(03-29-2012 02:39 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think Temple and Memphis have a lot better name value than you give it credit for in basketball- Memphis in particular. Probably a bigger hoops name quite frankly than either of Pitt or West Virginia. The Nielsen data does not include the NCAA tournament either, which is huge, given the Big East dominates that. Big East final was ahead of SEC and Pac 12 in # of viewers(didn't see ACC numbers).

They're good basketball names, but I definitely think you're overstating them compared to Pitt or WVU. There's no comparison to Syracuse - they're an elite draw. To be sure, the Big East will still have a lot of basketball value with UConn, Louisville, Temple, Memphis, ND, etc. It's a strong suit for the conference. All I'm saying is that they actually aren't ahead of the other power conferences in terms of basketball TV value even with the perception that the Big East is a "basketball conference". As much as the media loves to romanticize MSG, most of America doesn't really care with the Big Ten and ACC consistently getting larger basketball tournament numbers (it's not just this year). Regardless, all of the top basketball conferences are effectively even in terms of TV value. In contrast, the other 5 power conferences have a large advantage in football TV value.

(03-29-2012 02:39 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think Temple and Memphis have a lot better name value than you give it credit for in basketball- Memphis in particular. Probably a bigger hoops name quite frankly than either of Pitt or West Virginia. The Nielsen data does not include the NCAA tournament either, which is huge, given the Big East dominates that. Big East final was ahead of SEC and Pac 12 in # of viewers(didn't see ACC numbers).

I seriously doubt that statement. I'd LOVE to read some real, measurable proof of that. There's a lot more folks that care about WVU and Pitt any given week (especially Saturdays) than Memphis.

Again, you're always talking basketball only and not the total package. Memphis football is a dog, period. Take out the DeAngelo Williams years and they've never really done anything. Look at their basketball history, much of their biggest successes on the court were followed by scandal and vacated tournament wins.

Until basketball drives TV $$$ more than football Memphis IS NOT more valueable than WVU or Pitt.

(03-29-2012 12:09 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  The Big East has lived up to the present BCS criteria with the new additions.

What criteria? That the conference continues to be named "Big East", as it was in the Bowl Alliance and BCS founding documents?

Quote:There is no basis to omit them from their present status in the system going forward.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Are you talking about "their present status in the system" for 2012 and 2013, or "going forward" as in the next BCS/BCS-successor contract starting in 2014?

(03-29-2012 11:11 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 11:09 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  It is in Notre Dame's interest to keep the Big East strong. A system the kills the Big East is a strike against the Irish and their status as an Independent.

Until we get a sixteen team playoff that includes conference champions and at-large bids there are going to schools and conference left out. A four team playoff is the first step on the road to a full blown tournament. Schools are throwing away money by keeping a bowl system that is outdated and not very fan friendly.

Schools would throw away more money giving Arkansas State and LA Tech an auto bid to the tournament. They'd make more going to a bowl game than playing them.

(03-29-2012 11:29 AM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 11:11 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 11:09 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  It is in Notre Dame's interest to keep the Big East strong. A system the kills the Big East is a strike against the Irish and their status as an Independent.

Until we get a sixteen team playoff that includes conference champions and at-large bids there are going to schools and conference left out. A four team playoff is the first step on the road to a full blown tournament. Schools are throwing away money by keeping a bowl system that is outdated and not very fan friendly.

Schools would throw away more money giving Arkansas State and LA Tech an auto bid to the tournament. They'd make more going to a bowl game than playing them.

bull****. You realize that most schools lose money on bowl games right? If say....VT was hosting Arkansas St in the first round of a playoff do you actually believe VT couldn't make more off those 65K seats than a trip to the Orange Bowl?

This is one of the more absurd anti-playoff posts I've seen on here.

Below is a post I made earlier this morning that I think is relevant to this discussion.

http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=563...pid7740068

I've believed for some time that the schools from what are called non-AQ conferences today would be better off forming their own "playoff" whether it be within the fbs classification or a new classification. I personally think it would be successful and would quickly make more money than the bowls, if it didn't in the beginning, because it would create better matchups from the beginning and the matchups would continue to get better over a period of weeks. You know, like a playoff.

That doesn't mean that the bowls would have to be done away with altogether. Only the very best teams should be in the playoff. I believe that the same is true of the current fbs system. If TPTB would get their heads out of their arses and create an 8, 12 or 16 team playoff. The bowls would still exist as post-season exhibitions which is what they are today.

The so-called AQ schools are looking out for themselves and have no intention of ever creating a better environment for the non-AQ's. Accepting the scraps from the big boys table and hoping for a pat on the head is not a way to force changes in the current system. And regardless of how the group is classified there is no reason to stop playing the AQ schools for OOC games. There shouldn't be any fear of cutting off that revenue source unless the AQ schools would try to do it out of spite. And that isn't likely. They have 3 options:

1 - keep playing the non-AQ's just as today

2 - stop playing today's non-AQ's and only play fcs schools, fans will hate this because of the lack of competition, heck they already hate playing fcs schools

3 - play only other AQ schools, blow up many schools season records and take the risk that their fanbases will be turned off

(03-29-2012 03:53 PM)joe4psu Wrote:  I've believed for some time that the schools from what are called non-AQ conferences today would be better off forming their own "playoff" whether it be within the fbs classification or a new classification. I personally think it would be successful and would quickly make more money than the bowls

I approve of this post. Glad I'm not alone in calling for a non-AQ playoff system.

(03-29-2012 03:58 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 03:53 PM)joe4psu Wrote:  I've believed for some time that the schools from what are called non-AQ conferences today would be better off forming their own "playoff" whether it be within the fbs classification or a new classification. I personally think it would be successful and would quickly make more money than the bowls

I approve of this post. Glad I'm not alone in calling for a non-AQ playoff system.

I wish more people agreed. Change is scary though. And I have to admit what while I would love to see it as a sports fan I have an ulterior motive as a fan of a school in an "AQ" conference. The success of such a playoff would help force TPTB to create a playoff for all of fbs.

(03-29-2012 02:08 PM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 02:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing is, the Big East basketball tournament ALONE probably would get close to what the Big East is getting for everything now. Big East is a star property in basketball.

Also- all of the college leagues that have renegotiated have seen huge increases. That's more apples to apples than comparing to the NHL or MLS.

The Big East basketball tournament is not going to be the same without Syracuse. That is their event more than anyone else's. Even this year, you had Pitino jabbering like a moron about how C-USA had come to Manhattan with a UL-UCincy title game. Bet the Providence Mafia loved that. Wait until SMU, UCF, and Houston arrive. That's why I wonder if it's not better for the bball-onlies to take what's left of their brand and add a couple A10 programs and move on from football.

Why do you omit Memphis and Temple from your argument? And BTW, Houston has a top-20 recruiting class for 2012 according to every reputable recruiting service out there, and the ONLY top-20 class from the "mid-majors" so to speak.

(03-29-2012 04:47 PM)Texas2Step Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 02:08 PM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 02:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing is, the Big East basketball tournament ALONE probably would get close to what the Big East is getting for everything now. Big East is a star property in basketball.

Also- all of the college leagues that have renegotiated have seen huge increases. That's more apples to apples than comparing to the NHL or MLS.

The Big East basketball tournament is not going to be the same without Syracuse. That is their event more than anyone else's. Even this year, you had Pitino jabbering like a moron about how C-USA had come to Manhattan with a UL-UCincy title game. Bet the Providence Mafia loved that. Wait until SMU, UCF, and Houston arrive. That's why I wonder if it's not better for the bball-onlies to take what's left of their brand and add a couple A10 programs and move on from football.

Why do you omit Memphis and Temple from your argument? And BTW, Houston has a top-20 recruiting class for 2012 according to every reputable recruiting service out there, and the ONLY top-20 class from the "mid-majors" so to speak.

Temple's fine, but even a good Memphis team, just as good UL or good Cincy teams, doesn't really fit into the spirit of Madison Square Garden for the Big East Tournament. Incidentally, I'm not saying WVU really contributed to that atmosphere either, although our 2010 championship team did come mostly from the metro area. Point is, the Big East Tournament is losing a ton of cache with Syracuse and Pitt joining Boston College in the ACC. It'd be like having the ACC tournament in Greensboro but UNC being in the SEC. It's just not the same event, no matter how good Memphis or Houston, lol, may be that year.

(03-29-2012 04:10 PM)joe4psu Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 03:58 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 03:53 PM)joe4psu Wrote:  I've believed for some time that the schools from what are called non-AQ conferences today would be better off forming their own "playoff" whether it be within the fbs classification or a new classification. I personally think it would be successful and would quickly make more money than the bowls

I approve of this post. Glad I'm not alone in calling for a non-AQ playoff system.

I wish more people agreed. Change is scary though. And I have to admit what while I would love to see it as a sports fan I have an ulterior motive as a fan of a school in an "AQ" conference. The success of such a playoff would help force TPTB to create a playoff for all of fbs.

Joe, I've always felt a playoff was the inevitable destination for the schools that formed the CFA. Keeping control of the TV money was the first step. The amount of money to be made through a playoff will eventually pull it all together...

The other post about principles got me in a bullet point mood. I think both sides should be able to agree on these points:

1. ND is the single most well known and popular college football team. For a given level of success, ND will get more coverage than any other team. For the foreseeable future, ND will receive a spot.

2. ND's impact has lessened over the past few decades. We talk about the "kings, barons, knights" breakdown of schools. ND used to be God on that scale, almost as big as the rest of college football put together. They have been demoted to a solid "king".

3. ND has been down lower and longer than they ever had before. The comparisons to the Rockne-Leahy interregnum are not even close. That's considered a down period because they had a decade where they had no undefeated seasons and were outside the top 10 in winning percentage (at 11th). Over the last 30 years, they've had 1 undefeated season and are 21st in winning percentage, sandwiched between Texas A&M and Iowa.

4. It is nowhere written that the ND empire goes on forever. More than any other school, ND is dependent on fans who neither attended the school nor live anywhere near the school. Over the decades they've created new fans particularly among those without college education due to their Catholic connection and winning. It's unclear whether this process will continue indefinitely, especially considering the increasing college attendance and ND's continued on-field struggles.

5. NDNation is the single highest density collection of crazy in the college sports world.

(03-29-2012 02:16 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 12:57 PM)TOGC Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 11:36 AM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 11:28 AM)TOGC Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 11:18 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  And we have a winner.

The Big East would have been listed in that grouping with Syracuse, Pitt, AND West Virginia.

When was the last time Syracuse was relevant in football? Really?

Does that really matter anymore? Pretty clear who's considered important at this point. It's not the Big East or the Alliance.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

The Big East has a smaller television contract than the others because it's the oldest one that hasn't come up for renewal yet. When they renew it in the next few years, they'll get a HUGE raise and people will quit making dumb statements that the Big East doesn't matter.

It was already a better FB league than the ACC, and it got stronger when Pitt and Syracuse left. BSU more than makes up for the loss of WV.

What does that have to do with the premise? Sagarin might say the BE is stronger because they've got Boise and Houston's recent numbers to boost the Big East. That has absolutely NOTHING to do with what defines AQ and non-AQ originally. That doesn't change the academic elitism and tradition factors involved in all of this non-sense.

All I'm saying is that the Big East and Alliance will be in pretty much the same boat regarding the "New BCS". Neither will get any respect.

And yes, Big East basketball will still be far superior to the Alliance (if it happens). ECU would still jump to the Big East in a heartbeat.

Happy?

Academic elitism? That has absolutely nothing to do with conference expansion or television deals. Neither does tradition. Those two things are COMPLETELY irrelevant.

(03-29-2012 02:36 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 12:57 PM)TOGC Wrote:  It was already a better FB league than the ACC, and it got stronger when Pitt and Syracuse left. BSU more than makes up for the loss of WV.

Folks, he'll be here all week.



If Boise's presence in the Big East makes up for the loss of West Virginia, then please explain to the members of the jury why the Big East is not listed as one of the parties that matter at the "Big Table" along with the B1G, ACC, SEC, PAC-12, Big Texas XII, and Notre Dame.

That quote came from McMurphy, who is not the be-all, end-all. You act as if his words should be carved into stone tablets that came down from the mountain.

I can assure you that the loss of a good WV team, a decent Pitt team, and a God-awful Syracuse team will easily be replaced by the incoming teams to the nBE.

The first six matter because they are setting the tone of the conversation. The second group of six matter because the first six still need to persuade them for the final votes.

To me that is the difference. All 12 matter, six of them set the tone but then have to work to get the other six to vote "properly".

All 12 matter.

(03-29-2012 05:57 PM)TOGC Wrote:  Academic elitism? That has absolutely nothing to do with conference expansion or television deals. Neither does tradition. Those two things are COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Academics and tradition absolutely have an effect on conference expansion.

Tradition. Let's look at who was admitted into the Power 5 lately. West Virginia, TCU and Utah. 2 state flagships and a former Southwest Conference school.

West Virginia's academics were pretty much disqualifying for the ACC.
Boise State's academics and status as a jumped-up teachers' college hurts them almost as much as being in a small market.

A small part of the reason the Big East takes/took abuse is that it has schools with directional names and city names, which on average are less prestigious than state names. Because it's usually true across the country, people would guess that U of South Dakota's academics are better than South Dakota States' are better than Souix City U's.

(03-29-2012 06:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 05:57 PM)TOGC Wrote:  Academic elitism? That has absolutely nothing to do with conference expansion or television deals. Neither does tradition. Those two things are COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Academics and tradition absolutely have an effect on conference expansion.

Tradition. Let's look at who was admitted into the Power 5 lately. West Virginia, TCU and Utah. 2 state flagships and a former Southwest Conference school.

West Virginia's academics were pretty much disqualifying for the ACC.
Boise State's academics and status as a jumped-up teachers' college hurts them almost as much as being in a small market.

A small part of the reason the Big East takes/took abuse is that it has schools with directional names and city names, which on average are less prestigious than state names. Because it's usually true across the country, people would guess that U of South Dakota's academics are better than South Dakota States' are better than Souix City U's.

Texas is an elitist snob when it comes to academics.

But they allowed West Virginia in.

Conference expansion has NOTHING to do with academics.

It has EVERYTHING to do with money.

Don't know about the Big East, but in ACC country, expansion has every bit to do with academics as well as athletics.

Because, trust us, if academics were not a concern, West Virginia would have already been an ACC member.

(03-29-2012 05:24 PM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 04:47 PM)Texas2Step Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 02:08 PM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(03-29-2012 02:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing is, the Big East basketball tournament ALONE probably would get close to what the Big East is getting for everything now. Big East is a star property in basketball.

Also- all of the college leagues that have renegotiated have seen huge increases. That's more apples to apples than comparing to the NHL or MLS.

The Big East basketball tournament is not going to be the same without Syracuse. That is their event more than anyone else's. Even this year, you had Pitino jabbering like a moron about how C-USA had come to Manhattan with a UL-UCincy title game. Bet the Providence Mafia loved that. Wait until SMU, UCF, and Houston arrive. That's why I wonder if it's not better for the bball-onlies to take what's left of their brand and add a couple A10 programs and move on from football.

Why do you omit Memphis and Temple from your argument? And BTW, Houston has a top-20 recruiting class for 2012 according to every reputable recruiting service out there, and the ONLY top-20 class from the "mid-majors" so to speak.

Temple's fine, but even a good Memphis team, just as good UL or good Cincy teams, doesn't really fit into the spirit of Madison Square Garden for the Big East Tournament. Incidentally, I'm not saying WVU really contributed to that atmosphere either, although our 2010 championship team did come mostly from the metro area. Point is, the Big East Tournament is losing a ton of cache with Syracuse and Pitt joining Boston College in the ACC. It'd be like having the ACC tournament in Greensboro but UNC being in the SEC. It's just not the same event, no matter how good Memphis or Houston, lol, may be that year.

True, Syracuse leaving the conference does put somewhat of a dent in its appeal in NYC and therefore the BE tourney. But Temple is a good enough brand with good enough proximity to bring great interest to a tournament in NYC area, but of course that all depends on how well they perform. Memphis has a national brand name in basketball. They are not Syracuse, but they have a decent brand that can't only go upwards if they perform well on this stage. Houston, SMU, UCF, may never get that kind of attention in NYC for obvious reasons, but then again none of them were brought in to solidify BE basketball, but rather football. UConn, Louisville, an upward St John's, G'Town, Nova, Seton Hall, Notre Dame, Temple all have enough cache in the NorthEast that if all of those programs can sustain a competitive level in basketball, then the Big East may very well be able to weather yet another storm of lost programs.

I also believe that the Big East just signed a new deal to keep the tournament at MSG for the foreseeable future, and this was after the declared defections.

(03-29-2012 06:01 PM)TOGC Wrote:  I can assure you that the loss of a good WV team, a decent Pitt team, and a God-awful Syracuse team will easily be replaced by the incoming teams to the nBE.

This.

I have heard nothing in this thread but a lot of mumbo jumbo regarding academics and names of programs...

YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE. Whaaaaaaaaatever...

The fact is, most of the people posting in this thread don't have the foggiest insight into the Big East's TV deal.

Previous paradigms have been shattered. Under the direction of television consultants, the nBe has increased it's market coverage and structured it's television package across multiple time-zones, thereby increasing the innate value of the football conference.

Your POVs are worthless because this is unchartered territory.

Too many people are thinking OLD SCHOOL in regards to the inherent value that exists in the Big East football conference. The inventory has increased (more games) and more television-friendly programs have been added in the place of deadbeats like Syracuse and Pitt.



Ratings (both television and BCS standings) will determine the value of the package. The incoming schools (particularly Boise State, NAVY, and Houston) ratings measure up VERY NICELY versus the numbers that Syracuse and Pitt posted last year.

I don't believe some of you are trying to go the academic snobbery route. If that's the case than Rice and Tulane will drive a great deal for the new alliance.

(03-29-2012 07:39 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Don't know about the Big East, but in ACC country, expansion has every bit to do with academics as well as athletics.

Because, trust us, if academics were not a concern, West Virginia would have already been an ACC member.

+1000 WVU would have been an ACC member 30 years ago or at least 9 years ago.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk

...and that's a wrap. Thanks for playing, but I think it's settled that despite (my own) apprehension for ND, they have built up a fortress that keeps them in the haves.