NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:01 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:45 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 12:21 pm
Posts: 1916
The nature of the future BE schools will not include small private schools such as Marshal.The nature of BE is directed toward big state schools.An exception to that is Syracuse although a private school has a large SUNY component.Additionally ,ND would always be welcome.Now with regard to Memphis,is a school located just miles above Mississippi.This is a school already turned down by the BE.Now there are the Florida schools.USF and UCF,both of which are areas of Florida which are full easterners and mid-western transplants.The nature of these schools is much more northern than deep south.However,nothing has gone wrong with thew new conference and a lot of people are predicting its death,before its birth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 3:24 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 59
Location: Auburn, AL

Quote:
The nature of the future BE schools will not include small private schools such as Marshal.


Isn't Marshall public?

I'm intrigued about the Big East becoming more Ohio Valley centered. The CUSA has shifted west, why not the BE? I agree that tigersharktwo's comment on BE's death being highly exaggerated - but this is a speculative website.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 5:45 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
If you follow the Big East Presidents and ADs, there are abosolutely no plans to split. These guys will make any future decisions.

Sure both sides agreed to a 5 year plan to remain together which is not much different than Miami agreeing to ACC membership. All it takes is exit money and lead time and any school can move anywhere anytime.

The BE currently has the best of both worlds. The minimum 8 football schools to share football revenue along with BCS membership and argubaly the best basketball conference.

If revenue issues do not get in the way and BE builds football back to previous level, the conference will have no reason to ever split.

A possibility will always exist for Notre Dame to join for football regardless if everyone thinks the school will end up in the Big 10.

As long as the current BE remains together, the conference will remain a true eastern footprint.

It would take a majority of both group of schools to approve any expansion including football only membership.

The dyamics would change if the schools decided to split because of revenue, scheduling or what ever issues a 16 members conference may have in the future.

If the football schools split from the basketball schools, the conference football majority would lie in the Ohio Valley. Without a split, the majority lies in the large eastern markets and those schools have a lot to say about the conference including any type of football expansion.

As stated many times, I dont see the Big East splitting in five years because there is no reason to do so.

The BE has the required 8 football schools and BCS membership. SOS will be helped with OOC games.

Basketball has as much potential as any other conference.

We can debate the argument on revenue would be just as good for the football schools with or without bb schools. This argument does not hold up as there is no easy way to prove this and the 16 teams will eventually demand the top basketball money of all conferences once the conference is established.

Unless football somehow slips and a non BCS conference starts making more splash, there is no benefit to a split.

The one lingering question is how to get a 9th football member for balance football scheduling. This is often discussed by the BE Presidents and ADs as a want.

The primary statement is always a 9th football school would have to increase revenue, otherwise, the conference could have just keep Temple as a football only member.

If there ever has been any urgency on one school, Temple has one season to make a big splash. Would it not be ironic for Temple to make the BCS. Really to much of a long shot.

Only one school I know can increase revenue for the Big East and its Notre Dame.

The BE will most likely be content and just wait for Notre Dame. Sort of a stale mate between the Big 10 and Big East.

Just recently a BE AD was quoted as saying the BE will probably have 8 football schools for a very long time.







Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 7:14 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 321

Quote:

A point that is ofter mistaken or overlooked is the Big East football footpritn. The Big East football footprint has already shifted from the northeast to the Ohio Valley.

I disagree with folks who say Louisiville and Cincinnati are out of the Big East foot print. Maybe for basketball this may be true, however, Big East football is a different situation with a different footprint.


^Yes, technically half of the conference will be on or near the Ohio River. I am not totally convinced that the University of Pittsburgh, when voting on any new members would vote along with Louisville, Cincinnati, or a block along the Ohio River, just because they are on or at the very beginning of the Ohio River.

Pittsburgh is a very traditional and prestigious school that has a long history. If you are getting at a Ohio Valley vs. Northeast voting block on members, Pitt may view things more the way Syracuse, UConn, and Rutgers do. If that's the case, they may be more inclined to vote more favorably for a true "Northeast Footprint" team, than a team from another part of the country. If this is the case, which I think it may very well be, West Virginia would be the deciding vote, if its just a simple majority that is needed. If its more, then the Big East members may have a tough time on agreeing on who should be new members of the conference. Its also hard to say how USF would vote, as really it doesn't matter that much for geographical purposes except for UCF, which they also may be against for intruding on their market. But then they may be for them as they would be a travel partner.

So the real Ohio Valley core of what you're describing may be only U Louisville and U Cincy, and its hard to say how WVU may vote. They are a state flagship school and a land grant U and may be favorable if another state flagship land grant join themselves as well as Rutgers and UConn.

To show you about how the Big East is percieved among the other 5 BCS Conferences, take a look at the different editions of the Athon's pre-season college football annuals.

The ACC editions:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/index.php?cPath=33_21_24&osCsid=e82e59f53e8fa311b008e137de1b099a

The Big 10 editions:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/index.php?cPath=33_21_26

The Big 12 editions:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/index.php?cPath=33_21_25

The Pac-10 editions:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/index.php?cPath=33_21_29

The Southeastern Conference editions:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/index.php?cPath=33_21_23

Now those are the only conferences with the very title of their conferences in the editions. They do two other regional editions, one called...

The "Eastern" edition, in which there is only 2 different versions. One with a UConn and BC player, and the other with a Syracuse player:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/index.php?cPath=33_21_27

Notice that the edition is not called the "Big East" edition? Maybe that's because Boston College is in its last season in the Big East.

They also have a "Western" edition, which I can't get the direct link to because it can be found on their website, but if you scroll down on this www.sportsillustrated.com page that is doing a preview of all 117 teams and is linking Athon's editions from the various team previews, you will see from this Utah preview page that there are four players on the "Western" edition cover, which include Utah and Colorado State from the MWC, and Fresno State and Boise State from the WAC.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/specials/preview/2004/conferences/mwc/utah.html

So there are editions that are for each of the BCS conferences in name, while the Big East is included in an edition called "Eastern" and not Big East and that's the same as the MWC and the WAC being in the "Western" Edition.

Now to further this, there isn't any "Conference USA" editions, and when you click on a Non-BCS team from the www.sportsillustrated.com 117 team preview page:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/specials/preview/2004/teams/index.html

Like say in the CUSA, or the Sun Belt, or the MAC, you do not get an edition from anyone of those conferences. In addition, you do not get the "Eastern" edition if you click on Louisville, Cincinnnati, or USF. For all 3 of those schools you get a "Southeastern" school edition, and the Kentucky version of the "Southeastern" school edition includes the Louisville QB on it and that is the only reference to the CUSA on a cover of this magazine:

http://www.athlonsports.com/store/product_info.php?ref=47&products_id=85&affiliate_banner_id=1

My point with all these posts and links is this. The Northeast, as pointed out by many on this board has largest individual metro market in the US in NYC, and the Big East conference region is only second to the Big 10 in total population with ~55 million people, tied with the ACC.

If the Big East go for additional members down an Ohio Valley/Mississippi Valley or south of the Ohio River anywhere route (except West Virginia) then they are becoming a "Shadow" conference geographically to the Southeast Conference. If they go north of the Ohio River, but way west of the Appallachian Mtns (except for Norte Dame, if they would like to join), they are becoming a "shadow" conference underneath the Big 10, just like the MAC (notice if you click a MAC school from that http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/specials/preview/2004/teams/index.html you get an Athon's Magazine that is a "Big 10" edition. People will not be seeing the Big East conference out in front of its geographic region unless it remains a "Northeast" footprint conference. That is the only place where it can be geographically at the top, without being a "shadow" to another conference. This may be important considering that the Mountain West has this for the intermountain west (except for Arizona, and parially in Colorado, and IS a "shadow" in California and Texas).

My question is why abandon "The Largest Market" for teams that will result in a "shadowing" of another predominant conference?

I think the Northeast Footprint is very important to embrace in all this, and is the most advantageous for the conference to consider when expanding. Why would people in New Brunswick or Storrs or even Syracuse feel about being in a conference where the majority of the rivalries would be in the Ohio Valley? How do they relate to those schools?

That's why I say a very strategic path for the conference is to look at 1-AA programs in the "Northeast" Footprint for possible expansion in the long-term of the conference for possible candidates for expansion. This is coupled with looking at all possible candidates including the Ohio Valley, the Cape Hattaras shore, the Alabama or Tennessee or whaterver river valley, the Miami River in Ohio or whereever. But I think an emphasis should be on the Northeast, because that is a large market that has a lot of potential and the only region where the Big East would not be in the shadow.


Last edited by sportsgeog on Mon Jul 26, 2004 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 7:55 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
sportsgeog, the sports publication always had an eastern editions long before the Big East was formed. This is not a reflection on the Big East or lack of respect for the Big East.

As for the Ohio Valley connection, it is probably not worth the debate on how Pitt would decide to vote simply because the Big East will not be expanding for football. Of all current Big East schools, Pitt has never been totally supportive of eastern football. Just ask Penn State. If the BE was voting on expanding, Pitt would most likley vote for Memphis over Temple or UMass. Pitt did vote for removing Temple. So an eastern football footprint is not necessarily Pitt's priority.

Again it really does not matter on eastern foot print using div 1AA schools as the BE will not be expanding for football.

As for the BE, eight is enough for football unless Notre Dame wants to join.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 8:44 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 321

Quote:
sportsgeog, the sports publication always had an eastern editions long before the Big East was formed. This is not a reflection on the Big East or lack of respect for the Big East.

As for the Ohio Valley connection, it is probably not worth the debate on how Pitt would decide to vote simply because the Big East will not be expanding for football. Of all current Big East schools, Pitt has never been totally supportive of eastern football. Just ask Penn State. If the BE was voting on expanding, Pitt would most likley vote for Memphis over Temple or UMass. Pitt did vote for removing Temple. So an eastern football footprint is not necessarily Pitt's priority.

Again it really does not matter on eastern foot print using div 1AA schools as the BE will not be expanding for football.

As for the BE, eight is enough for football unless Notre Dame wants to join.



Right, I made that point in a previous post. The conference now has enough.

But someone made this thread "On how you would improve Big East football?". I am not sure who started the thread, I didn't go back to see who did. But we all have participated in it, with our different ideas on how we would improve it you and I included, as if it needed a lot of improvement. Maybe we all should have said, "huh?" and said it doesn't need to expand at this time, if that's what you're getting at. But we all are floating our ideas out there, and must have thought it was a fair question, so we are all offering up our speculative ideas.

Yes, its hard to say how anyone would vote. We wouldn't really know how any and all the members would vote for sure, until they actually voted. But along with that, what does Pitt's position on Penn State or Temple have anything to do with future voting of future members? That is what Pitt's position was on those two very schools was in the past. What's that got to do with UMass?, U Delaware?, Fordham?, Villanova?, SUNY at Albany?, SUNY at Buffalo?, SUNY at Stony Brook?, Hofstra?, Colgate?, UCF?, Marshall? Memphis?, Temple? Army? Navy? ECU?, UAB?, USM?, Miami, OH? Ohio U? or Hawaii? (j/k)

If and when in the future, which may be long into the future that the Big East votes, the circumstances of Pitt's position on Penn State and the circumstances of Pitt's position on Temple may very well be be different and the times will be different on any other member that they would vote on. Yes, I am like you on speculating on how they vote. But I am offering that the Ohio Valley is where Pitt, Louisville, Cincy, and WVU is nearby are all located. But that in itself -- that is, geographic location or region -- is not necessarily going to be the influence on a position that any one member will take on a conference issue, opportunity, or a decision.

Yes, I recognize that could be the name of that edition. But even then they still have Big East members on it. But, my whole point to this is that it is important that the Big East maintain its identity as a Northeast Conference, as that is its identity, its traditional region, and where it can only be out in front as a conference, and that includes such things as media identification. Otherwise it is not the biggest or one of the biggest media markets. The other conferences, including the Moutain West have this geographic forefront, etiher totally, or at least in a majority of the region in which members are located in. Right now the Big East has only 4 or 5 pure geographical Northeast teams. WVU is debateable. Its closest to Pitt, so it sorda is. If it became 1/2 or less in this region, interest may slide in the Northeast, its the only part where they are out front.

This is of course a discussion about the real long term expansion possibilities of the conference. I am just saying that the Big East shouldn't just look at only 1-A teams outside their footprint, but consider those inside their present footprint, including Northeast 1-AA teams.


Last edited by sportsgeog on Mon Jul 26, 2004 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 2:03 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
sportsgeog, you and I are in alignment are basically stating the same things.

I agree the northeast footprint is very important for the Big East and this is where the Big East basketball schools come into play. The basketball schools are not just part of the Big East for basketball and provide a greater benefit to the new Big East.

We all know how much money football generates and the importance of keeping BE football strong, however, football is actually just one of many sports played in the conference.

College sports conference are much more than just sports these days and provide an identify for the teams that are members of those conferences.

We often associate expansion with the need to reach 12 teams and a stage a football championship game, however, not every conference needs or wants this type of format. The Pac 10, Big East, MWC, Big 10 do not necessarily have the same desire to copy the ACC, SEC, and Big 12.

Another point that gets lost on BE expansion opinions is the east is very different than most parts of the country. St Johns, Georgetown are the primary teams in those large TV markets or cities/regions and do not want to support major college football. There is no other teams that can replace these teams for all sports. Likewise, there is no primary state university that can exist in a small college town and claim the markets similiar to how the Big 10 states are structured. Penn State may take the Philly market for football, however, basketball becomes a total different situation. Villanova has the biggest claim on the Philly basketball market.

So basicallly the BE has the required football members and at the same time keeps the northeast footprint as an all sports conference.

Some have issues with schools playing all sports except football. As for the BE is concerned, this is not an issue as the schools want this type of alignment. These schools are happy with this situation. The opposite was true for football only schools as Va Tech and Temple were not happy by having sports other than football in another conference.

The only issue that probably will create some friction is how to align the 16 members for basketball.

sportsgeog, any thoughts on how the BE should align for BB?





Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 3:24 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:22 am
Posts: 1030
Lash said "Pitt did vote for removing Temple"

- Not exactly true, Pitt abstained when voting occurred to kick out Temple - everyone else voted yes.

Lash said "Pitt has never been totally supportive of eastern football. Just ask Penn State"

- Not sure what you mean by this. The possibility of "NE FB" was squashed when when PSU was NOT voted into the BE in 1982(?). The BE then turned around and voted in Pitt.

My memory is a bit foggy on this one but I think that before Pitt was voted into the BE JoePa (AD of PSU at the time) tried to get the Eastern FB independents to form a league which didn't happen. BB was a BIG REVENUE source back then and the BE didn't see how PSU would really benefit them. Not only did JoePa have to convince Pitt, but he aslo would have had to convince SU and BC. Why isn't there any blame on them?

Even if the BE formed, who is to say when the Big10 came calling that PSU wouldn't bolt for them?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 4:33 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
PatherSC97, the last thing I want to do is become a spokes person for Pitt. So, thanks for clearing up any misinterpretations of what Pitt has done in the past for eastern football.

My own opinion is what is the difference between voting out Temple and obstanining from the vote. Not quite the same as Virginia's support of Va Tech to the ACC.

The common belief is the BE offered Pitt membership to stop the all sports movement by Penn State and Pitt accepted. The rest is history on Eastern All Sports League.

Pitt could have said no and Syracuse and BC would have followed Penn State, WVU, Rutgers, Army and Navy into joining an all sport league.

If you want any proof, just look at how Syracuse and BC were more than ready to follow Miami into the ACC.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:03 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
PatherSC97, please see previous post and a couple more comments.

I know Pitt and Penn State are old rivals and hate each other, however, Penn State has showed a lot of class after joining the Big 10.

I really do not think Penn State would have considered moving to either the Big 10 or ACC had the Eastern All Sports League formed.

JoePa, always had good things to say about the remaining eastern football teams and wished them well. During the recent ACC raids, he had positive things to say and recommendations on how the Big East football schools could survive and some teams that would be good expansion candidates.

Penn State has deomonstrated far more class than Boston College who have some fans that would like to see the Big East die. I am sure part of the problem is Boston College having cold feet as the school is moving to a southern based conference. At least Penn State borders other Big 10 states.





Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 6:38 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 321

Quote:
sportsgeog, you and I are in alignment are basically stating the same things.

sportsgeog, any thoughts on how the BE should align for BB?


Sure, we both agree that the Big East should stay at 8, as it stands right now. I concede on that we agree on that. But this thread asks the question on "How we would improve the Big East?" And everybody that has responded to this thread is throwing their ideas, including which teams should join.

It seems that what you want to concede or are concluding is the Northeast Footprint is just the three or four teams or five teams, and its sounding like that you only think there are only 3 in the Big East that are "Northeast", and the possibilities of having a primary Northeast Conference is out the window. My point is, when people are throwing these possibilities of candidates for Big East expansion is not to just look at potential members outside of the northeast, because they are the only viable candidates based on what is NOW, or for that matter some bad blood that happened in the past. What I am saying is not to be fixated on the NOW. The only thing that I think is a priority now is for the Big East members to settle in, build upon their new relationships, and build towards prosperity.

But if later, they feel the need to expand, then the Northeast Footprint -- ie "The Largest Market", should have a top priority in trying to further build an expand the conference. I don't think it would be a good thing for the Big East to drift westward, southward, or North-by-Northwestward, or South-by-Southeastward like a migrating nomadic amoeba, like some conferences have become. They say something like, well, they're our "Miami-like outpost". That's fine to have one of those, but if you don't watch it, you could have a whole conference of "Miami-like outposts" and they are outposts that are tucked under and away as a shadow to another prevailing regional conference and your conference no longer has as much exposure.

The Big East has time, lots of it to build upon these new relationships. But if they think they would even like to expand in the long term, I think looking at the teams in the Northeast Footprint, including both 1-A and 1-AA schools, and if they are 1-AA teams what kind of long-term plan should we have to move them up? UConn is a fine example of it working. They try to do it with 3 other Big East teams and they showed no interest. That doesn't mean those teams may not reconsider given different circumstances at a later date. The Big East shouldn't abandon that model just because those 3 said "no".

Also don't stop at those schools, also look at other schools in the NE. I made the comment about how there may not be the same model in the NE like in the Midwest, South and West, because there is a lot of schools in the NE. But UConn shows that it can work, given the right circumstances. But not only that, 1-AA move-ups the likes of USF, Boise State, and Marshall also have demonstrated success. So I am just saying don't count out the NE footprint for the Big East yet.

Yes, its best for the Big East to stay at 8 right now and indefinitely. To try the 8 team FB and 16-team all other sports federation work. Do that for sure. But if it does split, then keep the NE footprint a priority in that split for resulting conferences from that split.

As far as the BBall arangement of teams in divisions. If you want to make it work, and keep it together with no split, then simply mix up the teams throughout the two divisions. Do they have to be together just because they are together in Football? Does that really matter. They can different rivals in BBall than FBall. Many conferences don't have the same rivals in both sports.


Last edited by sportsgeog on Tue Jul 27, 2004 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 7:48 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
sportsgeog, in some ways I totally understand the BCS conferences because there are so many 1A wannbes that think they can compete at the highest level.

The problem with 1A football is over saturation of teams. Just because you build a 30 thousand stadium and get 10 to 15 thousand fans do not make you a major player for a major conference like the Big East.

Rather than moving teams up to 1A, there should be a movement back to 1AA for many teams. So we are in disagreement on teams moving up to join the BE. Temple, Buffalo are good examples of the failure in trying to compete at the highest levels of college football.

Now everyone outside of the BCS is going to blame the BCS for this unbalanced when in fact its lack of support and committment from many of those teams and their fans.

The only non BCS school outside of the new BE that has shown they actually deserve to be in a major conference as an eastern team is Marshall.

Delaware has never made a committment to any major sport. It is much easier to compete and win in 1AA and the basketball program has never done much as well as other varsity sports. The committment is just not there.

UMass has shown some signs of progress with building a new arena a few years back, however, even basketball has fallen off recently.

BC is the Mass 1A football school always has and always will.

If the BE football schools were to ever split, the only good option would be to go to nine members due to lack of qualified teams. Teams trying to move up just dont qualify as quality teams for major BCS conferences.

There are two future possiblities that I see happening for the BE that would be an improvement for football.

Option 1: Notre Dame joins the BE or moves on and the BE has an opening for a ninth member. In this scenerio, Northern Illinois may be a good pick if the 16 members remained together.

Option 2: The 8 football schools split and select a 9th football members.

Order of preferences: 1 Central Florida 2 Memphis 3 Marshall 4 East Carolina

Option 3: there are no other options for a major BCS conference such as the Big East and current division 1AA teams are in this divsion for a reason and should remain in that division as well as moving a lot of other teams back to div 1aa

As for football, the northeast footprint was lost with the failure of Penn State bid to create an all sports conference.

This is not the end of the world and having two Florida schools could create a travel balance with the 7 eastern schools. Just a different king of footprint. One that has warm weather bowl opportunities.







Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 10:49 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 321
We then disagree somewhat on this issue. I do agree somewhat with you in that there are too many teams. But the difference for me is not team by team, rather than conference by conference. If there is a predominant majority in a conference that are not meeting the requirements, then the whole conference really doesn't belong in 1-A.

But if you have a conference where there is a majority of teams that are overwhelming meeting the requirements, then I think it is very important to build and maintain that conference with its primary presence in its verymost outfront geographic footprint. If there are not enough teams that represent that most outfront footprint that are available as D-1A teams, then the best strategy to do that is to try to encourage a team or two to move up and then if they can demonstrate that they can meet the requirements of D-1A, then they would be allowed to join the conference (ala UConn to the Big East, and USF originally to the CUSA).

If you do not think the Northeast Footprint is not important or is gone, consider this. If a majority of the teams are not in the Northeast Footprint, then when it comes to having TV contracts, such as ABC/ESPN Game Plan, then the Big East will not have a weekly-covered ABC game of the week, like the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, and Pac 10 do. The Big East already overlaps too much within the Big 10, and ACC for it to be clear enough to estblish a group of ABC stations to cover the game and for it to be seen by every team's fanbase in the conference on their local ABC stattions, because the local ABC station has the Big 10 game, or has the ACC Game. If not ABC/ESPN then lets say that CBS would like to get another conference in addition to the SEC, and then have regional coverage like ABC. Well the Big East would not be a candidate as its region conflicts with the SEC. If not CBS, then NBC, but that would conflict with Norte Dame. Maybe if Fox can do College Football and feature Big East games on its network (not Fox Sports Net, but its affiliates).

If it can't get the regional coverage on any of the 4 networks, then it becomes a Cable Network conference. But with so many Big 10, SEC, and ACC games on ESPN, and Fox and TBS loaded up on Big 12 and Pac 10, room for the Big East gets smaller, unless they play on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday nights. It really does make the Big East a secondary conference for the media and TV coverage of their games, ala like Conference USA which is a secondary conference, or like the MAC, or like the Sun Belt, and somwhat the WAC. That sounds disparaging, but the Big East really needs to grasp its "largest market" of the Northeast to be out in the open and be a primary conference for a geographic region.

All I am saying is, that don't necessarily pay attention to now. Circumstances may change.

The most important thing to do is just stay at 8 and work to make the Big East confederation prosperous as it is designed to be. But if the split does happen, actually I think staying at 8 might be a better option than expanding at all, especially if the choices are all outside the northeast footprint. But I think if they are going to expand to get to 9 or 10 for scheduling purposes and to then I think looking at teams within the Northeast Footprint is the most important. Preferences are the following:

1) U Mass (Market and has had success in both sports, would need a bigger stadium and the ability to get a bigger crowd, but UConn's situation was similar, and UMass has been very good in 1-AA. Bottom line is that they return Massachussett to the Big East footprint, which is the 13th largest state and the immediate Springfield-Northhampton area is nearly 700,000 people within a 25 miles radius and would be a great potential rival to UConn -- UMass vs. UConn)

2) U Delaware (their attendance is really that much different than Memphis, UCF, Marshall, Cincy, and even USF. Basketball isn't as good, but hey, USF doesn't have an incredible basketball team, neither does UCF, and neither does Va Tech in the ACC -- also Philly is 50 miles away and is technically in the Philly metro area, and the Blue Hens get statewide support in Delaware, and really are in a better advantage with Philly and their state support when compared to Wyoming, its sorda nearness to Denver, and where they are at in the Mountain West)

3) Temple. Their attendance isn't below the 15,000 mark, they have a great basketball team, and they keep the Philly market, unless Delaware was secured as a member.

4) Marshall. Not a great market choice, but certainly within the footprint and would be a natural rival with WVU, great support. The other weakness is that it isn't the kind of academic school that WVU, or U Mass, or U Delaware, or Temple, or for that matter then other 7 members of the Big East.

Outside of these choices, if you were to go more into the "Ohio Valley" as you say, my two choices are:

1) Miami, OH -- Yes bring Miami back to the Big East, a new Miami that is. Good support, its BBall isn't bad, football is really good, esp. last year, would be Cincy's really long and traditional rival, this is a school with a long history and its a very good academic choice.

2) Ohio U -- Very similar characteristic to Miami, is actually older than Miami U. Football and attendance is not as good as Miami's. But both of these school along with Cincy would have the best shot at giving the Big East the most exposure statewide in Ohio, as no matter what they do, they will always be secondary to OSU and the Big 10. Miami and Ohio along U Cincy gives the best opportunity to secure and raise more interest and following of the Big East in its 4th largest state of its footprint and this "Near Northeast" Midwest state.

So, yes we disagree on this. We do agree that really the 8 as they stand now, that's its best to stay with that number and make the 16-team conferderation work. But if a different course happens such as a split, then we do disagree as I think the Northeast Footprint is very important when it comes to expansion choices.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 1:46 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 12:21 pm
Posts: 1916
Those who lead the BE were smart enough last year not to get involved with schools who would not be of significant value to the BE.They wanted to keep the best starting with the lose of Miami,whether it was votech or bc.They went with those who were the best choices in terms of committment and location and market (Louisville,Cinncinnat,USF and Connecticut)>the additions in bb of Marquette and DePaul were done for compromise and the keeping together of the BE structure.The four northern schools of CUSA plus late coming USF were by far the best available.1AA schools without massive committment ,truly southern schools in small towns or in deep south areas(besides in the large state of Florida were easily removed.The desires of ND also have been taken into the construction of the NBE.UCONN is not the same as UMASS in terms of committement to athletics nor in its ability to put up championship teams.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:36 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2660
Location: Phoenix Arizona
tigersharktwo, agreed!

sportsgeog, I am in a 12 team conference NY state of mind today, so lets play.

If the northeast footprint could be maintained, then I am in favor of having Fordham move up and play in the new Jets stadium.

Fordham would provide a natural rival for Syracuse and all of its alum living in NYC. Listed would be end of season rival games and alignment

BE North:
Syracuse - Fordham
UConn - UMass
Rutgers - Temple

BE South:
Pitt - WVU
Cincinnati - Louisville
South Florida - Central Florida

To some extent this alignment maintains the northeast footprint. Would allow Syracuse to always play long time rivalsPitt and WVU each year and keep in seperate divisions for northeast footprint.

Basketball would be well balanced with current powers Syracuse/UConn in one division and Pitt/Cincinnati in the other.

Travel partners would be aligned similiar to the Pac 10. Teams could swing into Tampa and bus to Orlando or travel into Pittsburgh and bus to Morgantown.
Same situation for Lousiville/Cincinnati or UConn/UMass.

Football championship game would play in NYC Jets stadium with a northern team as host. Should provide great attendance and renewed interest in college football for the northeast.

This scenerio could work if the cards fall into place. Lots of shuffling would have to occur first.

It is a fun thought for the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 140 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group