Friarfan, great to see you back on this board. I have to disagree with some of your comments.
First of all, sorry but "I don't think College Presidents have a clue on how major college sports should be conducted". You have too many special interest groups or clicks within the fraternity of the College Presidents leading to many special interest groups. The Big Ten and the Pac 10 is fine example; both get all the benefits of Rose Bowl special deals and yet do want to break tradition by having a true and fair college football playoff system. When you get to the bottom line it is special interest and greed over what is right and fair. Both of these confernece get to have their cake and eat too and everyone just assumes this is right because the Big Ten and Pac 10 Presidents say it so. The fans are stuck with the voting system that selects the top two teams that get to play in the football championship game primary due to the decisions of a few of the college presidents.
I don't agree with lot of ideas our US President comes out with, you know college presidents are going to have a lot less influence on my views.
The fans are the ones that actually pay the bills of college sports and not the Presidents or something the presidents are creating.
Another of your comment is as an example of the deer stuck in the headlights. Why do anything because you dont have any history or can not make things better. "It is what is is kind of mentality".
If the Big East Presidents have not learned their lesson by now they never will.
Forget history and think about the future. This is why we are getting a lot or additional interest in the US Presidential race this time around.
It sort of mirrors the Big East football schools with direction and change as the highlight of the race this year.
Like or not, the BCS is how major conferences are measured in today's world. The five other BCS conferences just have more history over the Big East. History does not necessarily bring success over a BCS conference with less history.
When you have a three year winning steak in BCS and 3 and 0 record over the last couple years which is best of the six BCS conferences, I don't think history should be a big concern of the football schools. If the Big East Presidents are concerned about this, then it just goes to show what they understand about college sports.
I would like to beleive the Big East President have learned from the past and are planning for options that may lead to a better long term future.
This could mean keeping the status quo if the money holds up fot basketball or it could mean a split.
Regardless history or lack of size of schools should not have any thing to do with the bottom line when it comes to defining a BCS conference.
The Big East has very little history and does contain football schools are of different size. This is bascially no differenct than Wake Forest, Duke, and BC in the ACC.
BC and Va Tech followed Miami into the ACC where there was little or no history for either schools in the ACC. Va Tech was prevented ACC membership for years in the ACC.
The final point of this post is the Big East football schools are BCS and that is the only thing that matters in major college sports today.
Hi, Lash, I hope that things are well in your neck of the woods.
Maybe I'm just getting cynical or pessimistic in my old age, but I think that prospects for the Big East are overrated. There are limitations that they have to fight due to the lack of tradition at many of the schools & limited markets at some.
My comment about the presidents was spurred mainly by criticism that I hear here in Connecticut about the announcement this week of UConn's contract with Notre Dame. Naturally the local populace wanted home & home - or at least something in there for a game in Connecticut. I think that if the school's administration could have gotten it, they would have. People then accuse UConn of bending over to be ND's butt boy.
This is what I mean about fans being unrealistic & dismissive of the presidents (administration, AD, etc.). No one would like home & home more than they would. But would a realistic person ever trade a game with Notre Dame for a game with Temple or Buffalo of some other lower level school? Because that's what it would mean. Although UConn's home games are not being played in the home state, neither the Jersey Meadowlands or Foxboro, MA are very far & many CT Yankees make that drive all the time to attend Pats', Giants', or Jets' games. UConn will have the same control of the tickets as any home team would. It's a huge boost in ticket sales because of the greater capacity of these stadiums over the 40,000 in East Hartford. So, what's the problem?
Add to this the fact that when teams do settle for lesser games to fill out the schedule, they are contracting with teams who are only doing it for the money. If they get a better deal, they bail at the last minute for the buy-out fee. UCF & Buffalo are among the many who have done this in recent years. UConn can trust that Notre Dame will not bail on them. However, they could not trust that a lesser school would because they are not able to pay as much money for these games as bigger schools will.
The president, AD, etc. know all this. The fans either don't or don't bother to think about it. They only think about their wounded pride. They dont't stop to think that 10 years of Notre Dame on their schedule guaranteed is a huge boost for this program - especially in this part of the country. Now they just have to go out & win the games.
I think that you make agood points about the need for this conference to take bold action with an eye to the future. Too much looking in the rear view mirror doesn't tell you where you are going - only where you have been. I've long been an advocate of the Big East making a spot for UMass & guaranteeing that spot if UMass makes the upgrade - the same way they did for UConn. The Big East badly needs members with a commanding state-wide presence. UMass has that potential & is one of the few such programs that are still available - especially in a relatively large state. They have made reasonable progress with their program although they still need to do much more. I think that a conditional guarantee from the Big East would give them the boost to get them over the top in terms of their ability to make the additional progress required.
The addition of UMass is really all that this conference needs after the inevitable & highly desirable split. A 9-member conference is the right size for a conference & there is no reason to expand beyond that unless the benefits to the conference are overwhelmingly positive. Theonly program on the horizon that has anything remotely close to that right now is Memphis & that would only be for their basketball program. If a Break Away Big East Football feels that it needs to stengthen football, then Memphis would be the way to go. Otherwise there is no one else out there who can help them in the foreseeable future.
Again, all the best for you & yours. I'm having fun following the primaries - almost like another sports season. I was able to get up to New Hampshire to see candidates from both parties & to rub elbows with people on the street & to guage how they were enjoying the experience. I met a number of candidates. I was even interviewed by Ebony magazine at an Obama event. My biggest disappointment was not being able to get to see the unveiling of the "Huckaburger" at one of the local restaurants. My biggest surprise was to see a group of Hassidic Jews up from New York holding an anti-Zionist rally to demonstrate for humane treatment of the Palestinians & against the state of Israel. You read that correctly - anti-Zionist Jews against Israel! It's amazing to see all of the groups that come out to be heard in a primary like that. Obama played to enormous overflow crowds, but then lost the primary. Go figure. He did the dame here a couple of weeks later. filled the Hartford Civic Center with 17,000 & they were turning people away. He won Connecticut. Anyway you look at it, this is an historic election with interesting & surprising races in both parties and likable candidates on both sides of the aisle.