(06-03-2010 01:35 PM)Capital Pirate Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:33 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:03 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 11:18 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 11:07 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  Not going to happen even if no Big East teams leave for the Big Ten or several do.

Source to support this 'fact', or merely your opinion?

where is the source to support the"fact" for the poster who stated certain schools would be added? Not interested in that are you.

for starters from a WVU board post:

espn insider article on big east expansion
Commissioner John Marinatto revealed on Wednesday that the Big East has wanted to expand for several years, in order to get to nine teams so that league members can have balanced conference schedules (four home games, four road games). "But we just keep coming back to the issue that there's no one we can bring in that brings us that value," he said.

Clearly, none of the likely candidates -- Central Florida, Temple, Memphis, East Carolina -- to replace departing Big East teams has moved the meter enough to warrant an invite on its own merit. But based on the following comment, it does sound as if the Big East has been coveting another institution for a while. "I don't want to say a school because I get in trouble every time I say a name," Marinatto said. "But if there was a school like that that fit from all the other standpoints, then we would certainly make the move and create a 17-team conference, a nine-team conference in football."

We assume that Marinatto has his eyes on an ACC school, perhaps one of the three that left the Big East in 2004/2005, since the ACC is the only BCS conference that is a geographic fit. But could there possibly be a I-AA program out there -- one considering an upgrade to I-A -- that would bring more "value" than the aforementioned quartet?

Well, since there weren't any ACC schools on your list, and the mention of the above quote : "But we just keep coming back to the issue that there's no one we can bring in that brings us that value"; then we should assume TCU, Houston, nor Navy bring the desired value either. Thereby finally bringing all of this to its conclusion, which in my opinion is as follows.
1. The team the BE probably covets is ND, and they aren't joining the BE in football.
2. Navy and Army are out, conference allignment doesn't suit them.
3. UNLESS there is a package deal with TCU, Houston and SMU are likely out as well.
4. TCU probably stay put depending on the outcome of the BSU to the MWC and however that will all sort out.
5. I don't think the BE can afford to try to develop a 1-AA program if the goal is to strengthen football and make more money. They need a program or programs that can compete now.
6. That leaves UCF,Temple,Memphis, and ECU as possible teams. I don't know who is going to get the invite, nor do I really care. It may not be a list of teams that a lot people find attractive, but here again its probably the most likely list of canidates since the BE isn't exactly in the position to be very picky.

Oh, and I didn't ask for the source from the poster that said those teams would be joining because he doesn't act like he will be the BE's final decision maker when it comes to expansion.
It would go a long way with everyone here if you were to present your 'facts' as opinions supported by data rather than absolute truths.

1. When he mentions teams that add no value he-as the auther stated is talking about the usual suspects Memphis, ECU, Temple, UCF etc. It is doubtful the Big East conference has looked west at this point for expansion candidates. They might consider this if major markets are lost.

2. The Big East attempted to lure Army and Navy in the past and there's no doubt they would again if the need came around. While Navy is a strong program, Army is questionable. Neither has basketball. It has been several years and if situations change then none of us knows what the academies might decide to do if asked.

3. If the Big East decided to go west, and they approached TCU, then TCU would likely want another nearby school, as would the Big East. There are several decent options there, actually better in many respects to eastern choices available. Not known if the Big East would even consider this. I suspect if they did it would be as part of some hybrid league under the BE banner with football only schools having other sports in other leagues (with the BE football schools remaining in bb).

4. If the MWC conference is poached by the PAC10 and/or BigXII and TCU is left on an island by themselves with only Boise in another division, a Big East with only one or two teams gone might appear to be a better option for them. It would make sense for the Big East to do their "due diligence" regarding adding TCU, may not ever happen.

5. There are basically few options to "strengthen football". Adding BCS schools would be #1-difficult to do at present. Adding TCU would be a good option there-difficult because of logistics and everyone being unstable at the present. No one else would strengthen Big East football and actually could lower the Big Easts BCS standing. Other eastern teams have performed better on the field than ECU over a decade or so- or since the BCS began, so ECU wouldn't be in the top there either. Adding teams will be not about helping them out and strengththening them so much as adding or maintaining markets and increasing revenues. A tv network as I have pointed out before is one of the best chances the BE has of achieving this. Small market teams need not apply there (unless they have national appeal). State programs-even current 1-AA ones and large city ones definitely should.

6. The list. Once again a conclusion of teams that must be the only options when this is far from the case (and studies like the one above clearly show). The Big East has many options if they can remain together at least to a degree, or if the Big 10 decimates them there won't be any reason to worry about it as all teams will find other homes.

My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis. I've never claimed to speak for the Big East--funny though you don't have a problem with others such as yourself or the poster stating things like "these are the teams the BE will add" without any supporting information at all.

Um, other posters don't have a long-running history of posting opinions or subjective analysis and presenting it as "fact"......that's the thing you don't seem to be able to grasp. Hell, friend, adding an "IMO" every once in a while would make your posts as innocuous as every other opinion posting made here.......until you do, though, you come off as a pompous wannabe-know-it-all who actually knows no more than any other poster on these boards....

Do you get it yet?

Oh really. I could go through hundreds of posts and find numerous ones daily where you CUSA types are posting baseless information as fact when it doesn't have any supporting information. I compile a list with factual information in it and you want to dispute it without providing legitimate information to do so, then still refuse to admit facts are shown.

ECU posters "facts":
-Our DMA isn't our DMA--should be fudged to put in our favor
-Our state, even though it isn't near a BE state is in the BE footprint
-Our football team, even though it isn't the winningest in football in the eastern U.S. is the best non-bcs school in the eastern U.S.
-We have rivalry games with teams even though no one else recognizes them
-charts with accurate information on them which rate various teams aren't accurate because ECU doesn't come out on top
-charts with accurate information on them which compare various teams are intentionally skewed to purposefully diminish ECU even though there are 16 other schools listed put into the same criteria
-information listed on said charts should be intentionally skewed based on ECU posters desires rather than checkable info to attempt to move their score up
-The Big East should add ECU and is foolish and irresponsible for not having done so to this point, even though actually adding ECU would diminish BE tv contracts, BE basketball AND BE football strength in relation to their current standings
and on and on

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis. I've never claimed to speak for the Big East--funny though you don't have a problem with others such as yourself or the poster stating things like "these are the teams the BE will add" without any supporting information at all.

I have never said the Big Least "will" or "will not" do anything. Please don't put words in my mouth. That is the difference between you and myself. I persented an opinion, while you state information as fact, quickly dismissing others that have the exact same level of involvement and knowledge about the situation as you.

(06-03-2010 01:52 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis. I've never claimed to speak for the Big East--funny though you don't have a problem with others such as yourself or the poster stating things like "these are the teams the BE will add" without any supporting information at all.

I have never said the Big Least "will" or "will not" do anything. Please don't put words in my mouth. That is the difference between you and myself. I persented an opinion, while you state information as fact, quickly dismissing others that have the exact same level of involvement and knowledge about the situation as you.

Big Least huh. What does that make CUSA which is ranked many many times lower as a football and basketball conference? Doesn't say much about its champ does it. Don't put words in my mouth. I posted a list of criteria comparing schools. I didn't say anything else about it---you and others like you did. I answered questions when asked and put up with your juvenile attacks. Obviously everyone doesn't have the same level of knowledge or involvement-that is completely clear.

(06-03-2010 01:52 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:35 PM)Capital Pirate Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:33 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:03 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 11:18 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 11:07 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  Not going to happen even if no Big East teams leave for the Big Ten or several do.

Source to support this 'fact', or merely your opinion?

where is the source to support the"fact" for the poster who stated certain schools would be added? Not interested in that are you.

for starters from a WVU board post:

espn insider article on big east expansion
Commissioner John Marinatto revealed on Wednesday that the Big East has wanted to expand for several years, in order to get to nine teams so that league members can have balanced conference schedules (four home games, four road games). "But we just keep coming back to the issue that there's no one we can bring in that brings us that value," he said.

Clearly, none of the likely candidates -- Central Florida, Temple, Memphis, East Carolina -- to replace departing Big East teams has moved the meter enough to warrant an invite on its own merit. But based on the following comment, it does sound as if the Big East has been coveting another institution for a while. "I don't want to say a school because I get in trouble every time I say a name," Marinatto said. "But if there was a school like that that fit from all the other standpoints, then we would certainly make the move and create a 17-team conference, a nine-team conference in football."

We assume that Marinatto has his eyes on an ACC school, perhaps one of the three that left the Big East in 2004/2005, since the ACC is the only BCS conference that is a geographic fit. But could there possibly be a I-AA program out there -- one considering an upgrade to I-A -- that would bring more "value" than the aforementioned quartet?

Well, since there weren't any ACC schools on your list, and the mention of the above quote : "But we just keep coming back to the issue that there's no one we can bring in that brings us that value"; then we should assume TCU, Houston, nor Navy bring the desired value either. Thereby finally bringing all of this to its conclusion, which in my opinion is as follows.
1. The team the BE probably covets is ND, and they aren't joining the BE in football.
2. Navy and Army are out, conference allignment doesn't suit them.
3. UNLESS there is a package deal with TCU, Houston and SMU are likely out as well.
4. TCU probably stay put depending on the outcome of the BSU to the MWC and however that will all sort out.
5. I don't think the BE can afford to try to develop a 1-AA program if the goal is to strengthen football and make more money. They need a program or programs that can compete now.
6. That leaves UCF,Temple,Memphis, and ECU as possible teams. I don't know who is going to get the invite, nor do I really care. It may not be a list of teams that a lot people find attractive, but here again its probably the most likely list of canidates since the BE isn't exactly in the position to be very picky.

Oh, and I didn't ask for the source from the poster that said those teams would be joining because he doesn't act like he will be the BE's final decision maker when it comes to expansion.
It would go a long way with everyone here if you were to present your 'facts' as opinions supported by data rather than absolute truths.

1. When he mentions teams that add no value he-as the auther stated is talking about the usual suspects Memphis, ECU, Temple, UCF etc. It is doubtful the Big East conference has looked west at this point for expansion candidates. They might consider this if major markets are lost.

2. The Big East attempted to lure Army and Navy in the past and there's no doubt they would again if the need came around. While Navy is a strong program, Army is questionable. Neither has basketball. It has been several years and if situations change then none of us knows what the academies might decide to do if asked.

3. If the Big East decided to go west, and they approached TCU, then TCU would likely want another nearby school, as would the Big East. There are several decent options there, actually better in many respects to eastern choices available. Not known if the Big East would even consider this. I suspect if they did it would be as part of some hybrid league under the BE banner with football only schools having other sports in other leagues (with the BE football schools remaining in bb).

4. If the MWC conference is poached by the PAC10 and/or BigXII and TCU is left on an island by themselves with only Boise in another division, a Big East with only one or two teams gone might appear to be a better option for them. It would make sense for the Big East to do their "due diligence" regarding adding TCU, may not ever happen.

5. There are basically few options to "strengthen football". Adding BCS schools would be #1-difficult to do at present. Adding TCU would be a good option there-difficult because of logistics and everyone being unstable at the present. No one else would strengthen Big East football and actually could lower the Big Easts BCS standing. Other eastern teams have performed better on the field than ECU over a decade or so- or since the BCS began, so ECU wouldn't be in the top there either. Adding teams will be not about helping them out and strengththening them so much as adding or maintaining markets and increasing revenues. A tv network as I have pointed out before is one of the best chances the BE has of achieving this. Small market teams need not apply there (unless they have national appeal). State programs-even current 1-AA ones and large city ones definitely should.

6. The list. Once again a conclusion of teams that must be the only options when this is far from the case (and studies like the one above clearly show). The Big East has many options if they can remain together at least to a degree, or if the Big 10 decimates them there won't be any reason to worry about it as all teams will find other homes.

My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis. I've never claimed to speak for the Big East--funny though you don't have a problem with others such as yourself or the poster stating things like "these are the teams the BE will add" without any supporting information at all.

Um, other posters don't have a long-running history of posting opinions or subjective analysis and presenting it as "fact"......that's the thing you don't seem to be able to grasp. Hell, friend, adding an "IMO" every once in a while would make your posts as innocuous as every other opinion posting made here.......until you do, though, you come off as a pompous wannabe-know-it-all who actually knows no more than any other poster on these boards....

Do you get it yet?

Oh really. I could go through hundreds of posts and find numerous ones daily where you CUSA types are posting baseless information as fact when it doesn't have any supporting information. I compile a list with factual information in it and you want to dispute it without providing legitimate information to do so, then still refuse to admit facts are shown.

ECU posters "facts":
-Our DMA isn't our DMA--should be fudged to put in our favor
-Our state, even though it isn't near a BE state is in the BE footprint
-Our football team, even though it isn't the winningest in football in the eastern U.S. is the best non-bcs school in the eastern U.S.
-We have rivalry games with teams even though no one else recognizes them
-charts with accurate information on them which rate various teams aren't accurate because ECU doesn't come out on top
-charts with accurate information on them which compare various teams are intentionally skewed to purposefully diminish ECU even though there are 16 other schools listed put into the same criteria
-information listed on said charts should be intentionally skewed based on ECU posters desires rather than checkable info to attempt to move their score up
-The Big East should add ECU and is foolish and irresponsible for not having done so to this point, even though actually adding ECU would diminish BE tv contracts, BE basketball AND BE football strength in relation to their current standings
and on and on

"You C-USA types".......what the hel* does that mean? Is that supposed to be some sort of personal insult? Your elitist all-knowing personality is clearly shining through on this board chief.

We're not disputing our DMA.......we know it's Greenville-New Bern-Washington. Nielsen draws those lines. They are what they are.
But again....our fan base extends past this DMA. A concept that is just so complicated and out of the box for you.
Your definition of footprint = "continuous states". That's YOUR definition.
Sure....Miami of Ohio and Marshall have better winning percentages since 2000. So what? I thought results on the field don't matter?
Your charts are a reflection of the data you gathered up. Nothing more, nothing less. You are using out dated information in some spots, like the UCF poster pointed out.
Foolish and irresponsible for not adding ECU? Nah.....I wouldn't say that. They made choices they felt were in the best interest of the conference, at the time. It is what is it.

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  1. When he mentions teams that add no value he-as the auther stated is talking about the usual suspects Memphis, ECU, Temple, UCF etc. It is doubtful the Big East conference has looked west at this point for expansion candidates. They might consider this if major markets are lost.

Do you know for fact that he is only talking about Memphis, ECU, Temple, and UCF?

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  5. There are basically few options to "strengthen football". Adding BCS schools would be #1-difficult to do at present. Adding TCU would be a good option there-difficult because of logistics and everyone being unstable at the present. No one else would strengthen Big East football and actually could lower the Big Easts BCS standing. Other eastern teams have performed better on the field than ECU over a decade or so- or since the BCS began, so ECU wouldn't be in the top there either. Adding teams will be not about helping them out and strengththening them so much as adding or maintaining markets and increasing revenues. A tv network as I have pointed out before is one of the best chances the BE has of achieving this. Small market teams need not apply there (unless they have national appeal). State programs-even current 1-AA ones and large city ones definitely should.

Why do you keep singling out ECU? I merely included them with Memphis, Temple, and UCF, the other 'usual suspects'.

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  6. The list. Once again a conclusion of teams that must be the only options when this is far from the case (and studies like the one above clearly show). The Big East has many options if they can remain together at least to a degree, or if the Big 10 decimates them there won't be any reason to worry about it as all teams will find other homes.

Did I say it was the only options? I think not. I merely stated they were the most likely canidates. Until one of the BE officials comes out and names a team or teams in particular, the 'usual suspects' is the teams I feel like are most likely the BE's targets.

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis.

You know, I might be mistaken, but I can't recall a single ECU fan here stating that ECU was the only option. Nor can I recall anybody hear that is a fan of any team stating much of anything that wasn't a rational thought or point of view. The most irrational point of view here seems to be your own in regards to the fact that you are right and everybody else must be wrong. You are entitled to thinking that, so go right ahead. We will all find out how this ends eventually.

Oh, and I can think of more than a few questions that were very reasonable that you chose not to answer.

(06-03-2010 02:01 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:52 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:35 PM)Capital Pirate Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:33 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:03 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 11:18 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 11:07 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  Not going to happen even if no Big East teams leave for the Big Ten or several do.

Source to support this 'fact', or merely your opinion?

where is the source to support the"fact" for the poster who stated certain schools would be added? Not interested in that are you.

for starters from a WVU board post:

espn insider article on big east expansion
Commissioner John Marinatto revealed on Wednesday that the Big East has wanted to expand for several years, in order to get to nine teams so that league members can have balanced conference schedules (four home games, four road games). "But we just keep coming back to the issue that there's no one we can bring in that brings us that value," he said.

Clearly, none of the likely candidates -- Central Florida, Temple, Memphis, East Carolina -- to replace departing Big East teams has moved the meter enough to warrant an invite on its own merit. But based on the following comment, it does sound as if the Big East has been coveting another institution for a while. "I don't want to say a school because I get in trouble every time I say a name," Marinatto said. "But if there was a school like that that fit from all the other standpoints, then we would certainly make the move and create a 17-team conference, a nine-team conference in football."

We assume that Marinatto has his eyes on an ACC school, perhaps one of the three that left the Big East in 2004/2005, since the ACC is the only BCS conference that is a geographic fit. But could there possibly be a I-AA program out there -- one considering an upgrade to I-A -- that would bring more "value" than the aforementioned quartet?

Well, since there weren't any ACC schools on your list, and the mention of the above quote : "But we just keep coming back to the issue that there's no one we can bring in that brings us that value"; then we should assume TCU, Houston, nor Navy bring the desired value either. Thereby finally bringing all of this to its conclusion, which in my opinion is as follows.
1. The team the BE probably covets is ND, and they aren't joining the BE in football.
2. Navy and Army are out, conference allignment doesn't suit them.
3. UNLESS there is a package deal with TCU, Houston and SMU are likely out as well.
4. TCU probably stay put depending on the outcome of the BSU to the MWC and however that will all sort out.
5. I don't think the BE can afford to try to develop a 1-AA program if the goal is to strengthen football and make more money. They need a program or programs that can compete now.
6. That leaves UCF,Temple,Memphis, and ECU as possible teams. I don't know who is going to get the invite, nor do I really care. It may not be a list of teams that a lot people find attractive, but here again its probably the most likely list of canidates since the BE isn't exactly in the position to be very picky.

Oh, and I didn't ask for the source from the poster that said those teams would be joining because he doesn't act like he will be the BE's final decision maker when it comes to expansion.
It would go a long way with everyone here if you were to present your 'facts' as opinions supported by data rather than absolute truths.

1. When he mentions teams that add no value he-as the auther stated is talking about the usual suspects Memphis, ECU, Temple, UCF etc. It is doubtful the Big East conference has looked west at this point for expansion candidates. They might consider this if major markets are lost.

2. The Big East attempted to lure Army and Navy in the past and there's no doubt they would again if the need came around. While Navy is a strong program, Army is questionable. Neither has basketball. It has been several years and if situations change then none of us knows what the academies might decide to do if asked.

3. If the Big East decided to go west, and they approached TCU, then TCU would likely want another nearby school, as would the Big East. There are several decent options there, actually better in many respects to eastern choices available. Not known if the Big East would even consider this. I suspect if they did it would be as part of some hybrid league under the BE banner with football only schools having other sports in other leagues (with the BE football schools remaining in bb).

4. If the MWC conference is poached by the PAC10 and/or BigXII and TCU is left on an island by themselves with only Boise in another division, a Big East with only one or two teams gone might appear to be a better option for them. It would make sense for the Big East to do their "due diligence" regarding adding TCU, may not ever happen.

5. There are basically few options to "strengthen football". Adding BCS schools would be #1-difficult to do at present. Adding TCU would be a good option there-difficult because of logistics and everyone being unstable at the present. No one else would strengthen Big East football and actually could lower the Big Easts BCS standing. Other eastern teams have performed better on the field than ECU over a decade or so- or since the BCS began, so ECU wouldn't be in the top there either. Adding teams will be not about helping them out and strengththening them so much as adding or maintaining markets and increasing revenues. A tv network as I have pointed out before is one of the best chances the BE has of achieving this. Small market teams need not apply there (unless they have national appeal). State programs-even current 1-AA ones and large city ones definitely should.

6. The list. Once again a conclusion of teams that must be the only options when this is far from the case (and studies like the one above clearly show). The Big East has many options if they can remain together at least to a degree, or if the Big 10 decimates them there won't be any reason to worry about it as all teams will find other homes.

My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis. I've never claimed to speak for the Big East--funny though you don't have a problem with others such as yourself or the poster stating things like "these are the teams the BE will add" without any supporting information at all.

Um, other posters don't have a long-running history of posting opinions or subjective analysis and presenting it as "fact"......that's the thing you don't seem to be able to grasp. Hell, friend, adding an "IMO" every once in a while would make your posts as innocuous as every other opinion posting made here.......until you do, though, you come off as a pompous wannabe-know-it-all who actually knows no more than any other poster on these boards....

Do you get it yet?

Oh really. I could go through hundreds of posts and find numerous ones daily where you CUSA types are posting baseless information as fact when it doesn't have any supporting information. I compile a list with factual information in it and you want to dispute it without providing legitimate information to do so, then still refuse to admit facts are shown.

ECU posters "facts":
-Our DMA isn't our DMA--should be fudged to put in our favor
-Our state, even though it isn't near a BE state is in the BE footprint
-Our football team, even though it isn't the winningest in football in the eastern U.S. is the best non-bcs school in the eastern U.S.
-We have rivalry games with teams even though no one else recognizes them
-charts with accurate information on them which rate various teams aren't accurate because ECU doesn't come out on top
-charts with accurate information on them which compare various teams are intentionally skewed to purposefully diminish ECU even though there are 16 other schools listed put into the same criteria
-information listed on said charts should be intentionally skewed based on ECU posters desires rather than checkable info to attempt to move their score up
-The Big East should add ECU and is foolish and irresponsible for not having done so to this point, even though actually adding ECU would diminish BE tv contracts, BE basketball AND BE football strength in relation to their current standings
and on and on

We're not disputing our DMA.......we know it's Greenville-New Bern-Washington. Nielsen draws those lines. They are what they are.
But again....our fan base extends past this DMA. A concept that is just so complicated and out of the box for you.
Your definition of footprint = "continuous states". That's YOUR definition.
Sure....Miami of Ohio and Marshall have better winning percentages since 2000. So what? I thought results on the field don't matter?
Your charts are a reflection of the data you gathered up. Nothing more, nothing less. You are using out dated information in some spots, like the UCF poster pointed out.
Foolish and irresponsible for not adding ECU? Nah.....I wouldn't say that. They made choices they felt were in the best interest of the conference, at the time. It is what is it.

Again, EVERYONE'S fan base extends past their DMA. Problem is, only the conference leaders, media types, etc. knows how much. This means you can't for the purposes of charts like I made add in a bunch of uncheckable unkown market. There is no reason to believe such information would change anything in favor of your team as it would apply to EVERY team out there-something you continue to not comprehend.

I challenge you to contact the BE comissioner's office and ask them if they believe ECU is in "the Big East footprint". Pretty sure you'll continue to be dissapointed there.

It is ECU posters who have been trying to claim on the field performance doesn't matter. I've said it is a measure of teams competitiveness. You left out Navy and USM and a couple of others I believe btw.

I used the data I was able to compile, as many studies do. As I pointed out, go to US News and you'll find some of their info is listed as 2007 data--this doesn't make the data inaccurate for the purposes of the review since it is applied to all evenly. If you want to go and get checkable current criteria for all of the schools and categories and post it here go ahead. I've stated more than once that officials will have much more current and detailed information than I've had a chance to compile.

I also asked if anyone had verifiable other categories they thought would add to this, feel free to collect the info for all schools as I have and post it--If I have time I will add in. Not one poster has done this. i have also made corrections where it made a difference in scoring or incorrect info was posted. You are free to check the data and make your own chart, but you might just end up being mad at yourself when you see the conclusions you come to.

(06-03-2010 02:14 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  1. When he mentions teams that add no value he-as the auther stated is talking about the usual suspects Memphis, ECU, Temple, UCF etc. It is doubtful the Big East conference has looked west at this point for expansion candidates. They might consider this if major markets are lost.

Do you know for fact that he is only talking about Memphis, ECU, Temple, and UCF?

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  5. There are basically few options to "strengthen football". Adding BCS schools would be #1-difficult to do at present. Adding TCU would be a good option there-difficult because of logistics and everyone being unstable at the present. No one else would strengthen Big East football and actually could lower the Big Easts BCS standing. Other eastern teams have performed better on the field than ECU over a decade or so- or since the BCS began, so ECU wouldn't be in the top there either. Adding teams will be not about helping them out and strengththening them so much as adding or maintaining markets and increasing revenues. A tv network as I have pointed out before is one of the best chances the BE has of achieving this. Small market teams need not apply there (unless they have national appeal). State programs-even current 1-AA ones and large city ones definitely should.

Why do you keep singling out ECU? I merely included them with Memphis, Temple, and UCF, the other 'usual suspects'.

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  6. The list. Once again a conclusion of teams that must be the only options when this is far from the case (and studies like the one above clearly show). The Big East has many options if they can remain together at least to a degree, or if the Big 10 decimates them there won't be any reason to worry about it as all teams will find other homes.

Did I say it was the only options? I think not. I merely stated they were the most likely canidates. Until one of the BE officials comes out and names a team or teams in particular, the 'usual suspects' is the teams I feel like are most likely the BE's targets.

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  My goal isn't to " go a long way with everyone here" since most of you are not Big East fans and don't discuss things on any type of a rational basis.

You know, I might be mistaken, but I can't recall a single ECU fan here stating that ECU was the only option. Nor can I recall anybody hear that is a fan of any team stating much of anything that wasn't a rational thought or point of view. The most irrational point of view here seems to be your own in regards to the fact that you are right and everybody else must be wrong. You are entitled to thinking that, so go right ahead. We will all find out how this ends eventually.

Oh, and I can think of more than a few questions that were very reasonable that you chose not to answer.

In the statements you just made you have points of view that you post as do all posters. I make my case, you make yours. If I see you or others stating things as fact regarding teams in my conference or my conference in general, I'll check it out and see if it's accurate. If not, I'll let you know. Others state "facts" and don't provide anything to back them up and get pissy when they are disputed as this thread shows well. If you look at this thread or other similar ones, I just don't see a whole lot of other posters here discussing issues with my charts. There are scores of ECU people taking issue with it, and making personal attacks on me. Naturally I'm not going to sit back and let visitors to the board of the conference I am a fan of attack me or shut out my ideas and post ad nauseum their mistatements and unverifiable info without replying. Remember it is you who are a visitor here--you don't see me on the CUSA board attacking posters and putting down their posts. You all have come over here to create issues, not the other way around. I presented info for fans of the Big East on a Big East board.

(06-03-2010 01:52 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  Oh really. I could go through hundreds of posts and find numerous ones daily where you CUSA types are posting baseless information as fact when it doesn't have any supporting information. I compile a list with factual information in it and you want to dispute it without providing legitimate information to do so, then still refuse to admit facts are shown.

ECU posters "facts":
-Our DMA isn't our DMA--should be fudged to put in our favor ++Um, here we go with that tricky "opinion/subjective" thingy you seem to have so much trouble with. First, I have never seen anyone suggest that anything should be "fudged", but if they in fact did say that, it would be an "opinion", not a "fact"++
-Our state, even though it isn't near a BE state is in the BE footprint ++But Texas is - only after another team from Texas is added, of course++
-Our football team, even though it isn't the winningest in football in the eastern U.S. is the best non-bcs school in the eastern U.S.
-We have rivalry games with teams even though no one else recognizes them ++"Rivalry games" are rivalries if fans from both schools say they are. Not sure what warped world you come from that demand 'national media' recognition to declare a series between two schools a 'rivalry' - and I'm not sure at all where or why you'd feel like pre-established 'rivalries' would be important within the least in future expansion plans. Did USF have a 'rivalry' with any BE team when it was added? How 'bout Cincy? You get the point.++
-charts with accurate information on them which rate various teams aren't accurate because ECU doesn't come out on top ++Hm. Tough one here....if you're talking about YOUR charts, then there is some question as to the 'accuracy' of the information, since YOU made quite a bit of it up - or either it was an opinion, if you please.++
-charts with accurate information on them which compare various teams are intentionally skewed to purposefully diminish ECU even though there are 16 other schools listed put into the same criteria ++See above++
-information listed on said charts should be intentionally skewed based on ECU posters desires rather than checkable info to attempt to move their score up ++Well, I suppose you've got me on this one....except for the fact that I'd have to pretty much 'check' with YOU to validate some of the 'checkable' info in said charts, and I'm just not sure about that.++
-The Big East should add ECU and is foolish and irresponsible for not having done so to this point, even though actually adding ECU would diminish BE tv contracts, BE basketball AND BE football strength in relation to their current standings ++An ECU fan said that? Wow. Brutal. Sounds more like what a anti-ECU opinionated/subjectively-driven poster from a non-ECU school would say - but hey. if you say so......++

Again....."facts"....not exactly.

(06-03-2010 09:45 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  As you know the posts are/were continuous at points-- a bit further down to another question you'll see I stated: Do you have a credible link to cite ECU/Marshall as a rivalry? I haven't been able to find one so far. If you provide a credible source then I will alter that, although it won't affect ECU's ranking or Marshall's. and a bit further down after a response: one link you provided is an ECU source, the other a Marshall U source. Can someone provide a link to an unrelated source that considers Marshall and ECU to be a rivalry game? If you think you can provide only local biased sources when you know that isn't a reliable source, I can't help you.

This is pure BS. You used wikipedia to "prove" that it was not a rivalry. Then when I posted a link to the wikipedia page for Marshall showing it was a rivalry, then you changed "your criterea." And you claim this isn't subjective.

(06-03-2010 02:15 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  Again, EVERYONE'S fan base extends past their DMA. Problem is, only the conference leaders, media types, etc. knows how much. This means you can't for the purposes of charts like I made add in a bunch of uncheckable unkown market. There is no reason to believe such information would change anything in favor of your team as it would apply to EVERY team out there-something you continue to not comprehend.

I haven't seen much evidence posted on this board from other fan bases. I started a whole thread asking for info on "secondary markets"...ie....where does your fan base extend to, beyond your primary DMA? I didn't get much feed back. So, either those folks just don't care, or, there's nothing to provide.

(06-03-2010 02:15 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  I challenge you to contact the BE comissioner's office and ask them if they believe ECU is in "the Big East footprint". Pretty sure you'll continue to be dissapointed there.

I have nothing to be disappointed about. None of us know what the future goals of the conference are. Establishing a presence in the 7th fastest growing state in the US could fit into their future plans. Expanding the "footprint" could be a goal. In addition to strengthening existing markets, which AdCorbett has stated many times. Something that certainly makes sense to me.

(06-03-2010 02:15 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  It is ECU posters who have been trying to claim on the field performance doesn't matter. I've said it is a measure of teams competitiveness. You left out Navy and USM and a couple of others I believe btw.

Fantastic....we've certainly been a competitive program. Two conference championships, bowl wins, wins over BCS teams, wins over top 25 teams......definitely helps our cause.

(06-03-2010 02:15 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  I used the data I was able to compile, as many studies do. As I pointed out, go to US News and you'll find some of their info is listed as 2007 data--this doesn't make the data inaccurate for the purposes of the review since it is applied to all evenly. If you want to go and get checkable current criteria for all of the schools and categories and post it here go ahead. I've stated more than once that officials will have much more current and detailed information than I've had a chance to compile
I also asked if anyone had verifiable other categories they thought would add to this, feel free to collect the info for all schools as I have and post it--If I have time I will add in. Not one poster has done this. i have also made corrections where it made a difference in scoring or incorrect info was posted. You are free to check the data and make your own chart, but you might just end up being mad at yourself when you see the conclusions you come to.

Eh....I've checked enough of your sources that I wanted to check.

(06-03-2010 01:19 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 12:33 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Oh, and I didn't ask for the source from the poster that said those teams would be joining because he doesn't act like he will be the BE's final decision maker when it comes to expansion.
It would go a long way with everyone here if you were to present your 'facts' as opinions supported by data rather than absolute truths.

1. When he mentions teams that add no value he-as the auther stated is talking about the usual suspects Memphis, ECU, Temple, UCF etc. It is doubtful the Big East conference has looked west at this point for expansion candidates. They might consider this if major markets are lost.

2. The Big East attempted to lure Army and Navy in the past and there's no doubt they would again if the need came around.

3. If the Big East decided to go west, and they approached TCU, then TCU would likely want another nearby school, as would the Big East.

4. If the MWC conference is poached by the PAC10 and/or BigXII and TCU is left on an island by themselves with only Boise in another division, a Big East with only one or two teams gone might appear to be a better option for them. .

5. There are basically few options to "strengthen football". Adding BCS schools would be #1-difficult to do at present. Adding TCU would be a good option there-difficult because of logistics and everyone being unstable at the present. .

6. The list. Once again a conclusion of teams that must be the only options when this is far from the case (and studies like the one above clearly show).

So, are these your opinions, or is it "factual data?"

"With a Fall 2009 enrollment of 27,703 students, it is the fastest-growing campus in the University of North Carolina system for six consecutive years"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Carolina_University
ECU’s undergraduate enrollment at 21,424, Charlotte’s at 19,419 and Carolina’s at 17,981. ECU’s current graduate enrollment of 6,196.
21424+6196= 27620
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-admin/mktg/east/Wi...Report.cfm

BTW UNC, Marshall, UCF, and USM are definitely other rivals. Building one with WVU and VT too. I dont need some website to tell me whether or not its a rivalry, the fans know.

As for the Temple person, you guys are worst than UCF in terms of town support. I Was born and raised in PHilly, my entire life! and literally KNOW ONE CARES ABOUT TEMPLE. 4th market or not, you guys get no love. ECU gets more love. To prove my authenticity PATS>genos, common philly knowledge. I just thought about it and LOL’d at temple even owning 5% of that philly market. That city shares close proximity to so many bball schools. NOVA DREXEL LASALLE RUTGERS PENN and many people dont care about anyoff them, course NOVA is top dog. No one will support temple football cause no one cares about temple.

Forgot to add Saint Joes

(06-03-2010 05:59 PM)EastCarolinaU Wrote:  Forgot to add Saint Joes

But Temple is loaded with International students....so that easily outweighs whether or not folks in Philadelphia will tune in if/when Temple plays on the Big East Network.

(06-03-2010 05:55 PM)EastCarolinaU Wrote:  As for the Temple person, you guys are worst than UCF in terms of town support. I Was born and raised in PHilly, my entire life! and literally KNOW ONE CARES ABOUT TEMPLE. 4th market or not, you guys get no love. ECU gets more love. To prove my authenticity PATS>genos, common philly knowledge. I just thought about it and LOL’d at temple even owning 5% of that philly market. That city shares close proximity to so many bball schools. NOVA DREXEL LASALLE RUTGERS PENN and many people dont care about anyoff them, course NOVA is top dog. No one will support temple football cause no one cares about temple.

This is one of the least eloquent posts I've ever read on this site. Your post is littered with grammatical and spelling errors. ECU served you well.

'I was born and raise in Philly, my entire life!' What does that even mean?

Pat's and Geno's is horsemeat. No one but tourists eat that crap.

Drexel? Rutgers? LOL

Yawn...

(06-03-2010 06:15 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 05:55 PM)EastCarolinaU Wrote:  As for the Temple person, you guys are worst than UCF in terms of town support. I Was born and raised in PHilly, my entire life! and literally KNOW ONE CARES ABOUT TEMPLE. 4th market or not, you guys get no love. ECU gets more love. To prove my authenticity PATS>genos, common philly knowledge. I just thought about it and LOL’d at temple even owning 5% of that philly market. That city shares close proximity to so many bball schools. NOVA DREXEL LASALLE RUTGERS PENN and many people dont care about anyoff them, course NOVA is top dog. No one will support temple football cause no one cares about temple.

This is one of the least eloquent posts I've ever read on this site. Your post is littered with grammatical and spelling errors. ECU served you well.

'I was born and raise in Philly, my entire life!' What does that even mean?

Pat's and Geno's is horsemeat. No one but tourists eat that crap.

Drexel? Rutgers? LOL

Yawn...

This is a sports forum. . . who cares about eloquence? Its about getting a point across. This isn’t a fuckin spelling B and im not trying to impress anyone with my grammar. However, im not surprised that out of my entire post you only comment on my grammar, cheese steaks, and Drexel/Rutgers. You know no one in the entire city cares about Temple. You guys are the epitome of irrelevant. Yawn, temple. You must be old if you dont like Pats. . . that and the junk and the yunk are my favorite ****** philly foods.

JHG722, he is right! Quit acting like a jerk!

(06-05-2010 11:08 AM)EastCarolinaU Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 06:15 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(06-03-2010 05:55 PM)EastCarolinaU Wrote:  As for the Temple person, you guys are worst than UCF in terms of town support. I Was born and raised in PHilly, my entire life! and literally KNOW ONE CARES ABOUT TEMPLE. 4th market or not, you guys get no love. ECU gets more love. To prove my authenticity PATS>genos, common philly knowledge. I just thought about it and LOL’d at temple even owning 5% of that philly market. That city shares close proximity to so many bball schools. NOVA DREXEL LASALLE RUTGERS PENN and many people dont care about anyoff them, course NOVA is top dog. No one will support temple football cause no one cares about temple.

This is one of the least eloquent posts I've ever read on this site. Your post is littered with grammatical and spelling errors. ECU served you well.

'I was born and raise in Philly, my entire life!' What does that even mean?

Pat's and Geno's is horsemeat. No one but tourists eat that crap.

Drexel? Rutgers? LOL

Yawn...

This is a sports forum. . . who cares about eloquence? Its about getting a point across. This isn’t a ******spelling B and im not trying to impress anyone with my grammar. However, im not surprised that out of my entire post you only comment on my grammar, cheese steaks, and Drexel/Rutgers. You know no one in the entire city cares about Temple. You guys are the epitome of irrelevant. Yawn, temple. You must be old if you dont like Pats. . . that and the junk and the yunk are my favorite ****** philly foods.

Coming from an ECU fan, that's hilarious. Let's see: behind UNC, Duke, NC State, Wake. For basketball, behind Charlotte and Davidson.

Yeah, we're irrelevant

By the way, it's 'spelling bee'.