NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 7:58 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:44 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
Lash, are you saying South Florida is important for recruiting or TV sets (or both)?

If recruiting, could they get that same impact with ooc games against USF, UCF, FIU, FAU?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:47 pm 
Bullet, I don't know exactly how are counting TV sets; though South Carolina is a comparatively smaller state, its population is quiet dense, and it is growing. South Carolina and Clemson both have 80,000 plus seat stadiums; nothing like that at any of the NC schools. Of those that are very close by, only UGA and Tennessee (near bordering state) match/exceed.
The SEC is not going to give up ITS footprint in the Carolinas with Univ. of So Car., particularly since the ACC expanded with Miami, Va Tech, and already having GT and FSU. The Charlotte (near border SC), Greenville/Spartanburg, Columbia, and Charleston (even Augusta & Savannah, GA) markets have a lot of TV sets, and plenty of fans that both the ACC and the SEC partake of.
If South Carolina (a charter ACC member), had not gone into the SEC, expectations are that they would have been in the Big East. South Carolina and the ACC did not have a happy divorce three decades ago.

As to the general topic, I tend to think the merit of must having a school in Florida is getting overrated. Sure it is important to the SEC and the ACC, and I suppose the Big East, due to fewer good options last year. C-USA and the SunBelt got picks there too. However, the Big 10, Big 12, and PAC 10 will survive just fine without a "Florida" team. It is not the only state that produces a bumper crop of fb players.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:28 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
DogsNCo@cks, I agree that one Florida school is enough for the Big East. Also agree that other states have good requits as well. With all the recent hurricanes, Florida could lose population in the future as well.

The primary reason the Big East expanded with South Florida was due to having the previous influence of Miami as a member and to help with requiting the Florida area for future Big East teams. From a TV perspective, Florida is already familiar with the Big East brand name and adding a replacement for Miami made sense.

Keep in mind that South Florida got the invite only after BC decided to go to the ACC.

Bullet, I really like the potential of Florida Atlantic with the current coach and location, however, like DogsNCo@cks stated one Florida team is more than enough for the Big East.

We all post a lot of BE expansion ideas which are only for our amusement.

The likehood of Big East expanding would only come if Notre Dame decided to move and that probably is not going to happen. With Notre Dame sudden resurgence in football, the odds for BE expanding in football is not very high for the future. Possibly Army and Navy could come on board someday, behond those two schools, no one brings enough value to expand the conference for all sports.





Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 12:50 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
As I said, I don't think the SC/USF/BC switch is anything even remotely likely to happen. But the SEC could replace South Carolina with just about anyone with little or no impact on their TV contract. There aren't that many people in South Carolina and the school doesn't have much of a football tradition even though they have great fan support.

I think the recruiting edge for having just any FL team in your conference is over-rated. However, it does help to play schools from Florida so that you get noticed. But coaching connections are the most important thing. Purdue does well in Texas because their coach has connections. I don't remember the last time Purdue played a Texas team.

There was an interesting stat a few years back that there was only ONE I-A school that did not have at least one player from either Texas, Florida or California. That school was Toledo (11-0-1 that year) who recruited Canada heavily. Florida is important to the eastern schools. Adding a team to your conference is just not necessarily that important for recruiting.

I don't know that USF will add many TV sets, even though there are a lot in Florida. I would not have added them.

However, I believe the BE was taking a gamble that USF would take off and become a power. And adding a Florida team so all those Northeasterners who moved down there could see their team play without having to fly 1000 miles.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 2:03 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
South Florida is already proving its value with the battle of the expansion teams between the Big East and MWC.

Since MWC fans think they are close or equal to the Big East in strength and far ahead of the rest of the non BCS conferences, South Florida win at TCU was a very important statement win for the new Big East.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 9:31 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
<<Since MWC fans think they are close or equal to the Big East in strength and far ahead of the rest of the non BCS conferences>>

If you read the MWC boards, they mostly seem to think they are comfortably ahead of the BE in strength and pushing the Pac 10.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 9:33 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
Don't interpret my last comment as saying I agree with them!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 9:01 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, I live out west and the MWC fans are delusional as one way to describe the conference.

No way the WMC is head of the new Big East and Pac 10 is far advanced.

The MWC is at best the number 7 conference for football 1A and could someday get into the BCS club.

MWC needs to win a major bowl in the BCS before claiming superiority over any of the current 6 BCS conferences.

I am "you must win on the field type guy" as statistics can be slanted to your favor. In my statistics, the new BE is superior to the MWC or any other non BCS conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 9:54 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
On the field this year, the 7 member BE, so far, appears to belong with the Big 5 and not with the rest. The MWC hasn't done as well ooc as CUSA and WAC, although they may have played a little tougher schedule.

Next year's membership will be weaker in the BE and similar in MWC. Over the last few years, the NBE and NMWC have been fairly comparable in overall strength with the NBE a little stronger in the middle and NMWC a little stronger at the bottom.

I think part of the MWC delusion is how well the 8 schools did in the 3 years of the WAC 16. BYU was strong and are way down now. Utah was having their strongest period and just this year they have gotten back to that level. UNLV and SDSU were doing well and have since slipped. Wyoming was solid, but is awful now. New Mexico was having the best period in their history and slipped back to normal afterwards (although they look good this year). CSU was having the best period in their history and, unlike the rest, has managed to maintain. Air Force has been fairly steady before, during and after the WAC 16. As for the remainder, TCU was not very good and took off afterwards. Tulsa was bad and just had their 1st winning season in many years last year. Fresno and Hawaii were at their worst in many years and have since recovered. UTEP was typically weak, but has gotten better since. San Jose declined from good years in the 80s and early 90s and just now is getting competitive again. SMU was down and has stayed down. Rice, like Air Force, has been fairly steady since the early 90s, usually competitive and sometimes challenging for the title. So the MWC 8 thought they were far superior to the 8 they left behind, but much of it was due to 3 year aberrations. They were better in fb, but the gap was a lot smaller than they seem to believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:33 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, you are falling back into that slant the statistics your way to describe the new BE next year.

The MWC is a one trick pony this year with Utah for BCS and dont see any other school stepping up next year. The new BE on the other hand, has two top 25 team returning with WVU and Louisville. Less not forget that Rutgers regardless of the bump with 1AA is improving and UConn can compete right now with any of the MWC teams except Utah.

What happens if Louisville and a BE team get to the BCS this year. Not out of the question. The polls are going to sky rocket Louisville if they beat Miami primary because Louisville is already a BCS member.

South Florida already beat next year member TCU, so slanting statistics is easy next year to state the new BE will be much ahead of the MWC.

While some think its not fair, the BE will partipate in the BCS for the next four years.

Baring any upset by BC, the BE will have four tries to prove BCS worthiness.

Like or not, the post season is what we all remember (especially BCS games) and not if Utah won a mid season game against a BCS member. Just ask WVU fans how difficult it was to lose the Gator to Maryland last year. No body talks much about the close to win over Miami in the Orange bowl, and everyone talks about the huge loss to Maryland in the Gator.

So, If the BE wins a BCS bowl in the next couple of years and the MWC is left out, the national perception will continue to have the new BE far ahead of the MWC.

National perception is everything and helps with TV, requiting, etc.

MWC needs to win a major bowl game to get out of the shadow of the Pac 10 and Big 12.

If a WAC team makes the BCS this year and wins a BCS game, the WAC should go hard after some MWC teams.

Unlike the new BE that is BCS material in the other major revenue producing sports of mens and womens basketball, the MWC is mid major or what every you want to call the term.

As stated before, the MWC needs to be much more concerned with the other non BCS conferences reaching a BCS bowl and much less concerned about if the new BE maintains the BCS bid.






Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 4:00 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
I believe the two are close. History over the last 5 years shows that. This year so far is definitely favoring the BE. There's no slanting stats there. UL, UC and USF are not historically as strong as BC, SU, WVU and Pitt, so the NBE will be weaker in the short term.

<<The MWC is a one trick pony this year with Utah for BCS and dont see any other school stepping up next year. The new BE on the other hand, has two top 25 team returning with WVU and Louisville. Less not forget that Rutgers regardless of the bump with 1AA is improving and UConn can compete right now with any of the MWC teams except Utah. >>

Let's see, Pitt was a top 25 team much of the last 2 years. They had to come from behind to beat Furman at home by 3 in OT. In any event, UL will drop out of sight after Miami beats them by 30 or 40 or 50. UK, Army, Tulane, UNC and ECU (this week) are hardly powerhouses this year. I suspect UL will lose 1 to 3 games after Miami. Having 2 top 25 teams in one year doesn't prove anything. See Pitt-they lost a lot of talent. Having teams consistently there does prove something.

<<So, If the BE wins a BCS bowl in the next couple of years and the MWC is left out, the national perception will continue to have the new BE far ahead of the MWC.>>

I fully agree with you there. An example of that is how highly some people talked about the MAC because of a few wins, ignoring the awful bottom half of the conference. The NBE does have 4 shots. I suspect the MWC is less likely to get a BCS team than the WAC, CUSA or MAC and they will not get an automatic bid in that 4 year time span. And a 30 point loss in a BCS game is still going to be better than not being there at all.

<<Unlike the new BE that is BCS material in the other major revenue producing sports of mens and womens basketball, the MWC is mid major or what every you want to call the term.>>

BE is clearly top tier in basketball which is a distinct advantage. I believe that is part of the reason for the improvement in the CUSA football programs since 96. MWC has not been #7 or #8 and often not top 10 in bb. However, their fan support and history is very good. They have been down since 98. If they invest in bb, they should be #7 or #8 most years. UNLV, Utah, BYU, UNM and Wyoming all have excellent programs. CSU is solid.




Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 6:40 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, you are failing to see my point. Let me see if I cant make it more clear with posing a question to you rather than a comment.

Do you think it makes any difference if the MWC is actually better than any of the 6 BCS conferences?

You are really going out on a limb when comparing the MWC to the 6 BCS conferences for all sports. In all sports the BE is probably in the top 2 or 3 of the BCS conferences.

In all sports the MWC is not as good as the Atlantic 10 probably the new Conf USA as well since Conf USA will excel in baseball. The MVC is better than the MWC in basketball and the PCC has performed better than the MWC. Less not forget the Mid American has out performed the MWC as well for basketball.

This is a legitimate question, which sports does the MWC excel in and please dont tell me football?





Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 7:00 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, couple more points.

Your are assumming the BE champ will be blew out in a BCS game? fair enough since WVU is projected to win this year and your basing all the future BE BCS games on that. Understandable for this year as WVU does not have a good tract record in bowl games.

More importantly, what happens if Utah has to play Louisville or Southern Miss in the liberty bowl and loses, what happens to the MWC changes of getting any respect in the polls for the following year.

What happens if the winner of the Boise State/Fresno State go undefeated. Which team would the BCS take and how would polls favor both teams over a MWC champion.

I would like to see the MWC champion play Georgia, Tennessee, or Auburn in the Sugar bowl. Better yet, play Miami or Florida State in the Fiesta bowl to bring more fair regional game for the MWC.

This would finally put the issue to rest as Utah would finally has some competation to compare to. Same goes for Boise State and Fresno State.

Less see what those teams perform when they play the real boys of big time college football.

A win in one of those games and we can finally give the MWC some respect.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 9:33 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
<<Do you think it makes any difference if the MWC is actually better than any of the 6 BCS conferences?>>

In the short run, no. Eventually, yes. The Tulane president made sure of that.


<<You are really going out on a limb when comparing the MWC to the 6 BCS conferences for all sports. In all sports the BE is probably in the top 2 or 3 of the BCS conferences. >>

I don't know where this is coming from. I was talking about bb and fb only. Current WAC and current CUSA are well ahead of MWC in all sports. Historically in bb, MWC schools have been good (UNLV, UNM, Utah, BYU have better support and history than most BCS schools). MWC has not been particularly good as those schools have not been up to their usual standards since 98.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 12:13 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, your name is fitting as you dodge a bullet in our debate again.

Rather than compare the MWC to the new BE which has its own issues to overcome in the next four years, we need to compare the MWC to other 5 BCS conferences.

If the BE fails to keep its BCS bid, the MWC is not going to get the bid. They will have to earn access just like the WAC or Conf USA or MAC.

Lets compare MWC readiness to compete with the ACC, SEC, Big 12, Big 10, and Pac 10 because this is precisely what the MWC will need to do to gain a BCS birth.

Those five conference at large members are the teams that Utah, Boise State, etc are actually competing with to get access to the BCS and not the Big East. And to your point, this is what Cohen agreed on.

So please answer my question, how, does the MWC compare to your so called "Big 5" BCS conferences.





Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jbb 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