REPORT: BEast to add UCF, SMU, Houston in all sports; Boise St/Navy/AFA in fball

[MU_LOL]

The only basketball-only fans that like this deal appear to be Georgetown (http://hoyatalk2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general). All others seem to be ready and willing for the basketball-only era to begin.

You weren't kidding, these guys are loving the idea, and a lot.

[Earl Tatum]

For Basketball only, I would want U. Conn. Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Houston, Memphis,
Xavier, Villanova, Temple, Providence, DePaul, Georgetown, Seton Hall and Marquette, and St. John's. There are some good rivalries with the Ohio teams, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, ND and MU. Just a thought..

[Niv Berkowitz]

Looks good.

And for anyone who thinks Houston and WVU are a 'push' for football?? May I offer you some ocean front property in Utah, because you sir are clearly insane.

[Aughnanure]

You weren't kidding, these guys are loving the idea, and a lot.

Reading their boards for the past few months, they really see themselves as better than all bball-onlies. The closest school they view to themselves  is Nova, but they really see themselves as a Duke that never moved its football up. They view any formation with the other basketball-onlies as the final nail in the coffin to their program (rather pathetic actually).  Not too long ago, many were calling for Georgetown to just go Ivy.

All others, including St. Johns and Providence want the basketball-only era to begin sooner rather than later.

[Aughnanure]

Being affiliated with perennial top-tens like UConn and Louisville is a good thing. Being affiliated with Cincinnati and Notre Dame is a good thing. If we go basketball-only, we likely lose those schools. And like it or not, those schools bring in a heck of a lot of the contract revenue. Trying to break away from them would be incredibly stupid. Mind-bogglingly, phenomenally stupid. Leave them, start a 10-team league, within 5 years we are no better than the current A-10. And frankly, they'll probably then add Temple and Memphis end up a better league than our new basketball-only league anyway.

Did I mention that breaking away would be monumentally stupid?

At what point is this type of overly-negative view (shared by many) become a self-fulfilling prophecy? Jeez, if all fans get this pessimistic and look down so negatively on the situation just because we can't play a UConn or Louisville anymore (once a year! I might add), then yes the programs will tread downhill.

Georgetown, St. John's, Villanova, Providence, Marquette, DePaul, Xavier, Butler, etc are better than the A-10 could ever hope to be, but so many here are freaking out b/c, for whatever reason, view our program's worth (and survival) as tied completely to the football schools.

[brewcity77]

At what point is this type of overly-negative view (shared by many) become a self-fulfilling prophecy? Jeez, if all fans get this pessimistic and look down so negatively on the situation just because we can't play a UConn or Louisville anymore (once a year! I might add), then yes the programs will tread downhill.

Georgetown, St. John's, Villanova, Providence, Marquette, DePaul, Xavier, Butler, etc are better than the A-10 could ever hope to be, but so many here are freaking out b/c, for whatever reason, view our program's worth (and survival) as tied completely to the football schools.

Really? Seriously? People are freaking out about LEAVING the league? 99.999% of our fanbase seems to think that we are all doomed, the sky is falling, and we MUST get out of the Big East as soon as possible, cut all ties, burn the bridges, and immediately create a basketball-only conference. Every time I blink, it seems there are 2 new threads and 10 new posts about how horrible this is and how we should toss the football schools out.

Yes, I think that deliberately kicking out two perennial top-ten programs is idiotic. And while people love this ten-team idea, how long is that going to produce bids. Five years from now, what will happen to the 9-9 teams? They'll go to the NIT. And that will probably be at least 50-60% of the league. We'll get 3-4 bids a year. Why? Because someone has to lose. And while it may be a league that is getting 7-8 bids a year now, it won't be that when those 7-8 teams are beating up on each other.

We're in the best basketball conference in the country. In 2 years, we'll be in one of the top three basketball conferences in the country, even with Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU gone and replaced. We can always go basketball-only. That option will never go away. We would always be welcome in the A-10, or C-USA, or even the Horizon or MVC. If the Big East splits, the NCAA rules that require 7 teams playing together for 8 years would mean that if they want an AQ spot, they have to bring us along, so whatever conference G'Town, 'Nova, and St. John's would become a part of would almost assuredly include us.

Bottom line, if you take out UConn and Louisville, there are no replacements. Period, point blank. There are no programs in the entire nation we could add that would bring the same value of those two programs. The only programs of that quality are already tied into BCS conferences. Any program that can be a perennial top-ten team and legitimately challenge for national titles regularly is in the ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, or PAC-12. Sorry, Butler doesn't count. Yet we seem to want to be rid of the two best basketball programs we are associated with because maybe, possibly one day in the future they might end up somewhere else? Sorry, but that's damn near the definition of lunacy.

If they go and it all comes down, then we can join whatever basketball-only conference we like. There pretty much isn't a basketball-only in the country that wouldn't have us. Honestly, even the WCC would probably take us if we were interested, geographic footprint be damned. So let's just step off the ledge and accept that even without Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU, we're still in a pretty damn good position and we should enjoy it as long as we can help make it last.

[NersEllenson]

Brew - How do you think Buzz addresses this in recruiting when every one of the sure-fire BCS schools negative recruits aginst MU not having football, and the likelihood of MU being forced into a league like the A-10, Horizon, MVC, WCC, Conference USA??

Living in gray area is the absolute worst place any of us can be.  As Al McGuire said about recruiting - the worst answer is "Maybe."  You want a "Yes," or a "No."  Recruiting is hard enough as it is, but to have to try to sell an unknown, unstable conference situation??  Not good.

On another point - Memphis would be a comparable value add to the conference as Lville.  Why are we not extending invites to Memphis and Temple currently and then 1 of the 3 of UCF, SMU, Houston??  The Big East is HOPING  (and HOPE is never a strategy) that UCF, Houston and SMU can boost their football profile.  At the end of the day, all 3 of these schools will be roughly the 5th best programs in their respective states of Texas/Florida.  None of them are going to start to out recruit/perform/draw Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Florida, Florida State, Miami, USF (okay debatable there)..

[brewcity77]

Brew - How do you think Buzz addresses this in recruiting when every one of the sure-fire BCS schools negative recruits aginst MU not having football, and the likelihood of MU being forced into a league like the A-10, Horizon, MVC, WCC, Conference USA??

Wow...didn't expect that one from you, Ners. Personally, I have faith in Buzz. I have a feeling he's faced negative recruiting before, people have said he'll leave at the first chance, or that it's just a small school in the middle of nowhere, yet somehow, Buzz has brought in great class after great class. He's earned my faith. So I'm not going to start doubting his ability just because someone has a new negative recruiting approach. Buzz will tell that that he's not going anywhere, that Marquette is in the best basketball conference in the country, and that they are doing everything possible to ensure the highest level of competition.

Living in gray area is the absolute worst place any of us can be.  As Al McGuire said about recruiting - the worst answer is "Maybe."  You want a "Yes," or a "No."  Recruiting is hard enough as it is, but to have to try to sell an unknown, unstable conference situation??  Not good.

I thought so too, initially. But if we start to force the divorce, who knows what will happen? If we piss off UConn and Louisville, maybe they force their way out to the ACC or Big 12. Maybe if they have enough initiative, and especially if Cincy goes with UL, we'll lose all of them. And you know what else we'll lose? Any hope we had of an exit fee. They'll all argue that since 2/3 of the conference left simultaneously, it constitutes a dissolution of the Big East as a football league and that the contract is no longer valid. Will they have a leg to stand on? Who knows. But it could well get tied up in court, they could win, and then we'd not only lose our best competition but also all the money we thought we'd have coming to us.

If we are good conference-mates, maybe when it all dissolves, UConn will be left without a home and Cincy will have to park their football in C-USA. Maybe we lose some, but maybe they keep their basketball programs with us because we showed them the good faith that Syracuse and Pitt did not. Right now, even though they have football and we don't, all of us in the Big East are going through this crazy realignment together. It'd be kind of a crappy thing to do to say screw you to our most powerful allies. Sure, they may do the same to us if given the chance, but at least we know it's coming, and we can always go basketball-only.

On another point - Memphis would be a comparable value add to the conference as Lville.  Why are we not extending invites to Memphis and Temple currently and then 1 of the 3 of UCF, SMU, Houston??  The Big East is HOPING  (and HOPE is never a strategy) that UCF, Houston and SMU can boost their football profile.  At the end of the day, all 3 of these schools will be roughly the 5th best programs in their respective states of Texas/Florida.  None of them are going to start to out recruit/perform/draw Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Florida, Florida State, Miami, USF (okay debatable there)..

Dunno. Memphis and Temple would be my first two choices, with UCF a close third. Then Houston. But UCF has a rising basketball program. Top 75 RPI last year and were ranked for a time. And Houston has a fantastic class coming in next year. There's hope for them. It's certainly better than ECU or some of the other names we were rumored with.

And if it all comes tumbling down, let's be honest. None of these new schools will stick around. They'll slink back to wherever they came from, leaving the Big East to the basketball schools that were here before the chaos, during the chaos, and will be after the chaos. Everyone's afraid that we'll be left in a conference with SMU, Houston, and Boise. Are any of them really going to stay if half the league leaves (again) and the BCS bid goes away? The simple answer is no.

[Aughnanure]

Really? Seriously? People are freaking out about LEAVING the league? 99.999% of our fanbase seems to think that we are all doomed, the sky is falling, and we MUST get out of the Big East as soon as possible, cut all ties, burn the bridges, and immediately create a basketball-only conference. Every time I blink, it seems there are 2 new threads and 10 new posts about how horrible this is and how we should toss the football schools out.

Yes, I think that deliberately kicking out two perennial top-ten programs is idiotic. And while people love this ten-team idea, how long is that going to produce bids. Five years from now, what will happen to the 9-9 teams? They'll go to the NIT. And that will probably be at least 50-60% of the league. We'll get 3-4 bids a year. Why? Because someone has to lose. And while it may be a league that is getting 7-8 bids a year now, it won't be that when those 7-8 teams are beating up on each other.

We're in the best basketball conference in the country. In 2 years, we'll be in one of the top three basketball conferences in the country, even with Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU gone and replaced. We can always go basketball-only. That option will never go away. We would always be welcome in the A-10, or C-USA, or even the Horizon or MVC. If the Big East splits, the NCAA rules that require 7 teams playing together for 8 years would mean that if they want an AQ spot, they have to bring us along, so whatever conference G'Town, 'Nova, and St. John's would become a part of would almost assuredly include us.

Bottom line, if you take out UConn and Louisville, there are no replacements. Period, point blank. There are no programs in the entire nation we could add that would bring the same value of those two programs. The only programs of that quality are already tied into BCS conferences. Any program that can be a perennial top-ten team and legitimately challenge for national titles regularly is in the ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, or PAC-12. Sorry, Butler doesn't count. Yet we seem to want to be rid of the two best basketball programs we are associated with because maybe, possibly one day in the future they might end up somewhere else? Sorry, but that's damn near the definition of lunacy.

If they go and it all comes down, then we can join whatever basketball-only conference we like. There pretty much isn't a basketball-only in the country that wouldn't have us. Honestly, even the WCC would probably take us if we were interested, geographic footprint be damned. So let's just step off the ledge and accept that even without Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU, we're still in a pretty damn good position and we should enjoy it as long as we can help make it last.

I don't recall any posts on here calling for Louisville, Cincy and UConn to just be "kicked out" or that we should leave the Big East. Thats the last thing anyone has called for. We know we have to wait this out, as the Big East name will mean so much for any version of this bball conference.The only thing people were calling for is to not allow the basketball-onlies to be walked all over and let in whoever (Boise, Navy, UCF, ECU) just to keep the only two basketball programs left that we want to be associated with. The argument was that UConn, Louisville and Cincy would still want their basketball associated with this conference even w/ out football, since there is no better alternative until one of the other 5 BCS conferences comes calling.

I don't necessarily have a problem with adding the 6 schools suggested, but I do if it leaves the basketball schools in a position to be taken advantage of and results in some schools overtime being forced out or marginalized.

And just like Bilsu said in an earlier post, it is not a 100% sure thing that this basketball conference will be there 5 years from now no matter what.

I do not think it is 100% given that, if the basketball schools broke off that they would all stay together. That is the biggest reason, I would not root for a basketball only conference. There are no guarantees we would end up with who we want. All of a sudden Notre Dame goes one way. Villanova goes somewhere were their football team can develope. ACC decides Georgetown as a basketball only school fits well with Notre Dame and takes them both. Xavier thinks they are better off where they are and Atalntic 10 expands by two taking two former Big East teams that does not include MU. There are alot of things that could go wrong, if basketball schhols decided to go on their own. In the end, just like the football schools, each school is going to do what is best for them and not what is best for Marquette.

[bamamarquettefan]

Brew - How do you think Buzz addresses this in recruiting when every one of the sure-fire BCS schools negative recruits aginst MU not having football, and the likelihood of MU being forced into a league like the A-10, Horizon, MVC, WCC, Conference USA??

I still believe that is offset by having the rare combination of being in a BCS conference but also being able to tell recruits they won't be the 74th most important kid on campus behind all the football players.

When I ran the study last year I believe 94% of four- and five- stars went to BCS conferences and Memphis was the only non-BCS school able to pull any ine. (too tired to go back and search the article, so will stand corrected).  I can't pretend to be in a kids head, but with 80% of what they hear on TV being about the BCS football conferences, we are giving up tremendous branding once we go to a basketball-only conference that isn't mentioned much except for teh 2 1/2 months a year between the BCS championship game and the end of March Madness.  So the difference is we might be doing it with 3-stars instead of 4-stars if we go basketball-only.

On West Virginia vs. Houston, the only factor that will be considered in the BCS evaluation is the year end BCS ratings, and right now Houston is 13th and West Virginia is 32nd.  Sure, WVU is better over the past few years, but even their 37th in 2010 isn't great.

But the problem in compariing is that if you want to take the three teams that left you are comparing the upgrade from West Virginia to Boise State, which is a difference in light years, especially considering that BCS Bowl wins are an additional factor in addition to average BCS ranking.  Obviously I wish WVU had stayed, but for BCS evaluation the potential Big East is obviously much better than the old even before getting a 12th team. 

[Norm]

Does anyone here really believe that Boise State and Air Force are gong to accept the offer to join the Big East? I just don't see it happening.

[GGGG]

I agree with brew completely.  Earlier I was all for a bball only breakaway, but he is right.  There is absolutely no reason to think we should go in this direction now.  As he said, we are essentially going to be in the third best bball league.  Yet some people want a bball only conference with the current bball schools, Xavier, etc?  Well, that wouldn't be the third best conference in the country - perhaps fifth.

So, if I get this right, people are advocating that we move away from good basketball teams, into a weaker conference, just because those good basketball teams might one day leave the BE?  Makes no sense.

And again, let's not get all hung up on the Big East brand.  Any value that that brand would give as a bball only conference would be small and frankly short-lived.  I've said this before, but if you take those same schools, put them in another conference, it would be the quality of their play that determines the conference's value - not the name on the package.

For instance, look at CUSA.  It was essentially formed as a basketbal conference first.  Now it is a southern football conference.  Does anyone think of it as a basketball conference any longer? 

[NersEllenson]

I agree with brew completely.  Earlier I was all for a bball only breakaway, but he is right.  There is absolutely no reason to think we should go in this direction now.  As he said, we are essentially going to be in the third best bball league.  Yet some people want a bball only conference with the current bball schools, Xavier, etc?  Well, that wouldn't be the third best conference in the country - perhaps fifth.

So, if I get this right, people are advocating that we move away from good basketball teams, into a weaker conference, just because those good basketball teams might one day leave the BE?  Makes no sense.

And again, let's not get all hung up on the Big East brand.  Any value that that brand would give as a bball only conference would be small and frankly short-lived.  I've said this before, but if you take those same schools, put them in another conference, it would be the quality of their play that determines the conference's value - not the name on the package.

For instance, look at CUSA.  It was essentially formed as a basketbal conference first.  Now it is a southern football conference.  Does anyone think of it as a basketball conference any longer? 

I think where there is misunderstanding is that those of us who want to go in THE DIRECTION of basketball only, are not advocating kicking out Lville, UCONN, or Cincy.  But instead, we are saying, let's not try to salvage football at the expense of watered down basketball - due to the eventual likelihood of Lville, UCONN, and Cincy leaving the conference anyway.  We can remain playing them as is, until they get offered elsewhere - in the meantime those schools would have to figure out their football situation.

If these schools are unwilling to agree to a STEEP buyout fee, such as $25M to exit the Big East - why on earth would we feel they are committed to the league long term?  For the life of me I cannot figure out why Temple and Memphis aren't 2 of the 3 schools being invited - as this would insulate against future good basketball school losses, and provide 2 football teams...give Houston the 3rd invite for their football strength and be on our way.

[GGGG]

UConn, UL and UC want to be in a conference that keep their AQ status.  They have invested big $$$ in their football programs based upon the expectations of certain revenues.  Since the revenue split between fball and bball isn't shared, it could be that the bball schools have a vested interest in staying in a AQ conference too.  Yeah they have watered down bball a little - not terribly though.  And in return you have kept members happy by almost assuring a future in the BCS.

[Aughnanure]

I agree with brew completely.  Earlier I was all for a bball only breakaway, but he is right.  There is absolutely no reason to think we should go in this direction now.  As he said, we are essentially going to be in the third best bball league.  Yet some people want a bball only conference with the current bball schools, Xavier, etc?  Well, that wouldn't be the third best conference in the country - perhaps fifth.

So, if I get this right, people are advocating that we move away from good basketball teams, into a weaker conference, just because those good basketball teams might one day leave the BE?  Makes no sense.

And again, let's not get all hung up on the Big East brand.  Any value that that brand would give as a bball only conference would be small and frankly short-lived.  I've said this before, but if you take those same schools, put them in another conference, it would be the quality of their play that determines the conference's value - not the name on the package.

For instance, look at CUSA.  It was essentially formed as a basketbal conference first.  Now it is a southern football conference.  Does anyone think of it as a basketball conference any longer? 

Have to disagree with you on the name. Nobody thinks anything positively about Conference USA, that is why it is used constantly in jokes about realignment. Nobody knows it is a southern football conference or even who all the teams are. The Big East is an established basketball brand that has been around decades and is nationally recognized and respected. If you think that is easy to replicate, or that it will simply disappear because of no UConn or Cuse, I think you are underestimating the value and power a brand has. There is a reason why the Big 10 never changed its name, and never will no matter how many teams it has. The value is in "Big 10" and people automatically connect that with power college football, even when the league is down.

[GGGG]

Look, I know a great deal about branding.  I never said there wasn't power behind a brand, but brand without substance decreases over time.  IOW, if UL, UConn and UC leave, you don't stick around in a bad basketball conference simply because of the Big East name.  *If* those schools leave, I don't think the bball schools can worry about who gets the BE name if they want to split - it would not be a reason *not* to leave.  (Not that I would think the remaining football schools would be all that interested in it anyway.)

[Aughnanure]

Look, I know a great deal about branding.  I never said there wasn't power behind a brand, but brand without substance decreases over time.  IOW, if UL, UConn and UC leave, you don't stick around in a bad basketball conference simply because of the Big East name.  *If* those schools leave, I don't think the bball schools can worry about who gets the BE name if they want to split - it would not be a reason *not* to leave.  (Not that I would think the remaining football schools would be all that interested in it anyway.)

Oh ok gotcha. I would agree that if somehow the bball-onlies got stuck with all these Conf USA/MWC leftovers (after UConn, Ville, etc left) and couldn't keep the name that they should leave since the conf would turn into whatever basketball conglomeration that is.

I assumed you were saying that the value of the brand would disappear overtime as a bball-only conference (obviously it will a little bit), and therefore we should ditch just to remain with whatever conglomeration gets a BCS bid.

My only issue with everyone here acting like we must do ANYTHING to remain associated with TWO schools. Two, that I might add, will leave at the first chance. Let's face it, there isn't much left of the original Big East as is and we are saying that if we don't do everything to preserve association with 2 schools (one which has as much history in it as MU) we are doomed to mid-major forever.

I still think it is beneficial to remain associated with UConn, Ville, Cincinnati, South Florida, and Rutgers for as long as possible. But at what cost for a few extra years?