners and losers and where this whole thing is headed -- yes we will. Who knows, maybe there is a next round of consolidation that eliminates one of the major conferences -- that could cause UCONN & CINCY to rethink their strategy.
Worst case we know nothing more and we add Dayton - oh well.
So the over-arching point is that we split because football is driving the bus -- we have an advantage and a point of differentiation. Let's learn a little more about the future before grabbing a bunch of teams we can have in 5 years.
-
I think you are interpreting my thought to be a little more linear than what I intended. Will Football fall apart for some schools in the next decade....maybe -- who knows. Will we know more about the next round of football consolidation, who are the winners and losers and where this whole thing is headed -- yes we will. Who knows, maybe there is a next round of consolidation that eliminates one of the major conferences -- that could cause UCONN & CINCY to rethink their strategy.
Worst case we know nothing more and we add Dayton - oh well.
So the over-arching point is that we split because football is driving the bus -- we have an advantage and a point of differentiation. Let's learn a little more about the future before grabbing a bunch of teams we can have in 5 years.
Good thoughts. I agree. No need to expand for expansion sake right now.
-
The Big East has started using travel partners for Women's Basketball. For example, St. John's plays Marquette on Friday night, while Seton Hall plays DePaul. Flip flop for another game on Sunday afternoon.
Yup.
BYU has its own television network already. I'm skeptical as to how that would play out with FS1.
Yup.
-
So the over-arching point is that we split because football is driving the bus -- we have an advantage and a point of differentiation. Let's learn a little more about the future before grabbing a bunch of teams we can have in 5 years.
This is exactly how I feel about Dayton. At any time, they would be available as a "second" team no matter who the companion addition was. UConn, Cincy, Gonzaga, Wichita State, VCU, whatever name someone decides to throw darts in the wall at, Dayton would happily slit their mother's throat to come along.
Only expand when it's for a team that you feel you "have to have", and if you need a second, Dayton will be there.
-
Weve been talking a lot about what the Big East should want in an expansion target. We should really be talking about what does Fox want in an expansion target. They will only approve more money if the teams are worth the cash. So what is Fox looking for? In order:
1) Significant media market: this kills Dayton, Wichita state, etc
2) New media market: this kills George Washington, Fordham, Loyola, st. Joe's, etc.
3) Will drive a national audience to watch games (most important): this kills Richmond, Denver, Davidson, old dominion, saint Louis, Boston university, etc
Who does that leave? Football schools (uconn, nd, Memphis, etc), maybe vcu (depends on life after shaka), and Gonzaga/BYU.
I know we have our objections about public schools, football schools, abd west coast schools. Fox doesn't share our objections. They would love to add any school that drives a national audience. Hell, west coast schools would give them some late night programming options. Fox isn't going to pony up more money for teams like Dayton and SLU so they shouldn't even be on the list.
So if we are going to expand, we have to find a way to do it with football, public, or west coast schools. And we will have to expand. We aren't making enough to justify our contact with Fox. If we want to get this kind of deal again, we need to find a way to drive more eyeballs to our games. Expansion is the easiest way to do that
-
Weve been talking a lot about what the Big East should want in an expansion target. We should really be talking about what does Fox want in an expansion target. They will only approve more money if the teams are worth the cash. So what is Fox looking for? In order:
1) Significant media market: this kills Dayton, Wichita state, etc
2) New media market: this kills George Washington, Fordham, Loyola, st. Joe's, etc.
3) Will drive a national audience to watch games (most important): this kills Richmond, Denver, Davidson, old dominion, saint Louis, Boston university, etc
Who does that leave? Football schools (uconn, nd, Memphis, etc), maybe vcu (depends on life after shaka), and Gonzaga/BYU.
I know we have our objections about public schools, football schools, abd west coast schools. Fox doesn't share our objections. They would love to add any school that drives a national audience. Hell, west coast schools would give them some late night programming options. Fox isn't going to pony up more money for teams like Dayton and SLU so they shouldn't even be on the list.
So if we are going to expand, we have to find a way to do it with football, public, or west coast schools. And we will have to expand. We aren't making enough to justify our contact with Fox. If we want to get this kind of deal again, we need to find a way to drive more eyeballs to our games. Expansion is the easiest way to do that
Spot on. It is all about media markets and programming.
-
Seriously, guys? It takes me to find this thread and say this? C'mom, we're better than this.
ABD.
ABD.
ABD.
Their fanbase is the STL Cardinals of NCAA Basketball.
-
Their fanbase is the STL Cardinals of NCAA Basketball.
As a Cubs fan I cannot agree with this. The Cardinals at least have won consistently for their fans' attitude. What has Dayton done for their fan's attitudes?
-
As a Cubs fan I cannot agree with this. The Cardinals at least have won consistently for their fans' attitude. What has Dayton done for their fan's attitudes?
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/livelygreendoor/2013/05/gif-ron-swanson-shrug.gif)
Not sure, but it's there.
-
Seriously, guys? It takes me to find this thread and say this? C'mom, we're better than this.
ABD.
ABD.
ABD.
Their fanbase is the STL Cardinals of NCAA Basketball.
Yes, their online fans are obnoxious, but they have a passionate fanbase and have won consistently over the past 20 years.
And no matter how obnoxious a few online fans may be, they won't be worse than the drunken Creighton fans that were trying to start fights in the stands and brought MPD into the stands. If Creighton is good enough for the Big East, Dayton is too.
Who else ticks the boxes like Dayton? Jesuit? Check. Winning program? Check. Commitment to basketball? Check. Natural geographical fit? Check. Recent high level success? Check.
ABD is silly because when you look at the A10, the MVC, the Horizon, and the other leagues we could conceivably poach, there just isn't that much there.
Seriously, barring a major geographical outlier like Gonzaga, a football pipe dream school like UConn or Notre Dame, or a combination of the two like BYU, who is the "Anyone" out there that is a better fit than Dayton? And not expanding wouldn't be a viable answer, because saying "ABD" implicitly indicates a desire to expand with other teams. Who are they?
-
Yes, their online fans are obnoxious, but they have a passionate fanbase and have won consistently over the past 20 years.
And no matter how obnoxious a few online fans may be, they won't be worse than the drunken Creighton fans that were trying to start fights in the stands and brought MPD into the stands. If Creighton is good enough for the Big East, Dayton is too.
Who else ticks the boxes like Dayton? Jesuit? Check. Winning program? Check. Commitment to basketball? Check. Natural geographical fit? Check. Recent high level success? Check.
ABD is silly because when you look at the A10, the MVC, the Horizon, and the other leagues we could conceivably poach, there just isn't that much there.
Seriously, barring a major geographical outlier like Gonzaga, a football pipe dream school like UConn or Notre Dame, or a combination of the two like BYU, who is the "Anyone" out there that is a better fit than Dayton? And not expanding wouldn't be a viable answer, because saying "ABD" implicitly indicates a desire to expand with other teams. Who are they?
It's beyond their online fans as well.
They have a football program, automatic pass as their second strike.
They don't bring a new TV market, which is their third strike.
Also, not Jesuit.
No need to expand just to include garbage.
-
It's beyond their online fans as well.
They have a football program, automatic pass as their second strike.
They don't bring a new TV market, which is their third strike.
Also, not Jesuit.
No need to expand just to include garbage.
Couple of things: Their football program is in the Pioneer Football League (non-FBS) - the same as Butler. Georgetown and Villanova also have FCS football. Dayton and Cincinnati are different TV markets, even though they are somewhat close to each other. Dayton brings the 8th most valuable college basketball TV market in the country. Butler isn't Jesuit, neither is DePaul, Providence, St. Johns, Seton Hall or Villanova. All Big East schools are Private, 9 of which are Catholic.
Other than these items though, you were spot on.
-
They have a football program like nova, butler and Georgetown have football programs. No biggie. They'd be a good addition.
-
Brewcity said they were Jesuit
-
Brewcity said they were Jesuit
Definitely not Jesuit
(http://www.ajcunet.edu/Assets/Regions/AJCU/ajcu_currentMap_31.jpg)
Although, I should note that the accuracy of this map can be questioned, as they have placed Marquette University squarely in Sheboygan County.
In any case, I don't recall ever seeing Dayton's seal in Raynor. I know that I would have remembered seeing it because I would have spit on it.
-
Definitely not Jesuit
(http://www.ajcunet.edu/Assets/Regions/AJCU/ajcu_currentMap_31.jpg)
Although, I should note that the accuracy of this map can be questioned, as they have placed Marquette University squarely in Sheboygan County.
In any case, I don't recall ever seeing Dayton's seal in Raynor. I know that I would have remembered seeing it because I would have spit on it.
Dayton is Marionist.
-
Brewcity said they were Jesuit
I was wrong on that, but they're still Catholic. So basically, the entire refutation of my post is based on their branch of priests?
But the main question I'd have is still this: Who are the teams that would be a better fit than Dayton?
-
But the main question I'd have is still this: Who are the teams that would be a better fit than Dayton?
I think that's the problem. If there are no better candidates than Dayton or SLU, then we should not be expanding the conference.
-
I think that's the problem. If there are no better candidates than Dayton or SLU, then we should not be expanding the conference.
Exactly. Down the line it probably will be necessary to expand, and Dayton and SLU will still be available.
I think it's time to revisit what might be the wrongest post in the history of Scoop. (And that's saying something.)
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=34539.msg422884#msg422884
-
I think that's the problem. If there are no better candidates than Dayton or SLU, then we should not be expanding the conference.
Nailed it
-
Seriously, guys? It takes me to find this thread and say this? C'mom, we're better than this.
ABD.
ABD.
ABD.
/thread
-
Exactly. Down the line it probably will be necessary to expand, and Dayton and SLU will still be available.
I think it's time to revisit what might be the wrongest post in the history of Scoop. (And that's saying something.)
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=34539.msg422884#msg422884
+1
-
While I think Dayton and SLU are the most logical candidates for expansion (today), I go back to how they would fit in - basketball wise. Dayton, under Archie Miller, would probably be in the top half (top-6) of the league on a consistent basis. Without Archie Miller, you're probably looking at 6-10 range. Saint Louis, on the other hand, would, under Jim Crews, would probably challenge DePaul and Seton Hall for 10-12.
So, would those 2 schools add value to the league?
-
While I think Dayton and SLU are the most logical candidates for expansion (today), I go back to how they would fit in - basketball wise. Dayton, under Archie Miller, would probably be in the top half (top-6) of the league on a consistent basis. Without Archie Miller, you're probably looking at 6-10 range. Saint Louis, on the other hand, would, under Jim Crews, would probably challenge DePaul and Seton Hall for 10-12.
So, would those 2 schools add value to the league?
No. And that's exactly the problem. If they aren't schools that drive eyeballs to television, than they are not worth the addition. Gonzaga, BYU, UConn, Notre Dame, Memphis, Temple, UMass (maybe),Wichita State (maybe) and VCU (maybe) are the only schools that do that. Is it possible to get any of them? Other than VCU and Wichita State, I don't know, probably not in most cases.
I think it is smart to wait to expand to see if any of the Gonzaga, BYU, UConn, Notre Dame, Memphis, Temple group becomes available over the next few years. If they don't, settle for VCU and Wichita State assuming they haven't fallen off by then. If they have fallen off, then maybe you start to talk about Dayton and SLU. But those are desperation adds in my opinion. Expanding just for the sake of expansion.
-
Just thought I should mention that expanding the conference makes it more difficult to get Marquette games on Fox Sports 1, so that a very good reason to slow the expansion process down to such a time as there are sure fire candidates to be had.
-
I don't know, TAMU. I just don't see the Big East Presidents signing off on VCU and/or Wichita State (especially). Disregarding both as public schools, both schools don't move the bar academically, and don't bring strong markets either. VCU would always be behind both Virginia and Virginia Tech, and WSU would always be behind Kansas and Kansas State.
It's all moot anyways, because the league probably won't be expanding in the next few seasons.
-
Well, since Eldon brought up the map....
What about Detroit Mercy? Jesuit. Geographical fit. New TV market. Decent basketball tradition. And the first time Dick Vitale says something good about the Big East, ESPN will fire him and we won't have to listen to him gush on about Duke when we beat them in the National Championship next year. That's win-win for everyone.
-
I think that's the problem. If there are no better candidates than Dayton or SLU, then we should not be expanding the conference.
Which is fine, and which I agree with, but makes the ABD meme a bit silly. I could probably easily list 100 programs across the country that anyone here would look at and say "gun to my head, have to add one, I'll take Dayton over them."
I don't want to add Dayton right now either, but if UConn inexplicably said "we're dropping to FCS for football and want to join the Big East for all other sports" and we had to take them and one other school, I'd happily say "Dayton, your time is now".
Wouldn't want to add them for the sake of adding, but they are a fine addition if we need a compliment.
-
I thought I would try to summarize some of the thought here regarding the *types* of schools that people want to see as expansion candidates, and what the conference leaders might be thinking.
FBS Football Members (BYU)
While this is likely not possible unless the school is an independent in football, I think this is a non-starter. And I think the BE membership agrees. As long as you are playing FBS football, that is going to be your primary focus and deservedly so. Doesn't really mesh with the goals and objectives of the BE.
Non-football, or FCS public universities (VCU, Wichita State)
This is a category that gets thrown out there and oftentimes dismissed. And while I understand why schools like this are dismissed, I wonder if this is a case where we aren't seeing the forest through the trees. VCU and Wichita are brought up because of their basketball success, which has been sustained in both cases through multiple coaches. Neither plays football, nor do they have the desire to at the moment. Both are steps down in terms of academics, but does that really matter? I think the BE leadership views these schools as non-starters, maybe because they don't trust that they will stay away from football? I think this view may end up being short sighted.
Non-football, or FCS private schools (too numerous to mention)
This is the category that is thrown around most often simply because the conference is made up of ten such schools already. However one thing I have noticed is that we seem to think being Catholic is a plus. I don't think that is the case at all. That being said, there are some good candidates, but no really obvious ones at this point. Either they don't bring enough of an audience to make it worthwhile, or they are such a geographical outlier that it isn't worth the effort.
I'm beginning to think that the BE needs to look more closely at the second category. The Atlantic 10 actually started as a mix of public and privates. (MVC as well.) And while it has become decidedly more private over time, they still have looked at public universities when they felt they added value (VCU, Charlotte). And if those schools eventually add football, like Charlotte did, they just went out and found a new member. Is that the end of the world? Not mine. I don't view conference membership as set in stone by any means.
-
Non-football, or FCS public universities (VCU, Wichita State)
This is a category that gets thrown out there and oftentimes dismissed. And while I understand why schools like this are dismissed, I wonder if this is a case where we aren't seeing the forest through the trees. VCU and Wichita are brought up because of their basketball success, which has been sustained in both cases through multiple coaches. Neither plays football, nor do they have the desire to at the moment. Both are steps down in terms of academics, but does that really matter? I think the BE leadership views these schools as non-starters, maybe because they don't trust that they will stay away from football? I think this view may end up being short sighted.
I see your point...but if they truly have no intention to get into football, they'd still be there for the taking several years from now. My conclusion on them is kinda like my conclusion on SLU, Dayton and the like: If we get to the point where expansion is viewed as the way to go, we'll be able to choose the schools that work best at the time.
-
I see your point...but if they truly have no intention to get into football, they'd still be there for the taking several years from now. My conclusion on them is kinda like my conclusion on SLU, Dayton and the like: If we get to the point where expansion is viewed as the way to go, we'll be able to choose the schools that work best at the time.
I agree. I guess the question is when is it time. I don't know enough to have an answer to that one.
-
The interesting hypothetical, and it's a huge hypothetical, is what if some of the great basketball programs that sponsor FBS football (Boston College, UConn, Duke, Wake Forest, etc.) find out that they can no longer keep up with all of the public schools floating around significant amounts of cash just to be competitive in FBS football? What if there comes a point where a number of schools can no longer compete with the Alabamas, Floridas, Auburns, Ohio States, Texases, etc.?
Under this scenario, there could be a division within the FBS - where one is essentially the NFL minor league and the other that still wants to be competitive under the collegiate banner. The B1G and SEC could form two super conferences (where the B1G takes all the premier PAC-12 universities to form a nationwide wide academic/athletic powerhouse, and the SEC takes the strong programs from the Big 12 and ACC). Under this scenario, Boston College, UConn, Duke, Wake Forest (and one could argue Notre Dame) wouldn't want to be a part of that. Where would they park their non-football sports? Each school would be a huge addition to the Big East.
-
And the consensus is..... much like the 2016 presidential election, there is no good candidate. Any school named will have more problems than advantages. It will ultimately come down to what Fox wants to do, but if I had my way expansion would be tabled for 5 years. Hopefully, by then an answer will reveal itself.
-
The interesting hypothetical, and it's a huge hypothetical, is what if some of the great basketball programs that sponsor FBS football (Boston College, UConn, Duke, Wake Forest, etc.) find out that they can no longer keep up with all of the public schools floating around significant amounts of cash just to be competitive in FBS football? What if there comes a point where a number of schools can no longer compete with the Alabamas, Floridas, Auburns, Ohio States, Texases, etc.?
The only way this happens is if football revenue decreases considerably (television contracts), or costs rise significantly (liability). I can't imagine anything in the near term that is going to cause Duke, Wake, BC to drop football. And near term is like within the next 25 years.
And really waiting around for that to happen may not make sense. You should strike when it makes sense to strike...not wait for a potential future that may never occur.
-
Which is fine, and which I agree with, but makes the ABD meme a bit silly. I could probably easily list 100 programs across the country that anyone here would look at and say "gun to my head, have to add one, I'll take Dayton over them."
I don't want to add Dayton right now either, but if UConn inexplicably said "we're dropping to FCS for football and want to join the Big East for all other sports" and we had to take them and one other school, I'd happily say "Dayton, your time is now".
Wouldn't want to add them for the sake of adding, but they are a fine addition if we need a compliment.
Alright, maybe you're right. If Val came up to me and said: You can have UCONN....but you have to take Dayton, with them. I'd cry tears of joy in one eye, tears of sadness in the other and then I would nod begrudgingly.
-
I am going to take a lot of heat for this, but I am going to say that I would like to add Fordham.
None of the current schools that fit our profile (small, catholic, urban) have a basketball team worth adding with the exceptions of Gonzaga and Saint Mary's, which are geographically impossible adds. Therefore, I would add a school with excellent academics, is catholic, and is in headquarters of the Big East, New York City.
I think this is beneficial move for the Marquette, Fordham and the Big East. It is beneficial to Marquette and the Big East because it brings in an institution with a sterling academic record, which really does add to the prestige of the league.
Fordham benefits in that they get dropped into an excellent basketball league which will immediately boost their revenue. They also get a legit marketing tool to prospective students (you have a big east basketball team that plays Villanova, Georgetown and Marquette every year).
I know many will think this is foolish but ask yourself this. Are we really improved by adding any other team out there that is available? Do you really want to add Dayton or SLU or whatever crap team they are going to put in there? No! Do they make our league better or more competitive? No! But ask yourself this. Does the value of your degree maybe go up if you are in a conference that is known for academic excellence? I think yes.
-
I'm firmly in the "no expansion for the foreseeable future" camp.
But the dreamer in me is warming up to the idea of UConn, even if they keep football and park it in another league (or leave it in the AAC). Obviously, there has to be a CRAZY-high exit fee.
Worst-case scenario: They leave in x number of years and each of our schools makes $5 million or more. Till then, we get one of the best college hoops programs of the last quarter-century to exploit as one of us.
-
So I'm going to throw my lot in with VCU. Before I get into that I'll briefly run down my other preferences, because I'm sure you all care very much. I like SLU, I hope for UConn, I find Dayton acceptable. I dislike Temple, looking at their financials and basketball budget they would be a poor add. Couple that with the fact that we already have the premier school in Philly and they are a non-starter for me.
On to VCU:
1. They may be behind VT and VA in the state, but they have a larger enrollment than either and own a decent market in Richmond. That's pretty solid.
2. Since the original formation of the conference they have nearly tripled their endowment. They would be behind only Georgetown in the conference, even with the addition of SLU. This shows a commitment to improving academics that I think the presidents can get behind.
3. Since the original formation of the conference they have built a practice facility that is up to par with most BE members. That's a significant investment in keeping hoops successful.
4. Since the original formation of the conference they have begun a plan to expand their arena to 10,000 seats. That's significant because the 7,400 seating capacity they had would be below the BE average attendance and below the average attendance of every major conference except one. Our current smallest arena is 9,100 (Butler)
5. They have compiled successful seasons under 3 consecutive coaches.
Cons:
1. Public, which I think is total BS.
2. New coach. We'll see how that turns out, but the school and facilities are attractive so I think the success of a single coach is sort of a weak criteria.
There have also been some changes in the leadership of the conference including a new president at Marquette (and I believe at least one other school but it escapes me which) and several new AD's. Of the 4 teams I like for expansion, all bring great facilities and 3 bring solid winning traditions. I think 3 would also keep the average kenpom of the conference above the .700 level that is considered "major." I think eventually (maybe 3-5 years) starting with VCU and Dayton, then waiting for football fallout to see what shakes out is a solid plan. Eh, but I'm just dude on the internet.
-
I'll also add that in a series of down seasons Dayton still had over 12,000 attendance average and even in a down year VCU would have a massive alumni base to draw from. Flyers travel well and VCU is an east coast school.
-
VCU has the credentials, no doubt, but I think they would insist on another public to come join with them. I don't know of any conference that has such an overwhelming majority of similar institutional schools - only to add just one outlying school.
The B1G, SEC, PAC 12 and ACC already had at least one private before widespread expansion occurred, mostly involving huge state public schools.
If UCONN were to join, however unlikely, I think their pair would be VCU. The Dayton/SLU pairing makes too much sense for today's standard - but it is just not good enough for the league to add value.
-
Three sets of thoughts...
1) On football schools...
I get the idea of waiting for the BC, Duke, or Wake, but they are getting what, $18M per year? Even if football isn't breaking even for them, I'm sure the combination of marketing, donations, and conference affiliation makes up for any money they lose on the program itself.
UConn, Memphis, or Temple, I suppose maybe they'd drop a level, but thus far, we haven't seen a rush of FBS schools dropping down. More teams are moving up than moving down. My guess is the money from donors and television offsets any losses they incur.
2) On Fordham...
I get the academic and market ideas, but we already have St John's and Fordham's basketball program is awful. This league is a basketball first league, and if being in the Big East for a decade hasn't woken DePaul up as a sleeping giant, what hope would Fordham have?
Adding teams has to make sense for Fox because if we add, we have to add value. That means either quality programs, new markets, or massive fanbases. Academics should be considered, but only if they meet the other qualifications (or at least some of them) first.
3) On VCU...
I view them like Dayton. If we want them, we could take them at any time. Not a great program, but good enough to add if there's another team you "have to take."
Though we'll never add VCU, no matter how much sense they make. Georgetown would never allow it. They are very anti-VCU.
The league is good right now. The round robin schedule works great. UConn, Notre Dame, Temple is the list for me. I don't think we'll have any of those on the table any time soon, but barring that type of program, there's no reason to add.
-
I am going to take a lot of heat for this, but I am going to say that I would like to add Fordham.
None of the current schools that fit our profile (small, catholic, urban) have a basketball team worth adding with the exceptions of Gonzaga and Saint Mary's, which are geographically impossible adds. Therefore, I would add a school with excellent academics, is catholic, and is in headquarters of the Big East, New York City.
I think this is beneficial move for the Marquette, Fordham and the Big East. It is beneficial to Marquette and the Big East because it brings in an institution with a sterling academic record, which really does add to the prestige of the league.
Fordham benefits in that they get dropped into an excellent basketball league which will immediately boost their revenue. They also get a legit marketing tool to prospective students (you have a big east basketball team that plays Villanova, Georgetown and Marquette every year).
I know many will think this is foolish but ask yourself this. Are we really improved by adding any other team out there that is available? Do you really want to add Dayton or SLU or whatever crap team they are going to put in there? No! Do they make our league better or more competitive? No! But ask yourself this. Does the value of your degree maybe go up if you are in a conference that is known for academic excellence? I think yes.
Not enough for Vanderbilt and Florida to consider leaving the SEC.
-
The whole concussion thing will be the demise of basketball, ai na?
-
One thing that I kinda wish folks would stop doing is talking about this school with so-and-so as coach and that school with such-and-such as coach and this school is kinda winning lately and that school is sorta treading water lately.
We want a great league to be around for a long time. Who is coaching somewhere, to me, is irrelevant. If history is any guide, we don't have a single program where the next Coach K or the next Lute Olsen is going to stay around for decades. So to base possible expansion on the current coach at a place like Dayton or VCU makes no sense.
The same thing with how the basketball team is doing the last year or three. Hell, if that were the main thing, Marquette, DePaul, Seton Hall and several others would have to be drummed out.
You base it on a school's commitment to basketball, a commitment usually shown by dollars. You base it on tradition. You base it on market. At least that's MHO.
If VCU can't survive Shaka leaving or Dayton can't keep winning after Archie is gone, I don't want either of them anyway. And we all knew Shaka would leave and we all know that Archie will, too.
-
MU82, I agree, which is why both VCU and Dayton are good targets. Both have sustained winning programs through multiple coaches for the past 15-20 years. It's the same reason Butler was still attractive after Brad Stevens left.
-
MU82, I agree, which is why both VCU and Dayton are good targets. Both have sustained winning programs through multiple coaches for the past 15-20 years. It's the same reason Butler was still attractive after Brad Stevens left.
Maybe, brew. I'm still in agreement with others that the Daytons and VCUs will be there whenever the Big East reaches out, be it next year, 5 years from now or whenever.
If we can't get the likes of UConn, I'm on the "no" side of expansion.
-
Maybe, brew. I'm still in agreement with others that the Daytons and VCUs will be there whenever the Big East reaches out, be it next year, 5 years from now or whenever.
If we can't get the likes of UConn, I'm on the "no" side of expansion.
I agree 100%. Dayton or VCU are only worth adding as a complimentary team to a bigger fish, like UConn or Notre Dame. Good candidates, but not must haves. They're ideal to keep on the back burner as reserve options if someone we truly want becomes available and we want to go to 12.
-
I agree 100%. Dayton or VCU are only worth adding as a complimentary team to a bigger fish, like UConn or Notre Dame. Good candidates, but not must haves. They're ideal to keep on the back burner as reserve options if someone we truly want becomes available and we want to go to 12.
We should be the effen commishes of this league - ha!
-
Weve been talking a lot about what the Big East should want in an expansion target. We should really be talking about what does Fox want in an expansion target. They will only approve more money if the teams are worth the cash. So what is Fox looking for? In order:
1) Significant media market: this kills Dayton, Wichita state, etc
2) New media market: this kills George Washington, Fordham, Loyola, st. Joe's, etc.
3) Will drive a national audience to watch games (most important): this kills Richmond, Denver, Davidson, old dominion, saint Louis, Boston university, etc
Who does that leave? Football schools (uconn, nd, Memphis, etc), maybe vcu (depends on life after shaka), and Gonzaga/BYU.
I know we have our objections about public schools, football schools, abd west coast schools. Fox doesn't share our objections. They would love to add any school that drives a national audience. Hell, west coast schools would give them some late night programming options. Fox isn't going to pony up more money for teams like Dayton and SLU so they shouldn't even be on the list.
So if we are going to expand, we have to find a way to do it with football, public, or west coast schools. And we will have to expand. We aren't making enough to justify our contact with Fox. If we want to get this kind of deal again, we need to find a way to drive more eyeballs to our games. Expansion is the easiest way to do that
The TV Contract is an important consideration. However, I think what is most important is the consistent quality of the league over a longer period of time and the development of strong rivalries. Right now the Big East is in an excellent position with 10 teams. In the first two years we have had 10 teams go to the tournament, which builds up our NCAA units. Our double round robin is a very distinctive feature of the conference. It helps two ways in that it promotes rivalries which enhances the brand identity of the schools in the conference. The strong identities will ensure that we keep our best coaches in the league for the long term , which also brings attention and recruits.
The next step for the conference is for our teams to go deeper into the tournament. The dollars that will bring in will bring in will be very significant. If we can consistently put our teams in the Elite Eight or better, build up strong rivalries among all the teams. our next TV contract will take care of itself .
Expansion only dilutes our league and there are really no teams that will fit into our configuration that are worth bringing in. Obviously if we took U Conn or Cincy back it would be great, but reality is they are gone once the ACC wants to expand, and that would only serve to hurt our brand. We are fine as we are. A little patience will go a long way.
-
The TV Contract is an important consideration. However, I think what is most important is the consistent quality of the league over a longer period of time and the development of strong rivalries. Right now the Big East is in an excellent position with 10 teams. In the first two years we have had 10 teams go to the tournament, which builds up our NCAA units. Our double round robin is a very distinctive feature of the conference. It helps two ways in that it promotes rivalries which enhances the brand identity of the schools in the conference. The strong identities will ensure that we keep our best coaches in the league for the long term , which also brings attention and recruits.
The next step for the conference is for our teams to go deeper into the tournament. The dollars that will bring in will bring in will be very significant. If we can consistently put our teams in the Elite Eight or better, build up strong rivalries among all the teams. our next TV contract will take care of itself .
Expansion only dilutes our league and there are really no teams that will fit into our configuration that are worth bringing in. Obviously if we took U Conn or Cincy back it would be great, but reality is they are gone once the ACC wants to expand, and that would only serve to hurt our brand. We are fine as we are. A little patience will go a long way.
We should absolutely focus on what makes a stronger league over a long period of time. The way to do that is to secure another contract with Fox. The only thing keeping the Big East from slipping to mid major status is our massive television contract. We need to do whatever we can to ensure that we will be renewed in 2026 with a similar contract. Now a lot of what you said, winning in March, developing rivalries, etc is part of that. If expansion will help that happen, then we should absolutely do that. I think Gonzaga/BYU is what eventually happens. I don't know how they figure out the geography, but they will. They will also have to figure out the BYU Network as someone else mentioned.
-
We should absolutely focus on what makes a stronger league over a long period of time. The way to do that is to secure another contract with Fox. The only thing keeping the Big East from slipping to mid major status is our massive television contract. We need to do whatever we can to ensure that we will be renewed in 2026 with a similar contract. Now a lot of what you said, winning in March, developing rivalries, etc is part of that. If expansion will help that happen, then we should absolutely do that. I think Gonzaga/BYU is what eventually happens. I don't know how they figure out the geography, but they will. They will also have to figure out the BYU Network as someone else mentioned.
I'm definitely aboard for BYU and, especially, Gonzaga. I didn't say so earlier because I just assume it can't happen. I hope I'm wrong.
-
If Zaga were to join the league, how much extra travel would that really be for MU? Seems like if the Zags are willing to do it, we should welcome them.
-
We should absolutely focus on what makes a stronger league over a long period of time. The way to do that is to secure another contract with Fox. The only thing keeping the Big East from slipping to mid major status is our massive television contract. We need to do whatever we can to ensure that we will be renewed in 2026 with a similar contract. Now a lot of what you said, winning in March, developing rivalries, etc is part of that. If expansion will help that happen, then we should absolutely do that. I think Gonzaga/BYU is what eventually happens. I don't know how they figure out the geography, but they will. They will also have to figure out the BYU Network as someone else mentioned.
The Zags are not going to put their team/teams at a disadvantage travel wise for every conference road game, crossing several time zones. Unrealistic. Who is going to pay travel expenses for all the non revenue sports?
-
The Zags are not going to put their team/teams at a disadvantage travel wise for every conference road game, crossing several time zones. Unrealistic. Who is going to pay travel expenses for all the non revenue sports?
I don't think you appreciate the difference in $$$ between our TV contract and the WCC's. More than makes up for the increase in travel costs.
I don't know if this happens but I think the hesitation would be more on the Big East's side than Gonzaga's.
-
The Zags are not going to put their team/teams at a disadvantage travel wise for every conference road game, crossing several time zones. Unrealistic. Who is going to pay travel expenses for all the non revenue sports?
There was an article about 2 years ago where the Gonzaga AD is quoted as saying they did the travel studies and were a willing partner if the Big East invited them. I would love BYU/Gonzaga joining the league. Gonzaga is an elite team, BYU has a huge following and fanbase. I think it's the east coast teams who are unwilling to do the travel....Georgetown seemed to be the hesitant party on adding Creighton so I doubt they are gonna want to go to Provo and Spokane.
-
I don't think you appreciate the difference in $$$ between our TV contract and the WCC's. More than makes up for the increase in travel costs.
I don't know if this happens but I think the hesitation would be more on the Big East's side than Gonzaga's.
Okay...I get the numbers. I understand the fiscal benefit. And I know that college sports has become a business more than anything else. But these are still college kids and at some point, maybe, just maybe someone should actually pause for a moment and consider the human element.
Not all of these players are going to be pros. Sure, maybe most guys that are able to earn a scholarship in the Big East will play professionally at some level, but we aren't talking about seasoned vets, we are talking about kids that have other obligations.
Consider that at least once per year, you are going to take the current Big East teams and put them on long plane rides to Provo and Spokane. This will take them away from classes and their other obligations. But even worse, it will probably take at least 3-4 trips per year for the Cougar and Zag programs to get their road games out East addressed. And sure, you can say "well, they don't have to necessarily go out east if we do divisions", but that's a load of crap. Provo is 948 miles from Omaha. Spokane is further. These kids will be putting in a minimum of 2500 miles in on every 2-game road trip. So pretty much two weeks per month in January and February the BYU and Gonzaga teams will be away from campus.
And yes, there's the travel cost element, but it's not just for the revenue sports, it's also for Cross Country, Soccer, Tennis, Track and Field, all the other sports these schools support. Will all of them get to fly charter planes? Probably not. Hopefully they can at least fly coach, because bus rides would be murder. The only upside to the bus ride is they might be able to more easily overcome the jet lag that the basketball players would be dealing with on a weekly basis.
When the new Big East was formed, I sat back and thought "this is nice, it's a throwback and has some of the elements of how college sports SHOULD be." Sure, Creighton was a bit of an outlier, but everyone was a philosophical fit and for the most part, everyone was a geographical fit. Round-robin play and finally a league that seemed to be about getting back to its roots rather than just making every single dirty low-down cash grab that you expect from the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Big 12 type conferences.
When everyone else compromised to bring in schools that clearly didn't fit their profile, whether Syracuse and Pitt in the ACC, Rutgers in the Big Ten, TCU in the Big 12, or pretty much anyone that UConn and Cincy were bringing into the American, we had a league that sure felt better than that. A league that yes, was going to be relatively lucrative for the schools involved, but was also going to make more sense than the other leagues that were just trading teams like baseball cards.
The ONLY way we should take BYU and Gonzaga is if they are willing to move their campuses to St. Louis and Minneapolis. Then it works. Otherwise, I don't want any part of them. They have good programs. They aren't terrible philosophical fits. But in terms of geography, in terms of doing what is actually best for the most important people involved, the Student-Athletes, they are awful fits and we should have no part of them. And frankly, they should want no part of us either.
If they want to be in a West Coast version of our league, then put in calls to St. Mary's, Weber State, Long Beach State, UNLV, San Diego State, New Mexico, Colorado State, and New Mexico State. Have a nice, West Coast-based 10-team league of their own that makes sense.
I want no part of either of them. I'd sooner take Fordham and Davidson.
-
I don't disagree with anything you said Brew. BYU/Gonzaga isn't the expansion I want, it's the expansion I think we will get. It's just a reality of college sports these days. It's all about the $$$$$. The Big East only gets to be a high major as long as we have this lucrative TV deal. We are set until 2026. If we want to be a high major from 2026 on, we need to find a way to justify the millions Fox is paying us. If you can find me one article that says something to the effect of "Fox getting their money's worth for Big East basketball" I would be surprised. The common perception is that Fox vastly overpaid for us. Unless we start driving more eyeballs to Fox Sports 1, we will either not be renewed or will be renewed for a lot less money. If either of those things happen, we will regress to mid major status.
If we find a way to start increasing ratings without expanding, that would be great. If we could find a way to increase ratings by adding teams like Dayton and SLU, that would be great. I don't see that happening. That means we either need to lure away football schools (would be my number 1 preference) or we need to go out and snag the last two brand name basketball programs left in the country, BYU and Gonzaga.
I do agree that it sucks for student athletes. But honestly, on my list of injustices that we put student athletes through, making them travel a couple hours further once or twice a year (more for the BYU/Gonzaga athletes) is pretty far down on my list of injustices.
Let's also not act like Gonzaga isn't already doing this. The closest school in the WCC to Gonzaga? It's BYU, nearly 750 miles away. Most of their conference opponents are in southern California, almost 1,400 miles away. They average over 1,000 miles, one way for every conference road game. Yes, the Big East is farther, and its in a different time zone, so it would be more difficult. But it's not like they are trading an easy travel schedule for a difficult one.
As Jet pointed out, Gonzaga is interested. At least they were two years ago. No idea about BYU. The hesitation is on the Big East's side.
-
One factor I just thought about is when other conferences' TV deals expire. The American is currently making 1.5 million per school per year for both basketball AND football. Pathetic compared to what the Big East is getting. The American's TV deal expires in 2020. They haven't exactly been earning their contract either. If they end up getting renewed for less money, maybe some of their member schools would be disgruntled enough to look elsewhere.
There really shouldn't be any rush to expand. We have 10 years to figure it out. The college sport landscape could look very different in 2020.
-
There really shouldn't be any rush to expand. We have 10 years to figure it out. The college sport landscape could look very different in 2020.
This for me is the biggest key. We are just scratching the surface of our new conference TV deal. Let's at least get halfway through the deal before we start adding programs that may as well be on another continent.
If we get to 2021 and ratings are still struggling, there's been no change in the conference landscape, and we are worried about getting a second deal with Fox, then I suppose it's time to start thinking about programs like this. But what other options will these schools have? Okay, maybe BYU could sneak into the Big 12 or Pac-12, but Gonzaga? They are going nowhere. Just like Dayton, VCU, Wichita State, St. Louis, Northern Iowa, Richmond, Valpo, Fordham, and any other potential non-football school someone could come up with.
The landscape will change by then. Probably not as much as it has in the past 6 years, but the Big East of 2009 had teams that now are in the Big East, American, ACC, Big Ten, and Big 12. Nebraska, Mizzou, Colorado, and Texas A&M were still part of the aptly named Big 12. The Pac-10 had a different number of teams and name. And the Big 10 couldn't count...well, I guess some things never really change.
Bottom line, it's too early in the deal to start bringing in schools that have no business being here. Gonzaga is on another planet and BYU has football. Those sorts of issues are the exact reason we left the old Big East in the first place. Inviting those problems to our new league just two years later would be the most stupid, short-sighted decision I can possibly imagine anyone making.
If Fox is that upset about ratings, just buy us out of the last decade of the contract and let us look for another carrier.
-
This for me is the biggest key. We are just scratching the surface of our new conference TV deal. Let's at least get halfway through the deal before we start adding programs that may as well be on another continent.
If we get to 2021 and ratings are still struggling, there's been no change in the conference landscape, and we are worried about getting a second deal with Fox, then I suppose it's time to start thinking about programs like this. But what other options will these schools have? Okay, maybe BYU could sneak into the Big 12 or Pac-12, but Gonzaga? They are going nowhere. Just like Dayton, VCU, Wichita State, St. Louis, Northern Iowa, Richmond, Valpo, Fordham, and any other potential non-football school someone could come up with.
The landscape will change by then. Probably not as much as it has in the past 6 years, but the Big East of 2009 had teams that now are in the Big East, American, ACC, Big Ten, and Big 12. Nebraska, Mizzou, Colorado, and Texas A&M were still part of the aptly named Big 12. The Pac-10 had a different number of teams and name. And the Big 10 couldn't count...well, I guess some things never really change.
Bottom line, it's too early in the deal to start bringing in schools that have no business being here. Gonzaga is on another planet and BYU has football. Those sorts of issues are the exact reason we left the old Big East in the first place. Inviting those problems to our new league just two years later would be the most stupid, short-sighted decision I can possibly imagine anyone making.
If Fox is that upset about ratings, just buy us out of the last decade of the contract and let us look for another carrier.
I assume the "incremental" contract adjustment for the addition of teams is not retroactive... so strictly from a fiscal standpoint, it would make sense to add those teams as early in the term as possible; especially if you're counting on the additional schools to "ramp up" to BE standards during that time (e.g. if Fordham was being added with the understanding that they use their BE membership as a foundation to raise their MBB profile substantially).
That said, I don't fault the "wait and see" advocates... seems like a very prudent stance given the volatility in conferences hasn't settled down yet.
-
I assume the "incremental" contract adjustment for the addition of teams is not retroactive... so strictly from a fiscal standpoint, it would make sense to add those teams as early in the term as possible; especially if you're counting on the additional schools to "ramp up" to BE standards during that time (e.g. if Fordham was being added with the understanding that they use their BE membership as a foundation to raise their MBB profile substantially).
That said, I don't fault the "wait and see" advocates... seems like a very prudent stance given the volatility in conferences hasn't settled down yet.
Here's the problem with that, however. The current contract is $500M for 12 years for 10 teams. If you divide that out, the average per year is $4.16M per team. If you expand by two members and get the maximum expansion allotment, according to the OP, you get $600M for 12 years for 12 teams. The average per year is still $4.16M per team. In terms of the television contract, there is no benefit for existing schools to add.
Now I suppose you could invite two teams and force them to earn a full share. Years 1-3 you get $2.08M, in years 4-6 you get $3.12M, then in year 7 and beyond you get your fully vested $4.16M share, but is the extra $416K/$208K per original team per year worth adding for?
The real benefit would be the potential for extra NCAA shares, but would Gonzaga be such a lock to make the tourney every year if they didn't play in a league that guaranteed them the 13+ wins and 75% chance of winning the conference tournament they have enjoyed since BYU joined the league 4 years ago? I'm confident they won't bring current shares with them, will they maintain their success in a league with twice as many top-100 opponents as they are used to?
-
Inviting those problems to our new league just two years later would be the most stupid, short-sighted decision I can possibly imagine anyone making.
I am for the wait and see approach too, but besides inconvenient travel for the student athletes, why do you think this decision would be so bad? It brings two massive brands into the Big East. We would have the 9 most dominant basketball only schools in the country all in one conference....plus DePaul, Seton Hall, and BYU. To me that would enhance the profile of the Big East. Geographically it's weird, but geography hasn't mattered for conferences in years. I think it would drive up television ratings and increase our likelihood of getting deep tournament runs. I just don't see the downside.
You say Gonzaga has no business being here. Why? Just geography? They are one of the best (you can even make an argument for the best) basketball only schools in the nation. We are the best basketball only conference in the nation. That makes them fit. That should trump geography.
The football thing with BYU I get a little bit more. Personally doesn't bother me. I'd add UConn, Notre Dame, Temple, Memphis, etc. tomorrow even if they kept their football teams. I think we let the concept of football scare us. This isn't the old Big East. We are and will always be dominated by basketball only schools. If they want to park their football somewhere else, I say let them in.
I think adding Gonzaga and BYU would only help the league. The only possible downside could be if we take them and then the likes of UConn and Notre Dame become available and we don't have room. That's why I say wait and see, but I think the likelihood of them coming back to us is pretty slim.
-
Here's the problem with that, however. The current contract is $500M for 12 years for 10 teams. If you divide that out, the average per year is $4.16M per team. If you expand by two members and get the maximum expansion allotment, according to the OP, you get $600M for 12 years for 12 teams. The average per year is still $4.16M per team. In terms of the television contract, there is no benefit for existing schools to add.
Now I suppose you could invite two teams and force them to earn a full share. Years 1-3 you get $2.08M, in years 4-6 you get $3.12M, then in year 7 and beyond you get your fully vested $4.16M share, but is the extra $416K/$208K per original team per year worth adding for?
The real benefit would be the potential for extra NCAA shares, but would Gonzaga be such a lock to make the tourney every year if they didn't play in a league that guaranteed them the 13+ wins and 75% chance of winning the conference tournament they have enjoyed since BYU joined the league 4 years ago? I'm confident they won't bring current shares with them, will they maintain their success in a league with twice as many top-100 opponents as they are used to?
It's not about benefit to individual schools. Its about benefit to the entire league. Two more brand names means two more fan bases that are watching Big East basketball, attending the Big East Tournament, and more big names to create quality matchups that will drive fans of the sport to watch.
-
Gonzaga and BYU are not national brands.
Okay, BYU may be close to a state school in Utah, but I just don't believe they have much pull beyond state borders, and I really hate the idea of a football school. Getting away from football is why we're here in the first place. It's inviting the problems of the past back through the door. And there's the slippery slope aspect. If we take BYU with football, why not UConn with football, or Cincy with football, or hell, why not just merge with the American and make a 20+ team superconference?
No football. Never again.
As far as Gonzaga, I get that they are a known commodity, but I'm just not that enamored. Small student base, 6,000 seat arena, and while their name is recognized, it's not like they have a big fanbase. I know...they've made the tourney for 17 straight years, but how much of that is playing in a crap conference? Only 4 of those bids have been at-large and only twice have they won more than 2 games in the tournament.
Gonzaga is ridiculously outside the geographic footprint and I just don't believe they will maintain their success level once they actually have to play a real schedule. I'm not convinced they'll continue to be a world-beater with the step up in competition. If they were a team with a few Final Fours and regular Sweet 16 appearances, but they haven't reached a Final Four yet and have only been out of the first weekend twice in the past nine years.
I think Gonzaga will be a team that draws a lot of interest early, but I see it planing off rather quickly. The problem is we'll be stuck with them and the crazy travel requirements for all of our teams, not just basketball.
I also don't see it helping the Big East Tournament. Maybe for a year or two, but MSG is a long way from Spokane (2582 miles) and Provo (2192 miles). We'd be far more likely to get visitors from more local schools like Dayton or VCU than either of those two.
Again, I don't want to expand unless it's a a clear-cut no-brainer decision. UConn or Notre Dame would fit that mold. I don't believe anyone else in the country does. Not Gonzaga, and certainly not BYU.
-
I think one of Nova us or GTown nab at least a Final Four before the contract is up we're just fine. Essentially I'd rather us bet on the teams we have doing great and building up their brand than needing to add more schools... unless one of those schools suddenly add a national championship or something.
-
One factor I just thought about is when other conferences' TV deals expire. The American is currently making 1.5 million per school per year for both basketball AND football. Pathetic compared to what the Big East is getting. The American's TV deal expires in 2020. They haven't exactly been earning their contract either. If they end up getting renewed for less money, maybe some of their member schools would be disgruntled enough to look elsewhere.
There really shouldn't be any rush to expand. We have 10 years to figure it out. The college sport landscape could look very different in 2020.
Wow, good luck building a football team that's attractive to a BCS conference with a total of 1.5 million to split between football and basketball.
-
Is there a reason Notre Dame keeps being brought up as a possible team to move to the Big East. Last I checked they are in the ACC, the top basketball conference there is. Is there a reason to believe they would actually leave? Does it have to do with their football program staying independent?
-
Gonzaga and BYU are not national brands.
Okay, BYU may be close to a state school in Utah, but I just don't believe they have much pull beyond state borders, and I really hate the idea of a football school. Getting away from football is why we're here in the first place. It's inviting the problems of the past back through the door. And there's the slippery slope aspect. If we take BYU with football, why not UConn with football, or Cincy with football, or hell, why not just merge with the American and make a 20+ team superconference?
No football. Never again.
As far as Gonzaga, I get that they are a known commodity, but I'm just not that enamored. Small student base, 6,000 seat arena, and while their name is recognized, it's not like they have a big fanbase. I know...they've made the tourney for 17 straight years, but how much of that is playing in a crap conference? Only 4 of those bids have been at-large and only twice have they won more than 2 games in the tournament.
Gonzaga is ridiculously outside the geographic footprint and I just don't believe they will maintain their success level once they actually have to play a real schedule. I'm not convinced they'll continue to be a world-beater with the step up in competition. If they were a team with a few Final Fours and regular Sweet 16 appearances, but they haven't reached a Final Four yet and have only been out of the first weekend twice in the past nine years.
I think Gonzaga will be a team that draws a lot of interest early, but I see it planing off rather quickly. The problem is we'll be stuck with them and the crazy travel requirements for all of our teams, not just basketball.
I also don't see it helping the Big East Tournament. Maybe for a year or two, but MSG is a long way from Spokane (2582 miles) and Provo (2192 miles). We'd be far more likely to get visitors from more local schools like Dayton or VCU than either of those two.
Again, I don't want to expand unless it's a a clear-cut no-brainer decision. UConn or Notre Dame would fit that mold. I don't believe anyone else in the country does. Not Gonzaga, and certainly not BYU.
Does anyone know if BYU is rooted for by all Mormons across the country? I mean, I think part of Notre Dame's brand is the fact that their mascot is the "fighting Irish" and people with Irish heritage may buy the product and root for Notre Dame just because the mascot says "fighting Irish."
Basically, does BYU have Wal-Mart fans (Mormons specifically) the same way the UW-Madison does? My hunch is to say "yes" since they have their own network, but I'm curious if anyone knows for sure.
-
We should be the effen commishes of this league - ha!
Wow. This post just smacks ignorance. You are clearly not aware of the amount of diligence required for purchasing office furniture. Do you know the difference between the OR-239 ergonomic and the OR-3742 cligomatic, triple-incline office chairs? I doubt it. Val does. Frankly speaking, MU82, you don't have the chops.
And that's to say nothing of the necessary level of conscientiousness that hiring someone to create a website takes.
-
Does anyone know if BYU is rooted for by all Mormons across the country? I mean, I think part of Notre Dame's brand is the fact that their mascot is the "fighting Irish" and people with Irish heritage may buy the product and root for Notre Dame just because the mascot says "fighting Irish."
Basically, does BYU have Wal-Mart fans (Mormons specifically) the same way the UW-Madison does? My hunch is to say "yes" since they have their own network, but I'm curious if anyone knows for sure.
Most of the Mormons I know root for BYU as their primary team.
-
Is there a reason Notre Dame keeps being brought up as a possible team to move to the Big East. Last I checked they are in the ACC, the top basketball conference there is. Is there a reason to believe they would actually leave? Does it have to do with their football program staying independent?
Mostly it has to do with prodigious alcohol consumption and bong hits by posters.
The most realistic scenario for ND coming to the Big East would be the Big Ten and SEC going supernova and devouring the ACC between them with the Big Ten passing on ND because it insists on remaining independent in football.
-
Gonzaga and BYU are not national brands.
Okay, BYU may be close to a state school in Utah, but I just don't believe they have much pull beyond state borders, and I really hate the idea of a football school. Getting away from football is why we're here in the first place. It's inviting the problems of the past back through the door. And there's the slippery slope aspect. If we take BYU with football, why not UConn with football, or Cincy with football, or hell, why not just merge with the American and make a 20+ team superconference?
No football. Never again.
As far as Gonzaga, I get that they are a known commodity, but I'm just not that enamored. Small student base, 6,000 seat arena, and while their name is recognized, it's not like they have a big fanbase. I know...they've made the tourney for 17 straight years, but how much of that is playing in a crap conference? Only 4 of those bids have been at-large and only twice have they won more than 2 games in the tournament.
Gonzaga is ridiculously outside the geographic footprint and I just don't believe they will maintain their success level once they actually have to play a real schedule. I'm not convinced they'll continue to be a world-beater with the step up in competition. If they were a team with a few Final Fours and regular Sweet 16 appearances, but they haven't reached a Final Four yet and have only been out of the first weekend twice in the past nine years.
I think Gonzaga will be a team that draws a lot of interest early, but I see it planing off rather quickly. The problem is we'll be stuck with them and the crazy travel requirements for all of our teams, not just basketball.
I also don't see it helping the Big East Tournament. Maybe for a year or two, but MSG is a long way from Spokane (2582 miles) and Provo (2192 miles). We'd be far more likely to get visitors from more local schools like Dayton or VCU than either of those two.
Again, I don't want to expand unless it's a a clear-cut no-brainer decision. UConn or Notre Dame would fit that mold. I don't believe anyone else in the country does. Not Gonzaga, and certainly not BYU.
I definitely disagree on your definition of national brands. BYU is as much of a national brand as you can get. Hell, they are an international brand. Mormons everywhere cheer for BYU as their default team. Gonzaga I would argue is one of the most if not the most recognizable name in basketball only schools. Casual basketball fans would tune in to watch games between Gonzaga and Georgetown or Gonzaga and Marquette. They certainly wouldn't do that for Georgetown vs. Dayton or Marquette vs. SLU.
I don't fear football. Bring on the football teams. Any basketball only programs remaining aren't valuable enough to add to the Big East (besides Gonzaga and maybe VCU/Wichita State). We will eventually need to hold our nose and pick up a football team if we want to expand whether its UConn, BYU, Memphis, Cincy, Notre Dame, Temple, etc. They can park their football somewhere else and it will be that conference's issue. If they end up getting picked up by the ACC and leaving, oh well, don't let the door hit you where the good lord split you. As long as we don't make football a sponsored sport of the Big East, we will be fine.
I don't think it is fair to say that Gonzaga has only been successful because of their conference. 17 straight tourney appearances is a feat no matter where you are from. Teams tend to raise to their level of competition. Gonzaga getting added to the Big East would increase their level of play, not decrease it. They would rise to the challenge. Same way I think Dayton would rise to the challenge. I have no concerns about Dayton's ability to compete in the Big East, I have concerns that no one gives a rat's arse about Dayton outside of the city of Dayton.
The geography only bothers me slightly. I think its something that can be worked out easily. A couple of extra hours on a plane isn't going to kill anybody.
-
While I don't think football schools are a non-starter, I do think university presidents will be vehemently against non-private/non-catholic schools. When the C7 broke away from the Old Big East, they had the option to add a school like VCU - coming off a Final Four, consecutive NCAA tournament births, having one of the hottest young coaches in the game (Shaka Smart), a new market (Richmond) and was/is a non-football school - and they weren't even seriously considered. The five schools that were immediately thrown around were: Xavier, Butler, Saint Louis, Dayton and Creighton - all private/Catholic schools.
Conference realignment has shown conferences want similar institutions in their club. B1G wanted Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland, not for their athletic accomplishments, but because they are all big research/land grant universities. At the time of their acceptance, all were AAU. The SEC wanted Missouri and Texas A&M, big state football schools in the southeast region of the country that increased their football print. The same goes for the PAC-12, who added Colorado and Utah.
-
While I don't think football schools are a non-starter, I do think university presidents will be vehemently against non-private/non-catholic schools. When the C7 broke away from the Old Big East, they had the option to add a school like VCU - coming off a Final Four, consecutive NCAA tournament births, having one of the hottest young coaches in the game (Shaka Smart), a new market (Richmond) and was/is a non-football school - and they weren't even seriously considered. The five schools that were immediately thrown around were: Xavier, Butler, Saint Louis, Dayton and Creighton - all private/Catholic schools.
Conference realignment has shown conferences want similar institutions in their club. B1G wanted Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland, not for their athletic accomplishments, but because they are all big research/land grant universities. At the time of their acceptance, all were AAU. The SEC wanted Missouri and Texas A&M, big state football schools in the southeast region of the country that increased their football print. The same goes for the PAC-12, who added Colorado and Utah.
That's because football conferences want good football schools....which are all public. And the Big East wanted all basketball schools....which for the most part are all private. Nothing to do with private/public.
-
I don't fear football. Bring on the football teams. Any basketball only programs remaining aren't valuable enough to add to the Big East (besides Gonzaga and maybe VCU/Wichita State). We will eventually need to hold our nose and pick up a football team if we want to expand whether its UConn, BYU, Memphis, Cincy, Notre Dame, Temple, etc. They can park their football somewhere else and it will be that conference's issue.
I disagree. Football schools will always look out for their football programs first. No interest in schools with split loyalties. I think the BE schools lived through that and understandably have no desire to go back to that.
Also, were are football schools supposed to "park their football teams?" I think the MAC is booting UMass next year, and outside of that, the only "football only" memberships that I can think of are Idaho in the WAC and Hawaii in the MW.
-
Mostly it has to do with prodigious alcohol consumption and bong hits by posters.
The most realistic scenario for ND coming to the Big East would be the Big Ten and SEC going supernova and devouring the ACC between them with the Big Ten passing on ND because it insists on remaining independent in football.
Thanks, I was gonna say it seems super unrealistic that ND would ever come back... I know we would all love to have them on the schedule every year again, but that just isn't happening.
-
The five schools that were immediately thrown around were: Xavier, Butler, Saint Louis, Dayton and Creighton - all private/Catholic schools.
It is a personal opinion, but I think people underrate the arena/academics aspects. Those schools are all (sans Dayton) among the premier schools in their region (or in SLUs case, a top 100 national university). They also all had 10,000+ seat arenas at the time (Butler has since reduced capacity to 9,100). VCU is currently making a big push to become more academically prestigious (no longer a commuter school, tripled their endowment over the last 3 years), they are increasing their arena capacity to 10,000 and they have a very nice practice facility opening up. We also have some new presidents and ADs since the formation of the BE. It's a completely new landscape.
-
I definitely disagree on your definition of national brands. BYU is as much of a national brand as you can get. Hell, they are an international brand. Mormons everywhere cheer for BYU as their default team. Gonzaga I would argue is one of the most if not the most recognizable name in basketball only schools. Casual basketball fans would tune in to watch games between Gonzaga and Georgetown or Gonzaga and Marquette. They certainly wouldn't do that for Georgetown vs. Dayton or Marquette vs. SLU.
Absolutely. Everywhere I have ever lived, I've regularly seen people (likely Mormons) wearing BYU gear. Heck, if they joined the BE, they'd arguably be the most national brand in the conference. Not the best school or the best hoops program...but in terms of national name recognition, they'd be as big as any we have.
I still wonder about the geography if we'd add Gonzaga or BYU...but have no question about BYU being a national brand.
-
Maybe I underestimate the BYU brand, but I just don't encounter that many Mormons. Notre Dame is on a totally different level as they draw Irish and Catholic fans nationwide, which is a massively bigger fanbase. When I travel, I see plenty of Notre Dame and state school fans. BYU I just don't notice.
Same goes for Gonzaga. I think they'd offer a short term bump but they aren't a long term panacea.
Regardless, questions about long term value of the brands, travel that doesn't take student athletes into the consideration, football, and jumping now to expand with no true monetary increase while not knowing what the next five years will hold are my concerns.
-
And to the "why Notre Dame" question, there's a strong continent I've spoken to that believes had the C7 broken off sooner, Notre Dame would have joined us and stayed fully independent for football. I think some of the thoughts of Notre Dame now is the knowledge that plenty of ND boosters wish they could have a do-over on their conference affiliation. It's probably a moot point now, but I think that's why they get mentioned.
-
And to the "why Notre Dame" question, there's a strong continent I've spoken to that believes had the C7 broken off sooner, Notre Dame would have joined us and stayed fully independent for football. I think some of the thoughts of Notre Dame now is the knowledge that plenty of ND boosters wish they could have a do-over on their conference affiliation. It's probably a moot point now, but I think that's why they get mentioned.
ND decided to leave in September 2012. The C7 broke off in December 2012. The C7 were talking about this long before September. My guess is that the C7 were ND's back up plan. Had the ACC said "no thanks," ND might be with us, but they have a pretty sweet situation right now. I can't see them looking back.
-
ND decided to leave in September 2012. The C7 broke off in December 2012. The C7 were talking about this long before September. My guess is that the C7 were ND's back up plan. Had the ACC said "no thanks," ND might be with us, but they have a pretty sweet situation right now. I can't see them looking back.
Yup, ND will never rejoin the Big East.
-
Yup, ND will never rejoin the Big East.
Probably not, but we can't know what college sports will look like in five years. If the B1G abd SEC devour the ACC and the ACC replaces them with teams from the American, would ND really be happy with those mandatory 5 games against the likes of temple, Syracuse, and Memphis? Maybe, maybe not. We won't know until it happens
-
Probably not, but we can't know what college sports will look like in five years. If the B1G abd SEC devour the ACC and the ACC replaces them with teams from the American, would ND really be happy with those mandatory 5 games against the likes of temple, Syracuse, and Memphis? Maybe, maybe not. We won't know until it happens
If more realignment is going to happen, it is either going to happen real soon. Or it won't happen significantly for another decade. The B10 television contract is up after next year, but after then it is well into the next decade before any of the major college contracts come due. I think what might be interesting then is the entire sports marketplace and how people partake. It might be completely different then.
-
Does anyone know if BYU is rooted for by all Mormons across the country? I mean, I think part of Notre Dame's brand is the fact that their mascot is the "fighting Irish" and people with Irish heritage may buy the product and root for Notre Dame just because the mascot says "fighting Irish."
Basically, does BYU have Wal-Mart fans (Mormons specifically) the same way the UW-Madison does? My hunch is to say "yes" since they have their own network, but I'm curious if anyone knows for sure.
They have a huge following. I know a few mormons who live in California and they follow BYU. If BYU joined the league, they would probably have a similar national following or even more than Georgetown or Villanova.
-
The main reason that BYU isn't in a conference like the P12 or B12 is due to their unwillingness to play on Sundays for religious reasons.
-
One thing that's not mentioned in the whole BYU is a national brand conversation is that BYU fans may not necessarily be the demographic that companies that advertise during televised sporting events. Yea, there might be BYU-eyes watching games, but they are not as likely to be buying beer, going to Hooters and the like. So, perhaps Fox might not see them as appealing as other potential expansion candidates.
-
Guys....
BYU HAS THEIR OWN NETWORK.
We're better off talking about the Mouse starting its own university in Bristol and adding them to the Big East.
Please, let's drop this before the salvos of Orgazmo allusions commence.
-
Guys....
BYU HAS THEIR OWN NETWORK.
We're better off talking about the Mouse starting its own university in Bristol and adding them to the Big East.
Please, let's drop this before the salvos of Orgazmo allusions commence.
That makes things difficult not impossible. BYU network hasn't done well though it has been better than the Longhorn network from what I've heard. I don't think we'll see too many of these single school networks in the future.
-
BYU has had their own network for years. They use it to show more than sporting events. There have been rumors about BYU wanting to get into the B12 if they can work out the playing on Sundays thing. Clearly they are willing to compromise the network if the money is right.
-
I've said this from the beginning of the conference, the next two schools I'd look at are Dayton and Saint Louis. Geographically, philosophically and athletically they make a lot of sense.
-
I've said this from the beginning of the conference, the next two schools I'd look at are Dayton and Saint Louis. Geographically, philosophically and athletically they make a lot of sense.
I think if the Big East would add teams that make them stay a major conference not just on the court but perception wise as well. I'm sorry I think adding Dayton and SLU makes the conference more mid major than major and they don't add a ton else to the conference. Ultimately I don't think the Big East expands for another 4-5 years. The Big East and Fox needs games they can market around even if the teams aren't great and rivalries can make that happen. Right now with the round robin format rivalries can be formed much quicker and I think rivalries and history between schools within this league can help the Big East as much as expansion can.
-
BYU has had their own network for years. They use it to show more than sporting events. There have been rumors about BYU wanting to get into the B12 if they can work out the playing on Sundays thing. Clearly they are willing to compromise the network if the money is right.
Yep. Looking at the BYU network schedule, they run mostly non-sports shows. Kinda different from the Longhorn Network and the conference run networks, which are basically all sports, all the time.
If the right offer comes along, the BYU network will not be a deal breaker.
-
I've said this from the beginning of the conference, the next two schools I'd look at are Dayton and Saint Louis. Geographically, philosophically and athletically they make a lot of sense.
But the $$$ doesn't make sense and that kills any chance of them getting an invite. Geography, philosophy, and athletic tradition all matter, but they need to pass the first hurdle of will they bring more eyeballs to Fox. The answer for both is a firm no. SLU brings the Saint Louis market but a team that no one in Saint Louis cares about. Everyone in Dayton love the Flyers but no one cares about the market of Dayton. If Saint Louis had Dayton's fan base, or Dayton was in a city the size of St. Louis, you might have some candidates.
-
I think if the Big East would add teams that make them stay a major conference not just on the court but perception wise as well. I'm sorry I think adding Dayton and SLU makes the conference more mid major than major and they don't add a ton else to the conference. Ultimately I don't think the Big East expands for another 4-5 years. The Big East and Fox needs games they can market around even if the teams aren't great and rivalries can make that happen. Right now with the round robin format rivalries can be formed much quicker and I think rivalries and history between schools within this league can help the Big East as much as expansion can.
Agree. We were fortunate to find three schools that can mostly avoid mid-major labels, and add good TV markets. Xavier with a prolonged history of high-major success in mid-major conferences; Butler largely on the strength of two Final Four runs; and Creighton with some decent success and a great fan following. Maybe Dayton is relatively close to Creighton in what they offer, but we were smart to give Creighton the nod and get a new TV market. SLU would bring a good TV market, but a reputation that screams mid-major.
I don't think Dayton or SLU would necessarily be the death knell of the BE as a high-major conference, but if we don't have to expand now, we're better off waiting to see what happens over the next few years. They'd still be there waiting for us if we need them in a few years.
-
Since we've beaten the Dayton, SLU, BYU, and Gonzaga horse to death, how about a different candidate. I don't like them personally but could see the benefit if they were to continue to grow their brand over the next few years. Loyola (IL). They've made a lot of commitments to improving athletics over the past few years, they've been growing their endowment, and their basketball has gotten a little bit better. Lord knows DePaul is never going to make the investment in basketball that we should expect out of a Big East member. What if we supplemented the Chicago market with a second Big East school?
Again, don't like them personally. But was curious what others thought.
-
Since we've beaten the Dayton, SLU, BYU, and Gonzaga horse to death, how about a different candidate. I don't like them personally but could see the benefit if they were to continue to grow their brand over the next few years. Loyola (IL). They've made a lot of commitments to improving athletics over the past few years, they've been growing their endowment, and their basketball has gotten a little bit better. Lord knows DePaul is never going to make the investment in basketball that we should expect out of a Big East member. What if we supplemented the Chicago market with a second Big East school?
Again, don't like them personally. But was curious what others thought.
I kinda doubt we'd help our negotiating position with FSN by adding a second school in a market we already have. But if we were going to go in that direction, I'd take St. Joe's over Loyola in a nanosecond.
-
Anyone else wonder if we talk about Big East expansion more than the conference leadership and member-schools talk about it? Or more than Fox talks about it?
-
One thing I haven't seen mentioned, but I think is important, is the differentiation the Big East gives us against schools like SLU and Dayton when competing for the general student population. A lot of students consider attending Marquette, Dayton and SLU. Offering what we would consider superior competition and a better fan experience as part of the Big East gives us a selling point against those schools that are very similar to us. If everything else is pretty close, that might be enough to convince some students to pick MU over SLU and Dayton.
-
One thing I haven't seen mentioned, but I think is important, is the differentiation the Big East gives us against schools like SLU and Dayton when competing for the general student population. A lot of students consider attending Marquette, Dayton and SLU. Offering what we would consider superior competition and a better fan experience as part of the Big East gives us a selling point against those schools that are very similar to us. If everything else is pretty close, that might be enough to convince some students to pick MU over SLU and Dayton.
I'm not sure conference affiliation for a sport played just over 25 times a year is a big differentiator for most students. Assuming the pool of students has lots of overlap and the schools really are comparable, I'd think that financial aid and overall campus feel/life (for the 150 or so school days where there isn't a game) would make a much greater difference. I have no idea how the three schools' financial aid differs and have never been to the SLU or Dayton campuses, so can't say how close it would be after factoring in those things.
-
Since we've beaten the Dayton, SLU, BYU, and Gonzaga horse to death, how about a different candidate. I don't like them personally but could see the benefit if they were to continue to grow their brand over the next few years. Loyola (IL). They've made a lot of commitments to improving athletics over the past few years, they've been growing their endowment, and their basketball has gotten a little bit better. Lord knows DePaul is never going to make the investment in basketball that we should expect out of a Big East member. What if we supplemented the Chicago market with a second Big East school?
Again, don't like them personally. But was curious what others thought.
Loyola, Detroit Mercy, Valparaiso, and to a lesser extent Bradley and Belmont all fall into the same category for me; while they kind of fit with the conference they would fast track us to mid-major mediocrity.
-
And to the "why Notre Dame" question, there's a strong continent I've spoken to that believes had the C7 broken off sooner, Notre Dame would have joined us and stayed fully independent for football. I think some of the thoughts of Notre Dame now is the knowledge that plenty of ND boosters wish they could have a do-over on their conference affiliation. It's probably a moot point now, but I think that's why they get mentioned.
Notre Dame left the Big East for the ACC to upgrade their Olympic Sports and to be in A better neighborhood academically( Duke, UVA,UNC,Wake Forest, BC etc). The condition of the ACC was the guarantee of five football games, which was not a big deal as ND had historically been playing many of them already. The only way they would have remained in the Big East is if the league would not have split and kept its AQ status as part of the BCS which somehow ND had access to if they were rated higher. When Big East became relegated to have to claw their way into New Years bowl picture ND had no further use for Big East and made the sweetheart deal with ACC. Their athletic donors love being an ACC school.
-
nm
-
Notre Dame left the Big East for the ACC to upgrade their Olympic Sports and to be in A better neighborhood academically( Duke, UVA,UNC,Wake Forest, BC etc). The condition of the ACC was the guarantee of five football games, which was not a big deal as ND had historically been playing many of them already. The only way they would have remained in the Big East is if the league would not have split and kept its AQ status as part of the BCS which somehow ND had access to if they were rated higher. When Big East became relegated to have to claw their way into New Years bowl picture ND had no further use for Big East and made the sweetheart deal with ACC. Their athletic donors love being an ACC school.
Disagree based on what I've heard. The most important thing for ND was retaining their Independent status in football. The ACC came along at the right time (before the C7 was ready to pull the trigger) and with the Big East collapsing around them, ND made the move they felt they had to make. If the C7 had been ready 3 months earlier to cut ties with the football schools, it would have been the C8 with Notre Dame coming along and retaining full football independence and Creighton would have been left in the cold.
-
One thing I haven't seen mentioned, but I think is important, is the differentiation the Big East gives us against schools like SLU and Dayton when competing for the general student population. A lot of students consider attending Marquette, Dayton and SLU. Offering what we would consider superior competition and a better fan experience as part of the Big East gives us a selling point against those schools that are very similar to us. If everything else is pretty close, that might be enough to convince some students to pick MU over SLU and Dayton.
I don't know about this. I think it could make a difference for many of us (Scoopers) if we were deciding now, but not sure about the HS students. I had two very basketball aware kids who have just considered those schools plus other (ND, Nova, G'town, BC etc), and the basketball experience was far down on their list. And I have been to games at SLU and Dayton, and the fan experience at both really is excellent-even though the strength of the conference opponents doesn't match up.
No doubt that basketball is great for the MU Brand/name recognition etc, but when it comes down to a decision, not many students are going to factor in MU being in a better conference than SLU, Dayton or George Washington.
-
I don't know about this. I think it could make a difference for many of us (Scoopers) if we were deciding now, but not sure about the HS students. I had two very basketball aware kids who have just considered those schools plus other (ND, Nova, G'town, BC etc), and the basketball experience was far down on their list. And I have been to games at SLU and Dayton, and the fan experience at both really is excellent-even though the strength of the conference opponents doesn't match up.
No doubt that basketball is great for the MU Brand/name recognition etc, but when it comes down to a decision, not many students are going to factor in MU being in a better conference than SLU, Dayton or George Washington.
Well not directly. But very indirectly they certainly will. NCAA Tourney appearances brings name recognition, and tourney appearances is a function of conference affiliation.
-
Disagree based on what I've heard. The most important thing for ND was retaining their Independent status in football. The ACC came along at the right time (before the C7 was ready to pull the trigger) and with the Big East collapsing around them, ND made the move they felt they had to make. If the C7 had been ready 3 months earlier to cut ties with the football schools, it would have been the C8 with Notre Dame coming along and retaining full football independence and Creighton would have been left in the cold.
Notre Dame Football was independent in the Big East and had some ability to access the BCS as an AQ as condition of its relationship with the Big East. When the Big East as it was then structured collapsed, that special AQ football status also vanished . Notre Dame, fully committed to remaining independent in football, shopped for the best deal for the rest of their sports and that is why they made the deal with the ACC. If you remember, there was some chatter from ND that they would be a member of the new Big East for a year while transitioning but that never came to be.
If the ACC would not have been flexible on the football independence, then they would have joined the C7 group. However,ND has a heavy investment in sports like Lacrosse, Soccer and Baseball and the ACC is a more attractive option than the Big East for those sports. At the time they made the decision that was emphasized .
It would be nice if we could get the basketball games on the schedule again. However, I don't think ND has any urgent interest in making it happen.
-
A collectively bargained TV contract for all P5 schools. Interesting idea.
http://www.scout.com/college/texas/story/1561434-the-next-big-move-in-realignment
-
A collectively bargained TV contract for all P5 schools. Interesting idea.
http://www.scout.com/college/texas/story/1561434-the-next-big-move-in-realignment
It all depends on per school revenue. I just have a feeling the B10 isn't going to do better linking up with the other P5 conferences.
-
A collectively bargained TV contract for all P5 schools. Interesting idea.
http://www.scout.com/college/texas/story/1561434-the-next-big-move-in-realignment
An interesting idea, but I don't see it happening.
-
Disagree based on what I've heard. The most important thing for ND was retaining their Independent status in football. The ACC came along at the right time (before the C7 was ready to pull the trigger) and with the Big East collapsing around them, ND made the move they felt they had to make. If the C7 had been ready 3 months earlier to cut ties with the football schools, it would have been the C8 with Notre Dame coming along and retaining full football independence and Creighton would have been left in the cold.
If true, it's a shame the timing didn't work out. Because I'd trade Creighton in a nanosecond for Notre Dame.
-
Notre Dame Football was independent in the Big East and had some ability to access the BCS as an AQ as condition of its relationship with the Big East. When the Big East as it was then structured collapsed, that special AQ football status also vanished . Notre Dame, fully committed to remaining independent in football, shopped for the best deal for the rest of their sports and that is why they made the deal with the ACC. If you remember, there was some chatter from ND that they would be a member of the new Big East for a year while transitioning but that never came to be.
As I recall, that idea getting floated by ND admin was shut down pretty hard and fast by Big East admins.
It would be nice if we could get the basketball games on the schedule again. However, I don't think ND has any urgent interest in making it happen.
Immediately after the Reformation, Brey was talking about wanting to get Marquette on the schedule again, but he's mysteriously stopped mentioning playing Marquette, to the point where he's publicly declaring that he wants to play DePaul in their first game in their new arena.
You know, the arena that was approved years ago but will apparently open after Marquette's new home.
-
I'm skeptical as to the whole AQ thing... what's the benefit?
Publicity? If ND's image ever falls to the point where they need an annual appearance in the likes of the Music City or Belk bowls to boost their profile, then I'm not sure their image is even salvageable.
Money? ND is probably one of the schools that actually profits from a bowl appearance, but just how much of the $3.5M from the MC Bowl did ND keep last year? The ACC takes their cut (probably half), then you have your travel expenses and per diem for the team/staff, and what about ticket guarantees? All told... ND walked home with a million in their pockets perhaps? They have to rake in 4-5x that amount from a home game in ticket sales alone, and that's doesn't include the $2.5M they get from NBC per game.
Appease the alumni? ND should know that there is no appeasing their alumni. If you're going to resort to half-ass pandering, why do anything at all?
I think the whole AQ and bowl tie-in argument is BS, personally. The move to the ACC was strictly about their O-sports and stability... and frankly, that seems like a lateral move in hindsight.
-
As I recall, that idea getting floated by ND admin was shut down pretty hard and fast by Big East admins.
Immediately after the Reformation, Brey was talking about wanting to get Marquette on the schedule again, but he's mysteriously stopped mentioning playing Marquette, to the point where he's publicly declaring that he wants to play DePaul in their first game in their new arena.
You know, the arena that was approved years ago but will apparently open after Marquette's new home.
I also remember this. But the deal that I remember that the BE presidents shot down was ND parking in the BE for one year, until ND made the full move into the ACC
-
Add Fordham and make the Big East an elite academic conference. Dayton, SLU add nothing to our conference whatsoever other than 3 or 4 crappy games onto our schedule. Fordham may be horrible at basketball, but Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette and Fordham makes a pretty solid academic core.
Adding Dayton and SLU is the quickest way to destroy this conference. Don't add schools just for the sake of adding schools.
-
It's first and foremost an athletic conference. Adding Fordham would not be a good move.
-
The foundation of this conference is basketball. We can't afford to add anyone that doesn't add value to the basketball brand. Fordham is a complete non-starter.
Perennial winning programs and tourney teams like VCU, Gonzaga, BYU, and Dayton would add quality matchups and NCAA credits in the long run. Fox would never sign off on a program like Fordham.
-
I'm gonna guess that only DePaul would support adding Fordham. Probably their best shot at getting out of the BE basement....
-
The foundation of this conference is basketball. We can't afford to add anyone that doesn't add value to the basketball brand. Fordham is a complete non-starter.
Perennial winning programs and tourney teams like VCU, Gonzaga, BYU, and Dayton would add quality matchups and NCAA credits in the long run. Fox would never sign off on a program like Fordham.
If we can't afford to add anyone who doesn't bring value to the basketball brand, the only school that meets that qualification is Gonzaga. SLU, Dayton, etc. do not.
We are what we are. We are never going to be a super conference, but we will always be relevant. Adding middling schools with mediocre basketball programs is the quickest way to sink this conference. If you want to expand to include academically elite members I am all for it. But adding more crappy basketball schools is harmful. Expansion for expansion's sake is not a good blueprint for the big east.
-
I just don't see what is all that great about making the conference better academically either. And let's not pretend that Fordham is Ivy League or anything. It is a very good national university, but it's not as though the drop off to Dayton or St. Louis is enormous.
But I do agree with you. Mediocre basketball programs add nothing.
-
If we can't afford to add anyone who doesn't bring value to the basketball brand, the only school that meets that qualification is Gonzaga. SLU, Dayton, etc. do not.
We are what we are. We are never going to be a super conference, but we will always be relevant. Adding middling schools with mediocre basketball programs is the quickest way to sink this conference. If you want to expand to include academically elite members I am all for it. But adding more crappy basketball schools is harmful. Expansion for expansion's sake is not a good blueprint for the big east.
While dayton doesn't bring a big brand they could get there by the time we were expanding. They certainly have a better brand than Seton Hall who outside of 88-94 hasn't ever been a truly good program.
-
Dayton, in most years with Archie Miller, would finish in the top-6. Without Archie Miller, it could be a toss-up, as they have had some pretty bad years under Jim O'Brien, Oliver Purnell and Brian Gregory. If you are adding a school, you don't want to add to the middle of the conference (which is what Dayton/SLU would do) - you want to add programs that would add to the top of the conference.
As previously stated, there just aren't any programs out there that fit at the moment. It is what it is, but the Big East won't suffer because of it.
-
As previously stated, there just aren't any programs out there that fit at the moment. It is what it is, but the Big East won't suffer because of it.
This is how I feel. Some simply don't have the requisite commitment to basketball (Fordham); some are too far away (Gonzaga), some do nothing to expand the "footprint" of the Big East (St. Joe's, Loyola IL); some don't fit the private-school theme/philosophy (VCU/WSU), and some are just too petulant to tolerate (Dayton).
Incidentally, you can't do anything about your geography, public/private status, or petulance (although, I guess we've been surprised before on that last one), but you can control the resources you commit to basketball. Fordham may not be one, but I'd be willing to bet that BE officials/presidents have talked to their counterparts from a select group of schools and outlined specific goals/milestones to meet over the next several years as a sort of "roadmap" towards consideration. If such conversations have taken place, the likes of Dayton, SLU, Davidson, Richmond, etc. likely know the specifics of what they have to accomplish... and if so, I'd keep an eye out for a gamechanger or two amongst this crowd over the next 2-3 years.
-
I think that discounting schools solely because they are public is short-sighted. That said, any public school should come under extra scrutiny. Wichita State, for example, has a smaller enrollment than St. John's, DePaul, and Georgetown, is the 3rd most popular school in their own state (generously), doesn't have a fan base that travels well (MSG problem), and their location is sub-optimal. They also have fans equally annoying to Dayton. That doesn't even get into the issue of academics.
-
SLU? Richmond? St. Joe's? Dayton? Keep 'em! Why make the conference worse?The Big East has already been knocked down a peg by losing Syracuse, Louisville, etc.
I just can't imagine the AAC being around in its current state for all that long. Sooner or later, the top AAC basketball schools will come to terms with the fact that they're major powers in a mid-major conference and the football teams will come to terms with the fact that they're being left out in the cold when the big money bowls make their picks. That conference just doesn't have long-term staying power. If the Big East wants to expand, they should wait out Cincinnati, UConn and possibly Memphis and Temple. There are likely going to be significantly more football independents within the next 5-10 years. Why force the issue by picking up mid-majors and hoping the conference affiliation will help them improve?
-
SLU? Richmond? St. Joe's? Dayton? Keep 'em! Why make the conference worse?The Big East has already been knocked down a peg by losing Syracuse, Louisville, etc.
I just can't imagine the AAC being around in its current state for all that long. Sooner or later, the top AAC basketball schools will come to terms with the fact that they're major powers in a mid-major conference and the football teams will come to terms with the fact that they're being left out in the cold when the big money bowls make their picks. That conference just doesn't have long-term staying power. If the Big East wants to expand, they should wait out Cincinnati, UConn and possibly Memphis and Temple. There are likely going to be significantly more football independents within the next 5-10 years. Why force the issue by picking up mid-majors and hoping the conference affiliation will help them improve?
Agreed. 10 works for the time being. Only way I expand (outside of Gonzaga), is with Cinci and UConn (would be fine with Memphis and Temple too, I guess), and them either leaving football behind, or signing massive buyouts to leave the BE if a better situation comes along.
-
I will say this, if Fordham and Holy Cross were to join we would have quite the academic conference. I really do think that counts for something. I also understand why people would think this is a horrible idea.
-
I will say this, if Fordham and Holy Cross were to join we would have quite the academic conference. I really do think that counts for something. I also understand why people would think this is a horrible idea.
You have to meet a bare minimum academic requirement. Beyond that is just gravy. No one really cares about academics in college athletics.
-
You have to meet a bare minimum academic requirement. Beyond that is just gravy. No one really cares about academics in college athletics.
Tell that to the Ivy League
-
Add Fordham and make the Big East an elite academic conference. Dayton, SLU add nothing to our conference whatsoever other than 3 or 4 crappy games onto our schedule. Fordham may be horrible at basketball, but Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette and Fordham makes a pretty solid academic core.
Adding Dayton and SLU is the quickest way to destroy this conference. Don't add schools just for the sake of adding schools.
I choose None Of The Above.
-
Tell that to the Ivy League
TAMU was clearly exaggerating. There are conferences that do care. However they aren't very competitive on the athletic field in most cases and don't earn a great deal of revenue from their athletic endeavors.
Since the BE obviously wants to be competitive and increase revenue, they are going to look at schools that are competitive athletically that also fit its model. While Fordham and Holy Cross are models for the types of school the BE has, they simply aren't competitive enough.
-
If we can't afford to add anyone who doesn't bring value to the basketball brand, the only school that meets that qualification is Gonzaga. SLU, Dayton, etc. do not.
We are what we are. We are never going to be a super conference, but we will always be relevant. Adding middling schools with mediocre basketball programs is the quickest way to sink this conference. If you want to expand to include academically elite members I am all for it. But adding more crappy basketball schools is harmful. Expansion for expansion's sake is not a good blueprint for the big east.
I don't think SLU is worth discussing. Without Majerus, they're back to being a nothing. Unfortunate, but true.
Dayton would be a fine addition if there was some other must have school and we wanted to go to 12. Gonzaga thinks it's feasible? Okay, take them and Dayton. UConn drops football? Okay, take them and Dayton. Notre Dame decides the ACC is lame? You get the idea.
I don't think anyone is suggesting adding Dayton for Dayton's sake, but if we need a school to balance numbers, they make the most sense.
-
another 8 page expansion thread that goes nowhere
this is becoming like 'another new oil threads' on Harley/car forums
-
TAMU was clearly exaggerating. There are conferences that do care. However they aren't very competitive on the athletic field in most cases and don't earn a great deal of revenue from their athletic endeavors.
Since the BE obviously wants to be competitive and increase revenue, they are going to look at schools that are competitive athletically that also fit its model. While Fordham and Holy Cross are models for the types of school the BE has, they simply aren't competitive enough.
I seem to remember Holy Cross making the tournament about 12 years ago as a 14-seed and playing a pretty tight game against the #3. Granted, that was over a decade ago, and they haven't done much since.
-
Yeah but, ya gotta consider the #3 team's coach. That 'splain lots, ai na?
-
I seem to remember Holy Cross making the tournament about 12 years ago as a 14-seed and playing a pretty tight game against the #3. Granted, that was over a decade ago, and they haven't done much since.
I was never more nervous in person at a Marquette game.
Travis Diener was The Man and D-Wade was a bit player.
-
Bit playas don't put up triple doubles vs Kentucky, ai na?
-
Bit playas don't put up triple doubles vs Kentucky, ai na?
You can't be a superstar two weekends in a row, apparently.
-
I will say this, if Fordham and Holy Cross were to join we would have quite the academic conference. I really do think that counts for something. I also understand why people would think this is a horrible idea.
If we're going for academics above all else, why not raid the upper echelons of the Patriot league, and go for schools like Colgate or Boston U? Better academically than Fordham, and probably no worse in hoops.
-
If we're going for academics above all else, why not raid the upper echelons of the Patriot league, and go for schools like Colgate or Boston U? Better academically than Fordham, and probably no worse in hoops.
Heck lets just grab some D3 teams like UofC, NYU or MIT
-
I think it is hilarious that Marquette (USN&WR National University #86) fans are acting as if SLU (#96) and Dayton (#108) aren't good enough schools academically.
-
I think it is hilarious that Marquette (USN&WR National University #86) fans are acting as if SLU (#96) and Dayton (#108) aren't good enough schools academically.
Once you're out of the top 90 you might as well not even be ranked
-
I think it is hilarious that Marquette (USN&WR National University #86) fans are acting as if SLU (#96) and Dayton (#108) aren't good enough schools academically.
I also got a chuckle out of that.
Once you're out of the top 90 86 you might as well not even be ranked
FTFY
-
I think it is hilarious that Marquette (USN&WR National University #86) fans are acting as if SLU (#96) and Dayton (#108) aren't good enough schools academically.
Who said anyone was going by US News Rankings? Holy Cross and Fordham have sterling reputations academically, rankings or no rankings. And the whole thrust of my argument is that if you associate yourself with academically superior institutions, your academic reputation will become superior as well. That's why I would rather associate with schools that are better than ours rather than schools that are the same or slightly worse.
No one is saying that Dayton and SLU aren't good schools, but they certainly aren't elite academic schools or elite basketball schools. At least with Fordham and Holy Cross you would get elite academic catholic institutions.
-
Who said anyone was going by US News Rankings? Holy Cross and Fordham have sterling reputations academically, rankings or no rankings. And the whole thrust of my argument is that if you associate yourself with academically superior institutions, your academic reputation will become superior as well. That's why I would rather associate with schools that are better than ours rather than schools that are the same or slightly worse.
No one is saying that Dayton and SLU aren't good schools, but they certainly aren't elite academic schools or elite basketball schools. At least with Fordham and Holy Cross you would get elite academic catholic institutions.
I was going by USN&WR because it is simply a ranking standard. One that I have troubles with, but by and large is accepted by the public as semi-authentic.
I think your statements in this thread ask a question that some of us are taking for granted. What is the purpose of the Big East Conference? Most here view it entirely as athletics oriented. Membership should be the best schools possible no matter the type of school (VCU, Wichita) or if they have football (UConn, UC).
You seem to want it to be more than simply athletics. That it should be a grouping of schools that participate in athletics, but also have strong academic reputations. And that this should be important to Marquette. So the conference can afford to make athletic sacrifices for the sake of academic reputation. The Ivy League and the Patriot League are examples.
I think the BE is going down a middle road. It is primarily an athletic conference, but with a membership of similar schools (private, non-football). So my *guess* is that schools like SLU and Dayton are much more likely to be our next members than VCU, Wichita, Fordham or Holy Cross.
-
The biggest (of several) problems about adding schools for their academics is that it would end up costing members schools millions in television revenue. The contract with Fox does gives us the ability to add two (or more) schools in exchange for more money from Fox. Fox would presumably give enough money to make it so every member is still getting their ~4 million a year. Fox won't do that for any two (or more teams). They will only add that money if they deem the two additional teams as lucrative enough to justify their investment. Fordham and Holy Cross don't come anywhere close to that bill. So instead of getting more money to split between 12 members, the Big East would have to split the same money between 12 members, reducing each members payday. Perceived academic prestige is not worth that. Academic prestige is near the bottom on the list of criteria that high major conferences look for. You have to not suck at academics and you will get accepted if you are good at athletics.
Any potential expansion school for the Big East has to go through Fox first. Before you start looking at academics, endowments, institution type (e.g. things Fox doesn't give two craps about), you have to see if they are a quality enough program for Fox to invest in them. If they are, then you start arguing public v. private, football v. non-football, etc. If they aren't, the rest of the stuff doesn't matter because they aren't going to be added to the Big East.
-
Who said anyone was going by US News Rankings? Holy Cross and Fordham have sterling reputations academically, rankings or no rankings. And the whole thrust of my argument is that if you associate yourself with academically superior institutions, your academic reputation will become superior as well. That's why I would rather associate with schools that are better than ours rather than schools that are the same or slightly worse.
No one is saying that Dayton and SLU aren't good schools, but they certainly aren't elite academic schools or elite basketball schools. At least with Fordham and Holy Cross you would get elite academic catholic institutions.
I personally give zero fu**s about academics as it pertains to Marquette basketball and the teams in their conference. I am certain I am not alone there.
I'd take two horsesh*t academic schools into the BE that are elite basketball schools (not really any out there that fit that mold, and without football), but the point still stands. I'd take Cinci and Memphis over Fordham and Holy Cross every single time, without a second thought.
-
No one is saying that Dayton and SLU aren't good schools, but they certainly aren't elite academic schools or elite basketball schools. At least with Fordham and Holy Cross you would get elite academic catholic institutions.
I think your biggest problem is considering Fordham an "elite" academic school, while acting as though SLU isn't. They're both very good schools, and any difference between the two would widely be perceived as inconsequential.
-
Who said anyone was going by US News Rankings? Holy Cross and Fordham have sterling reputations academically, rankings or no rankings. And the whole thrust of my argument is that if you associate yourself with academically superior institutions, your academic reputation will become superior as well. That's why I would rather associate with schools that are better than ours rather than schools that are the same or slightly worse.
No one is saying that Dayton and SLU aren't good schools, but they certainly aren't elite academic schools or elite basketball schools. At least with Fordham and Holy Cross you would get elite academic catholic institutions.
I'm starting to wonder whether you feel that your Marquette degree isn't prestigious enough. I'm not really trying to insult, that's just how your argument is hitting me.
-
I'm starting to wonder whether you feel that your Marquette degree isn't prestigious enough. I'm not really trying to insult, that's just how your argument is hitting me.
I don't agree with that characterization. As a graduate of Marquette University (Not Marquette Basketball) I am much more concerned with Marquette's Academic standing than its' basketball standing. I feel that the best interests of Marquette University are to align itself with the best Academic Schools possible that fit our unique profile (small, private, Catholic). I feel that the value of a Marquette Degree (you can call that "prestige" if you want to) is most enhanced by being included with those schools.
You can certainly make a compelling argument (I am sure many would agree with it) that it is more beneficial to include schools that also have excelled in Men's Basketball. You can make a strong argument that a strong basketball conference not only increases revenue, but also increases exposure that promotes enhanced academics and campus life.
But to say that someone who wants their University to support adding academically superior schools because that person feels that their degree isn't prestigious enough is not only shallow, but hypocritical.
-
I don't agree with that characterization. As a graduate of Marquette University (Not Marquette Basketball) I am much more concerned with Marquette's Academic standing than its' basketball standing. I feel that the best interests of Marquette University are to align itself with the best Academic Schools possible that fit our unique profile (small, private, Catholic). I feel that the value of a Marquette Degree (you can call that "prestige" if you want to) is most enhanced by being included with those schools.
You can certainly make a compelling argument (I am sure many would agree with it) that it is more beneficial to include schools that also have excelled in Men's Basketball. You can make a strong argument that a strong basketball conference not only increases revenue, but also increases exposure that promotes enhanced academics and campus life.
But to say that someone who wants their University to support adding academically superior schools because that person feels that their degree isn't prestigious enough is not only shallow, but hypocritical.
You're on a marquette basketball fan board in the offseason. Most people here care a great deal for the basketball program, and while I have zero qualms about my Marquette degree, what ties me most to the school is the basketball program. Align with schools like Fordham and Holy Cross, and before long the Marquette basketball program won't even be feasible to watch if you don't live in Milwaukee.
If the Big East is going to expand, it needs to first or foremost add schools with elite basketball programs. Obviously having good academics would be a nice plus, it shouldn't be the bar.
-
I don't agree with that characterization. As a graduate of Marquette University (Not Marquette Basketball) I am much more concerned with Marquette's Academic standing than its' basketball standing. I feel that the best interests of Marquette University are to align itself with the best Academic Schools possible that fit our unique profile (small, private, Catholic). I feel that the value of a Marquette Degree (you can call that "prestige" if you want to) is most enhanced by being included with those schools.
You can certainly make a compelling argument (I am sure many would agree with it) that it is more beneficial to include schools that also have excelled in Men's Basketball. You can make a strong argument that a strong basketball conference not only increases revenue, but also increases exposure that promotes enhanced academics and campus life.
But to say that someone who wants their University to support adding academically superior schools because that person feels that their degree isn't prestigious enough is not only shallow, but hypocritical.
SMH
Okay...the reality is, any discussion of schools like Fordham or Holy Cross is, well, academic. Those schools will NEVER be added. Any additions made will be because of what they add fiscally to the athletic contract the league has with Fox. End of story. You may as well argue about whether we should be trying to poach Columbia and Penn from the Ivy League for all the merit the topic of academics has in this thread.
It might make a difference if you are differentiating with a school like Memphis, but to act like the academic merits of Fordham, Holy Cross, Gonzaga, Dayton, and SLU are relevant is frankly laughable.
-
I don't agree with that characterization. As a graduate of Marquette University (Not Marquette Basketball) I am much more concerned with Marquette's Academic standing than its' basketball standing. I feel that the best interests of Marquette University are to align itself with the best Academic Schools possible that fit our unique profile (small, private, Catholic). I feel that the value of a Marquette Degree (you can call that "prestige" if you want to) is most enhanced by being included with those schools.
You can certainly make a compelling argument (I am sure many would agree with it) that it is more beneficial to include schools that also have excelled in Men's Basketball. You can make a strong argument that a strong basketball conference not only increases revenue, but also increases exposure that promotes enhanced academics and campus life.
But to say that someone who wants their University to support adding academically superior schools because that person feels that their degree isn't prestigious enough is not only shallow, but hypocritical.
I was equating prestige of a degree with the value of a degree. I think most people do. I honestly don't understand how anything I said could be construed as being either shallow or hypocritical. You didn't bother to make an argument for either point of view. You just threw them out there as accusations.
The possibility of adding Holy Cross to the Big East illustrates why your suggestion is nonsensical. You say that the Big East should invite them so that conference schools are associated with "the best academic schools possible". However, Holy Cross, as a member of the Patriot League, currently associates itself with a group of schools about which has been said "Outside of the Ivy League, it is the most selective group of higher education institutions in NCAA Division I". So, by accepting an invitation to the Big East, Holy Cross would be disassociating itself with more selective (and hence more prestigious) schools in favor of being in a stronger athletic conference. So, by accepting a Big East invitation, Holy Cross would be disproving your theory about why Holy Cross should be a desirable addition to the Big East in the first place.