What is apparent with the BE is that things are "locked in" till 2010. It is doubtful any additions and departures will occur in the meantime.
Suppose the B10 decided to add #12, and looked at a current BE team other than ND? A 5 million fee and 27 month notice? Whether that was imposed as a preventive attempt at the time to avoid a BC departure or something similar, it is formidable. The 27 month thing also sounded futuristic, and certainly the 2010 date was in mind at the time.
With the coincidence, or perhaps not, of the Notre Dame TV contract expiring around that time, the five years into the future appears to be a key point for some structural changes. Also, in a five year period, the BCS will be tweaked some more, in whatever direction.
In the meantime, there will be schools, within conference, and externally, positioning or posturing themselves for the next opportunity. Certainly, time will have been given to see how the 8 fb and 16 bb league performs and a record to be shown for arguments either way.
There are too many tangibles to predict exactly what will happen. Some may argue the status quo will prevail, but a split between the bb schools and others may just be a safe bet. Certainly the public face of Tranghese and the BE will be to emphasize the cohesion and downplay any potential split a few years from now.

Dognthings, there is a report on one of these threads 'Gator bowl thread?" expressed from Pac 10 commissioner on lack of interest of expansion from both Pac 10 and Big 10. The Pac 10 is a close ally of the Big 10 and have read many articles out west on this same prediction. I really do not see the Big 10 taking a current Big East school to reach 12.

Frairfan, has a very interesting thread on Big East and the Gavitt plan that may just have the answer to what the Big East plans are for the future.

I am now predicting the Big East will simply implement the full Gavitt plan and avoid a breakup and allow a split at the same time.

You would basically have two seperate conferences that via for the same conference title and NCAA bid and at the same time provide more flexablility for one group to react to necessary changes with losing the brand name. Cross over games could continue for TV and established rivals and the Big East football schools could take care of any necessary football needs at the same time.

Dogsnthings, One more point on Gavitt plan. With two seperate conferences under the same umbrella including cross over games would allow the Big East football schools to take a 9th all sports member when the time is necessary. The basketball schools could take a basketball only school as well to balance out schedules. The Big East may have to consider playing 18 conference games would be the only hard sell to provide two cross over games per Gavitt proposal.

Dogsnthings, One more point on Gavitt plan. With two seperate conferences under the same umbrella including cross over games would allow the Big East football schools to take a 9th all sports member when the time is necessary. The basketball schools could take a basketball only school as well to balance out schedules. The Big East may have to consider playing 18 conference games would be the only hard sell to provide two cross over games per Gavitt proposal.

Sorry guys my thinking is fragmented today as its been a busy week. Three post in a row?

Since the Pac 10 commish thinks there is value is preserving eastern football, the Big East could take UMass and Holy Cross. Holy Cross was orgininally picked over Boston College in the first place. This would bring back to the Big East the Massachussets markets including the fragmented Boston market as well.

If the Cavitt plan works for 8 by 8 it would most assuredly work for 9 by 9 if implemented in full form.

The only point to be made is that ND does want be in a league with basically what are 1AAA schools for its other than football sports.I agree that it is difficult to predict what will happen 2010.An 8/8 split is highly unlikely as a ND move to the B10.Whether 12 league or 16 league has yet to be dtermined,although MT and crew would like to minimize a split happening.

Lash, et. al.,
Agree, there could be a Gavitt version or umbrella arrangement down the road.
Theoretically, the BE could have two divisions in fb if there were a modified set of schools (not advocating for that). Georgetown and Villanova play 1-AA, but suppose there were six more including schools such as Delaware and UMass. Of course that would involve the exiting of schools that do not offer intercollegiate fb of any kind. Temple could even return to the BE as a 1-AA competitor for example. I know, this sounds extreme, but if the conference exchanged DePaul, Marquette, Seton Hall, St. Johns, and Providence with five others that are solid bb but also have 1-AA football (some from the A10 conference for example), the BE could sponsor two fb divisions, one 1-A and one 1-AA. If 1-AA gets revamped by the NCAA, the same concept could prevail.

Before anyone who is a fan of one of the bb only schools reacts, I am speaking totally hypothetically, and frankly it is less bizarre than some things I have heard. The design would maintain a bb forefront, but require five different schools while maintaining a ND factor.

With sponsoring two divisions in fb, the BE could schedule a limited number of cross-over games. OK, after making this post I may end up with another thought. Again, totally speculative and hypothetical.

With the potential of the NCAA doing away with the 1-A label and the potential for the Need for the 1-A FB schools to play 1-AA school each year, they could rotate the 1-AA faction onto the schedule or make schedule alliances.

Although, so much would need to happen for this its not really worth considering (dumping a few of BB schools in good markets and adding 1-AA schools with lesser markets).

Dognthings, you are right on to where I am going with the Gavitt plan. I think we are hitting the nail with the Big East thinking plan as well for the future.

The Gavitt plan offers so much flexability without a messing breakup and who loses the brand name, etc.

Right now, the Big East just need to settle with the current 8 football members. Once the BCS is a bit more secured, there is simply going to be a need for more football teams and possibly several more teams for football.

Part of the reason the Big East maintained BCS membership is similiar to the quotes by the Pac 10 commish, college football needs a strong eastern presence. It not going to be able to be contained by having a couple conference based in the south or midwest with a token team or two to grab the attention of that region.

So, less take UMass, Villanova, and Delaware. Factor in Temple or Buffalo or Fordham and you have a potential 12 team league if you need one. With the fading of the 1AA status, attendance is the only thing that really seperates the football programs today. Attendance means one thing in money.

Back to the Gavitt plan. The Big East could build up on one side by expanding say with UMass to provide a 9th football member. If the Gavitt plan were in place the football schools could add as needed and the basketball side could continue as needed with desired teams. If Villanova decided to play big time football, then move to the football side and the basketball schools could find a replacement possibly with another Philly school.

UConn has proven that state supported schools can move up and recent sell out with Buffalo last week should single to UMass it is possible to accomplish the same goals if the vision is there to succeed.

The Gavitt plan allows teams to be loosly associated together and even play for the same championship in basketball and have football grow in the process. Everyone thinks that 18 teams will not work. I beg to differ using the Gavitt plan. Its just a matter of time when the Big East needs to revert back to the Gavitt plan to expand for football. Right now, they can just keep the Gavitt plan on hold until its needed to be addressed for expansion. Don't think Mr Gavitt is going to far away when he is needed again to keep the conference he created secured.

The Gavitt plan was modified to a 16 team 1 division operation in 2003.This was hardly an easy accomplishment.The 3 factions (BE football 8,ND and the 7 non-1a football programs)worked on this compromise long and hard.Any plan that effects all 3 factions at the same time would be really difficult or impossible to get concurrence from all three groups.The idea of bringing new football member who need an all sports membership is the single most difficult idea.(no matter what school you bring up)That is one reason why the current idea of a 4 game schedule of attaching Army and Navy(who do not want or need an all sports membership)is by far the easiest as well as a good solution to balance in football scheduling at 9 members and 8 league games.the political realities of the BE with its 3 factions are constantly waived off by many.However,these realities are what control the process.While ,I am accused by many of pushing a Villanova solution,such a solution as was with the UConn solution will work within the BE political reality.

Tim Brando: Big Ten Heads List of Top Hoop Conferences
Feb. 09. '06 - Note his comments regarding the Big East Conference

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060209/SPORTS0408/302090008/1001/SPORTS

The snub issue with the 2006 bb selection committee has multiple issues. While Cincinnati was not happy, neither were schools such as Maryland and Michigan.

The Big East still has an issue of fixing the situation of playing frequency vs conference opponents and making the system equitable.

In football and basketball, conferences between nine and twelve members appear to work best for scheduling. The Big East and MAC have dismissed this for other reasons. Hybrid designs do have their distractions.

Would two nine-team conferences have 5 invites each vice 8 of 16?