I think these type of news will further the BE football schools to make a stand. The reality is that all the conference movements are being led by FOOTBALL and you need to shore up that part of the conference as much as you can.
If the Big10 came caklling Rutgers i wouldnt blame them for going the Big10 is obviouslsy a more established, more revenue and stable han the BE.
At the end it may be just talk but I think the BE football schools will react to it.

Cubanbull Wrote:I think these type of news will further the BE football schools to make a stand. The reality is that all the conference movements are being led by FOOTBALL and you need to shore up that part of the conference as much as you can.
If the Big10 came caklling Rutgers i wouldnt blame them for going the Big10 is obviouslsy a more established, more revenue and stable han the BE.
At the end it may be just talk but I think the BE football schools will react to it.

The problem, though, is that if Rutgers leaves, our only ties to the NYC market will be non-Football schools Seton Hall and St. John's. I think you have to think very hard about leaving behind the NYC, Philly and Washington DC markets.

wvucrazed Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:I think these type of news will further the BE football schools to make a stand. The reality is that all the conference movements are being led by FOOTBALL and you need to shore up that part of the conference as much as you can.
If the Big10 came caklling Rutgers i wouldnt blame them for going the Big10 is obviouslsy a more established, more revenue and stable han the BE.
At the end it may be just talk but I think the BE football schools will react to it.

The problem, though, is that if Rutgers leaves, our only ties to the NYC market will be non-Football schools Seton Hall and St. John's. I think you have to think very hard about leaving behind the NYC, Philly and Washington DC markets.

U may be forced to look at temple again...

I think IF keepig the Philly market is so important then, yes, the BE might turn back to Temple.
But Temple must show that they have a`plan to support their football/basketball programs.

Im not aware of what has the Temple administration done in that regard since the BE kicked them out.

wvucrazed Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:I think these type of news will further the BE football schools to make a stand. The reality is that all the conference movements are being led by FOOTBALL and you need to shore up that part of the conference as much as you can.
If the Big10 came caklling Rutgers i wouldnt blame them for going the Big10 is obviouslsy a more established, more revenue and stable han the BE.
At the end it may be just talk but I think the BE football schools will react to it.

The problem, though, is that if Rutgers leaves, our only ties to the NYC market will be non-Football schools Seton Hall and St. John's. I think you have to think very hard about leaving behind the NYC, Philly and Washington DC markets.

I guess some people never learn. I suggest you drop football and focus on basketball.

If i were running the big 10 i would first try to make a compromise with ND before looking elsewhere. I would give the irish and an all sports invite minus football for a five year time frame. At the end of five years, the assumption would be ND football would than become a full member, if ND choose not to bring in football than they would be out for other sports after 5 years. If ND doesn't work out, clearly i think rutgers would be the choice for team #12. They fit the big 10 profile, large flagship state school, add a huge market, and give penn state a rival. Sure travel isn't perfect but not much different than washington-ariz that the pac 10 manages. As for the big 10 picking up missouri, it could happen but i think rutgers adds more value. I don't buy the idea the big 10 is in league with the pac 10, ie they add missouri so the pac 10 adds texas and A&M. Actually, i think the pac 10 would add texas and colorado, than the sec would probably add texas A&m and oklahoma but if the major leagues want to kill somebody off, the big east is the easiest target. The worst thing that could happen to the big east would be the big ten pick off 1 team (rutgers) than the ACC expand to 14 with syracuse and uconn but while i won't rule it out, the odds are against that happening.

L-yes Wrote:

wvucrazed Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:I think these type of news will further the BE football schools to make a stand. The reality is that all the conference movements are being led by FOOTBALL and you need to shore up that part of the conference as much as you can.
If the Big10 came caklling Rutgers i wouldnt blame them for going the Big10 is obviouslsy a more established, more revenue and stable han the BE.
At the end it may be just talk but I think the BE football schools will react to it.

The problem, though, is that if Rutgers leaves, our only ties to the NYC market will be non-Football schools Seton Hall and St. John's. I think you have to think very hard about leaving behind the NYC, Philly and Washington DC markets.

I guess some people never learn. I suggest you drop football and focus on basketball.

learn what, exactly?

If we can bring in Auburn or Nebraska or Virginia Tech, then sure - we can forget about markets. But we have to play to our strengths, and the major Eastern markets and the "Big East" identity is a major strength of this league.

The presidents of our football schools looked at splitting away, and ultimately decided against it. Are they stupid? Or do you think it just might be possible that they have more information about financial realities and understand more of the situation than fans on a message board? I'm thinking the latter.

Cubanbull Wrote:I think IF keepig the Philly market is so important then, yes, the BE might turn back to Temple.
But Temple must show that they have a`plan to support their football/basketball programs.

Im not aware of what has the Temple administration done in that regard since the BE kicked them out.

nor do I ... I just threw that out there... because.. I see no one else available to help with those markets..

If nothing else... this gives us one more topic to get thru another summer day.

I think there was NO split at that time in 2003 because of the situation was not clear.

1. The BE TV football contract took a big hit.
2. The BCS was NOT safe for the BE.

So at that point the football schools had NO CHOICE but to stick together with the nonfootball schools because basketball was the guarantee money and kept the league's name and prestige.
We are now 4 years later and

1. The BE TV football contract has gone up.
2. The BCS slot is safely pocketed.

So the fears that led to not making the jump are now no longer there. So now the situation is different. There was a 5 year period and not surprisingly, MT will be done at that time.

Will the BE football schools choose to remain? maybe BUT if they do it will not be for the reasons they did in 2003

-- Most Big 10 fans seem to think its Rutgers or Missouri. I would say SU is looking to be the darkhorse right now

Cubanbull Wrote:I think IF keepig the Philly market is so important then, yes, the BE might turn back to Temple.
But Temple must show that they have a`plan to support their football/basketball programs.

Im not aware of what has the Temple administration done in that regard since the BE kicked them out.

--Disagree. If one of the our schools leave then Eastern football is dead and a new league with a new identity needs to be formed. We will need strong football programs and schools with fans. Memphis, ECU and maybe even Southern Miss (if only USM had a respectable bball program). We can't afford to have Temple sort out their problems under these circumstances

JMO

Jackson

I agree with you on Temple. I was just answering the question about the importance of the Philly market.
I have big questions about the importance of such markets as I had stated in previous threads, Does having Villanova gives the BE access to the Philly market in football? Do Phiily fans would be interested in watching BE footbvall because Villanova is in the league?

Cubanbull Wrote:I think there was NO split at that time in 2003 because of the situation was not clear.

1. The BE TV football contract took a big hit.
2. The BCS was NOT safe for the BE.

So at that point the football schools had NO CHOICE but to stick together with the nonfootball schools because basketball was the guarantee money and kept the league's name and prestige.
We are now 4 years later and

1. The BE TV football contract has gone up.
2. The BCS slot is safely pocketed.

So the fears that led to not making the jump are now no longer there. So now the situation is different. There was a 5 year period and not surprisingly, MT will be done at that time.

Will the BE football schools choose to remain? maybe BUT if they do it will not be for the reasons they did in 2003

But there are new variables. Assuming the Big 10 network is a success, and other leagues follow in their footsteps - where does that leave the Big East? Suddenly the Eastern media markets become even more important if we aspire to follow that model.

Also, who knows what the potential loss of Rutgers and the nation's largest media market would do for our marketability?

The Big 10, with their new network apparently the primary factor, is looking at markets. But the Big East should ignore them? Doesn't make sense to me.

no doubt alot of questions would need answers....

and staying in this hybrid set up makes the big East the easiest pick from the other conferences.
In a way the BE is always reactiing to others rather than acting out.
The league needs to reach an agreement with its members and get a commitment from all to stick together and grow. Thats impossible with our current line up. There is no room to expand and half the league is NOT interested in football which is causing all the changes.

Cubanbull Wrote:and staying in this hybrid set up makes the big East the easiest pick from the other conferences.
In a way the BE is always reactiing to others rather than acting out.
The league needs to reach an agreement with its members and get a commitment from all to stick together and grow. Thats impossible with our current line up. There is no room to expand and half the league is NOT interested in football which is causing all the changes.

We are the easiest to pick from the other conferences because we have teams willing to leave. Why? Because we are the least prestigious, have the worst TV contracts, the worst bowls, etc. of the 6 BCS leagues.

There is not a member of the BE that would turn down an invite to any of the other BCS leagues - that is just reality. And that would not change if we split into two. All we would be doing is essentially abandoning the Eastern media markets at a time when we may need to look at what a BE TV network can bring.

The BE hyrbrid is perfectly suited for that type of arrangement. We have a major event in NYC in the BE tournament. We have a presense in Chicago, Milwaukee, Philly, Washington, DC, NYC, plus the markets of our football schools. The BE is widely regarded as the best basketball league, or 2nd best, in the nation. There is value there that we can't just toss aside, IMHO. We would have plenty of content for a hypothetical BE network.

If we jettison these major eastern markets - right at a time when it looks like each BCS league might get into the TV game - it would be a terrible, terrible error.

Cubanbull Wrote:and staying in this hybrid set up makes the big East the easiest pick from the other conferences.
In a way the BE is always reactiing to others rather than acting out.
The league needs to reach an agreement with its members and get a commitment from all to stick together and grow. Thats impossible with our current line up. There is no room to expand and half the league is NOT interested in football which is causing all the changes.

the only problem ... u will never get everyone to agree to stay no matter what move u make.. If the big 10 calls.. someone would go.. if something happened that led the ACC or Sec to come calling.. anyone in conf would jump... U have to.. to much $$$ dif to stay put. I do think the league needs to get proactive.. and set it's self up to be a bit more stable.. where u can lose 1 or 2 and still have a base of 8 or 9 to work from. problem is MT...and the prez are not that type of people.. they are reactionary.. not proactive..

The hybrid BE does make Rutgers more vulnerable to the B10.The B10 has very valuable research assets and a better sports conference and bowls and tv packages than the BE by far.Adding the likes of ecu or memphis and splitting the BE will not make Rutgers less vulnerable to the B10.If tv markets are the key it certainly would be Rutgers and Missouri.However,there are the politics of the B10 east versus west.The western B10 schools would clearly want Missouri over Rutgers.Go read the Iowa article where USA today got their story from.

i agree with what you guys say. I just dont think the BE will ever move away from that situation in its current form.

cardheel Wrote:

Maize Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:Well, do people BELIEVE me now???

If Notre Dame doesn't capitulate, it will be Rutgers, Syracuse, or Missouri.

Cheers,
Neil

Oh I believe you and I would not blame Syracuse or Rutgers for leaving. But if the Big East would lose one as long as Schiano stays at Rutgers I would let Syracuse go.

Losing Rutgers OR Cuse would have a devastating effect on the BE. This is about more than wins and losses. How could it even be called the BE if we lose a big part of the northeast footprint? Schiano could bolt RU anytime for that matter. I'm not saying he will, but nothing is written in stone.

Lose Syracuse and replace it with another directional alphabet soup school? No thank you.

If you split, it'll be named something like the Eastern Athletic Conference anyway, as I understood that the BE name would remain with the Basketball schools?

I know no one in the BE football was thrilled about the idea of merging with C-USA, but it seems its not to remote of a possiblity that at least much of C-USA eastern would be asked into a slimmed down B.E. if they take one BE school, and it is decided strength in numbers are needed (12); you need four schools. Memphis, ECU, UCF and USM seem good to me. (TShark; it doesn't matter what you think).

UAB is a good market (Birmingahm, but would it deliver fans?
USM, not in the footprint (neither is USF or some say Memphis) but would be a good market (state of Ms, as much as Ole Piss or Missstake) and Gulf coast area of Ala, Ms and La. USM is a good football program and basketball is getting better with more committment to the program. Marshall? would UWV go along, and would they bring enough eg market? Tulane, since Katrina would be questionable.

I believe the MAC schools do not have facilities needed for a BCS conference, and would they add value?

Will be an interesting time , and definitely more food for thought!

Cubanbull Wrote:i agree with what you guys say. I just dont think the BE will ever move away from that situation in its current form.

well the good news is that we might not have to. There are only so many open slots in the other BCS leagues. Once the Big 10 is at 12, there isn't really any other movement that could impact the BE, barring moves by leagues to 14 which is something that doesn't seem feasible at this point.