The Bishin Cutter wrote:
This should be a no-brainer. ECU, USM, or UMass. All of them make sense for this conference.
I would certainly agree. The BE did this re-built eastern concept only partly, bringing back Temple, adding UCF, and anticipating Navy fb.
I suppose Memphis, SMU, and Houston are OK too, for all-sports since the BE was pursing a divisional model.
I believe Boise State fb and SDSU fb were over-reach. It looks too tentative and more of the isolated and remote pocket, here and there, rather than a valued "national scope" mantra.
Had the BE kept it "largely east focused", using the term "east" liberally, with their expansion, would the BE be in a more troublesome situation, financial and otherwise, compared to their current situation? I think not. For mid-major bowl appeal, certain regional TV pickups', and for cultivating new and renewed rivalries, a more eastern focus could prove better for the long-run.
Outside the military service academies, seeking fb-onlies is something the BE should have considered stopped doing. Anyway one puts it, it's much a C-USA do-over.
They can do divisions anyway they want. I am basically saying, rather than having added BSU & SDSU fb; preferred adding instead, all-sports Southern Miss., ECU & UMASS.
Uhhh though, they'd need to figure out the 20-team bb stuff, but could work.