I think you nailed it. The Big East can remain at 16 teams as long as it is profitable to do so. There was another thread with actual TV revenues for each school, and the basketball contract nets $2 million a season from CBS/ESPN/ABC.

The fact of the matter is, the Big East is sending eight teams to the dance and found a scheduling model that maximizes TV games, success, RPI and NCAA bids.

I predicted back in 2003 that the Big East 16 was an experiment to get them two sides meeting NCAA conference requirements to split in 2011, and that they would not get enough NCAA bids for both sides to want to make it work much longer than that. The schedule dictated that they wouldn't send the 9-11 teams everyone was predicting when they expanded.

I wouldn't say I was "wrong" because the NCAA threw a monkey wrench in there and added two games to the schedule a few years ago. This let the Big East get more wins so the fact that they played 288 games against each other didn't drag down their RPIs closer to .500. That difference is probably 7-10 RPI spots over teams from the A10, MVC, etc. and helping them get eight instead of six or seven.

Point is, the basketball schools have long-since had the stance that they need to remain tied to the football schools for as long as possible, lest they become like A-10 schools. Xavier and Dayton have nice little seasons, but they don't have Final Four seasons.

Each side is doing well enough that none has a reason to leave. Teams like Cincinnati, DePaul and USF aren't complaining. While their NCAA chances in hoops took a big hit, they are still making more money in the BE than C-USA.



They key isn't getting to 12 teams, as C-USA has proved. It's getting 12 GOOD TEAMS. Or at least 10 good teams.

The Big Ten isn't adding because they only want Notre Dame.
The Pac 10 isn't adding because they don't have any candidates that are clearly upstaging them in the West and from a big market. Gonzaga has great basketball, but aren't in a big market at all. Boise State's been good in football, but not good enough, not good enough in basketball and doesn't bring a big enough market to warrant expansion.

While Utah's had some good runs, they'd need to be DOMINATING the MWC in football and basketball to get a look, and even then, there'd need to be a second team and there's market size issue.

As for the "lack of success" by the ACC, I think it's working just fine:

http://www.statefansnation.com/wp-conte ... ansion.jpg

I'd say the Big XII is doing just fine, too. The division imbalance only becomes a factor if the conference can't agree on a BCS revenue sharing plan that makes everyone happy. (The SEC divides everything into 12 slices. They could put their best six teams in one division and everyone's still going to be happy. It's not like Vandy wants out of a deal in which 10th place gets them $18 million).


The bottom line is, the new members of the Big East (and you need four for a 12-team league) have to bring in market size, fan base, and revenue to make a TV contract better.

If football splits, they lose DC and Philly from the basketball contract (11 million people **let's not get into the symantic argument of how many people in each city are actual fans of each school. GTown and Nova ARE the #1 schools in each of those markets)
AND they still need to grown the football contract by 33% to accomodate four new members.

Orlando and Memphis are 4.5 million people.
Buffalo is 1.1 million in the metro area. East Carolina is half a mil tops.

Unless they can nab Penn State or Notre Dame (unlikely) the Big East probably isn't going to split anytime soon (unfortunately as an A-10 fan).

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942

Here's a dissertation topic for someone in Sports Administration or Marketing. What studies have been done to suggest where a particular insitution is located has a near perfect correlation with generating revenue and population of the immediate vicinity? Obviously TV exposure is a prime key, but "regional" tends to imply a much bigger area; and national access grows....it's not Channel 16 "Action News & Weather".

Some of the most successful college athletic programs, with huge stadiums, impressive attendance, established competitiveness, and national recognition are located in rural areas, and often very small towns with a handful of stoplights. Conversely, there are Division 1 Universities in some of nation's largest cities/metro areas, who garner half-empty stadiums, and not much watched locally, even if happen to be on TV available hundreds of thousands.

I believe in examining conference expansion, taking a close look at fan base (which can transcend boundaries), attendance records, prior success/potential, resources, logistics/distance, academics, etc. If those factors are positive, better reasoning than picking a school in an urban setting surrounded by non-university high-rises and blight.

Matt,
Should the debate on a split or no split of the new Big East include the options or the benefits of original Gavitt plan details as well? What if the state of Virginia had not screwed things up for the ACC expansion by forcing Virgina Tech to replace Syracuse in the planned ACC expansion with the trio schools of Boston College, Miami, and Syracuse. Had the state of Virginia not interfered with the ACC expansion plans, would the new Big East be better today? I think both the ACC and new Big East would be stronger and better aligned today if this had not occurred.

No surprise the only school from both the new ACC and new Big East that really benefited from the move by the State Government of Virginia was Virginia Tech. Since Miami and Boston College were already part of the plans and most of the original ACC school have broken even with the expansion, only Va Tech basically gained from this move. Many other schools including Syracuse were really hurt by this move.

The ACC may not be have closed the gap with the SEC in football with Syracuse, however, the conference would be stronger in basketball and not appear to be out of geographical alignment with Boston College so far north without any close rival schools.

Without Syracuse in the mix, the Big East would have most likely kept the original Gavitt plan of keeping both group of schools in separate distinct divisions with some cross over basketball games.

The plan for the football division included keeping Temple and expanding with either Louisville or Cincinnati and the eight member was tentative going to be a pick between either Central Florida or South Florida.

Since South Florida eventually was picked to replace Boston College, less just assume the school would have been picked over UCF in the original Gavitt plan. Less also assume Louisville would have been picked over Cincinnati.

Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Pitt, Temple, Connecticut, Rutgers, Louisiville, South Florida would be in the separate football division and Notre Dame, Depaul, Marquette, St Johns, Providence, Villanova, Georgetown, Seton Hall would have been included in the separate 8 basketball only division.

The Gavitt plan would have allowed an easy expansion of a ninth football school to balance schedules. Less make one more assumption that Virginia Tech and WVU would have most likely pushed and succeeded with bringing in East Carolina as the ninth football member.

The new Big East would then have the following alignment:
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Pitt
Temple
UConn
Rutgers
Louisville
South Florida
East Carolina

Less assume the basketball division would have picked another school to allow for 16 basketball conference games and included Xavier.

The new Big East football division would have been very good in football. Since West Virginia would continue to part of the new Big East and its historic win over Georgia in the Sugar bowl is assume to have saved the Big East BCS bid and would not have changed with Syracuse going to the ACC. Louisville latter won a BCS bowl along with WVU win in the Fiesta may have included another BCS win with Virginia Tech in the Big East.

The basketball side of the Big East football division would have included last years three number one seeds in the NCAA of UConn, Pitt, and Louisville and this will assume would have not changed by having Syracuse in the ACC.

The only possible down side would be losing the state of New York and the Cincinnati market. If Xavier were included in the cross over basketball schedules along with St Johns, these markets to some extent would have been maintained as well for the football schools.

Maybe all the issues facing both the new ACC and new Big East should be blamed on the state of Virgina for interfering with the orginal ACC plans.

The new Big East should consider going back to the original Gavitt plan format that was the bases for requiring 16 schools and move away from the one large division. This large division is causing all the current perceived problems with ability to control football concerns including expansion of a ninth football member. Notre Dame would continue to be available for the bowl deals. Basketball would be much more fun by having double round robin games in both divisions with two or four cross over games between the football schools and basketball only school divisions. The Gavitt format would most likely not impact the ability for basketball to negotiate the current TV contract.

The basketball tournment could continue to be played in NYC with both division winners facing off or Saturday night for the NCAA automatic bid.

The most important benefit would be to allow the football schools to address football issues without any needing approval of the basketball only schools which is precisely why Gavitt called for this type of plan and not the current 16 member blob that is just going to cause more issues as football needs are addressed in the future.

Maybe the Gavitt plan is the solution to avoid a split in the future and should be included in the discussions of split or not to split.

Well, it's pretty quiet out there. The only news was the rejection of the MWC proposal by the BCS'ers.

Looks like the staus is definitely quo for years to come.

BE MB thread noting that FY09 has come and gone apparently without any notice to the BE of any school leaving or of a split amongst it's members.Link at http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=375899

Thread also notes that (apparently banned) BE board member Tigersharktwo has apparently argued that there would not be a BE split.
I believe that this board has /had a member by that name. However,he has apparently not posted here in a while.I believe that he is a member here in good standing.

Thanks
Freaked

Do well recall TS2. I viewed him as an advocate for the BE status quo or whatever the official line or actions in which the BE embraced. His slant may have been favoring a particularly unnamed bb school or the group of them. He certainly had a passion opposed to the rise of the MWC as a potential BCS auto-bid; and the relationship with Notre Dame was dandy. Also, the idea that Villanova could become a BE fb member he favored. Though his tact was highly opinionated, defending, and often combative, I garnered there were other posters that shared much of his views.

If a fan supports the BE or certain school(s) in the BE, and advocates certain changes related to expansion or splitting, that is not being anti-BE in itself. It appears, most notably with certain BE fans, a defensiveness, when change is suggested. I could be in error, but when referencing the BE, sensitivity gets elevated. Maybe it's the conference's history, maybe it's protectionism, maybe it's favoring bb schools, maybe it's the psyche of some in the northeast that overhauling a hybrid is destructive to their wishes. Oh well, it adds dynamics to the discussions, and I suppose, at times, plausible arguments.

Somehow this post got lost in the shuffle and did not show up correctly on this thread. I think there needs to be more discussion on Big East reverting back to the orgininal Gavitt plan verses splitting or remaining in the status quo. Most of the current issues facing the Big East has a lot to due with the decision of the conference to drop the Gavitt plan and have one large 16 member conference.

The issues with the Big East have nothing to do with membership size and more to do with how the conference is aligned in one large division.

Can we just please bring back the Gavitt plan or at minimum discuss the merits of this plan.

Apparently my earlier post,the one that Louisville Card responded to was"eaten" by a "glitch".
Here is repost.
BE MB thread noting that FY09 has come and gone apparently without any notice to the BE of any school leaving or of a split amongst it's members.
Link at http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=375899

Thread also mentions BE board member Tigersharktwo who apparently argued against the BE splitting.
Apparently Tigersharktwo is also a member of this board although he has not posted here in awhile.

Thanks
Freaked

I'll check the admin records. I saw your post and even responded on the ncaabbs site. But later on, your post was gone.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Just checked the mod records and nope, no deletion. Most recent was my banning the spammer, and your deleting of the spam topics (shoes, etc). As always, THANKS!

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Just a correction: It was Mark Warner, not Allen, who was governor of Virginia at the time of the Tech/UVa flap.

Louisville Blog article suggesting that BE "inertia" has made a Big East split "inevitable".Link at http://uoflcardgame.com/big-east-split- ... ball/12291