(04-02-2012 12:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-02-2012 11:56 AM)Topkat Wrote:  Now, if you think doing away with the BCS and AQ's will essentially get you what we have with the basketball tournament selection process, good luck to ya. College football never was, will never be.

The NCAA tournament money is divided almost 50-50 between the AQ and non-AQ conferences. In contrast, the AQ conferences get between 88% and 94% of the BCS money.

So yes, ain't no way the SEC, B1G, etc. are going to shift to a system that gives non-AQ conferences more money.

In fact, I'd bet the main reason the BCS will be going away is because the B1G and SEC are tired of sharing access to major bowls on an equal basis with the Big East. The Big East is the conference that will lose the most when AQ goes away.

I don't believe basketball is close to a 50-50 split, the major conferences have the majority of teams advancing in the tourney.

When it comes to money, the teams that bring eyes to the tv are the bread and butter. If basketball were limited to one game per week in a single venue, you can bet tv would dictate the big schools play just like the Bowl selection process.

Business is business.

(04-02-2012 01:16 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-02-2012 12:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-02-2012 11:56 AM)Topkat Wrote:  Now, if you think doing away with the BCS and AQ's will essentially get you what we have with the basketball tournament selection process, good luck to ya. College football never was, will never be.

The NCAA tournament money is divided almost 50-50 between the AQ and non-AQ conferences. In contrast, the AQ conferences get between 88% and 94% of the BCS money.

So yes, ain't no way the SEC, B1G, etc. are going to shift to a system that gives non-AQ conferences more money.

In fact, I'd bet the main reason the BCS will be going away is because the B1G and SEC are tired of sharing access to major bowls on an equal basis with the Big East. The Big East is the conference that will lose the most when AQ goes away.

Not even close for ncaa tournament money 50/50....
Big East this year gets 29.4 million dollars...
bottom 16 conferences combined get 29.9 million dollars.

AQ combined gets 122 million dollars
all others get 73.8 million

that's hardly 50/50.

That split will I believe increase soon. 2006 tourney AQ had 71 units. non AQ had 54 units. That gap of 17 by far the smallest in the 2006-2012 period. It's replaced by 2012 tourney, AQ 81 units, non AQ 51 units. To put in perspective- next year-
AQ 124.5 million
non AQ 73.8 million

Ok, but that 63-37 split is still far different from the BCS 93-7 split, eh?

I think the split is more like 85/15 in BCS- depends on performance.

A 63/37 split is a lot closer to 2/1 than 1/1.

Big East is no worse in football than either the ACC or Pac12, the conference rankings show this. Not sure where the stigma came from, but whatever.

(04-02-2012 03:32 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think the split is more like 85/15 in BCS- depends on performance.

A 63/37 split is a lot closer to 2/1 than 1/1.

The BCS/bowls split is around 88-12 if two non-AQs make the field, 94-7 if only one makes it.

But no matter: The point was that the NCAA basketball split is FAR more favorable to the non-AQs than is the BCS/bowl split, and that is doubtless true.

2011(for the 2010 season)- The non AQ's got like 24.6 million. The 3 AQ's with 1 team in got 21.2 million. The 3 with 2 teams got 27.2 million.
So AQ's got 145.2
non AQ's got 24.6
total of 169.8- 85.5%.

haven't seen the numbers for this year. Will be lower for the non AQ's because no non AQ school busted thru this year.

(04-02-2012 04:12 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  Big East is no worse in football than either the ACC or Pac12, the conference rankings show this. Not sure where the stigma came from, but whatever.

It came from ESPN trying to talk the conference down so they can get them for cheap.

(04-03-2012 03:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(04-02-2012 04:12 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  Big East is no worse in football than either the ACC or Pac12, the conference rankings show this. Not sure where the stigma came from, but whatever.

It came from ESPN trying to talk the conference down so they can get them for cheap.

Come on. The perception that the Big East is the runt of the AQ litter is widespread and many years old, long pre-dates ESPN/Big East TV negotiations.

Cowen is a clown.
If his standards are as high as he implies, than why hasn't he held the Tulane Athletic Department to those high standards for all these years. Tulane is a big reason for the perception problem within CUSA.

(04-03-2012 03:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-03-2012 03:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(04-02-2012 04:12 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  Big East is no worse in football than either the ACC or Pac12, the conference rankings show this. Not sure where the stigma came from, but whatever.

It came from ESPN trying to talk the conference down so they can get them for cheap.

Come on. The perception that the Big East is the runt of the AQ litter is widespread and many years old, long pre-dates ESPN/Big East TV negotiations.

But is not necessary factual. Mostly repeated by the media without using facts.

(04-03-2012 03:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-03-2012 03:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(04-02-2012 04:12 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  Big East is no worse in football than either the ACC or Pac12, the conference rankings show this. Not sure where the stigma came from, but whatever.

It came from ESPN trying to talk the conference down so they can get them for cheap.

Come on. The perception that the Big East is the runt of the AQ litter is widespread and many years old, long pre-dates ESPN/Big East TV negotiations.

It pre-dates THIS current TV deal, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been their plan for a long time. They swayed teams away from the league for years, gave us a terrible deal after the last raid and pushed for our exclusion from the BCS. Do you know why? A non-BCS league costs a LOT less than a BCS one.

(04-01-2012 02:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:27 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:05 AM)justinslot Wrote:  You forgot the whole quote! You know, where he contradicts himself two sentences later:

"Every school in the Big East with the exception of Rutgers and UConn will have come from Conference USA and the Mountain West. My view is that the Big East is not a power conference, and anyone who thinks they are doesn’t know athletics. The power conferences now are the Big 12, the Pac-12, the ACC, the Big Ten and the SEC. The other thing I’ve seen is that the parity is getting much better even between the power conferences and all the rest. When I was fighting the fight back in 2003 around the BCS, the Boise States, the TCUs, the Utahs were never thought of in the same breath as the power conferences. Now, they’re all joining the power conferences because they’ve proved their way in football."

Not sure i see the contradiction? He's saying there are 5 power conferences, but that the gap between the powers and non-powers has narrowed, and that a few of the former non-power schools have proved their way into the power ranks ... There would only be a contradiction if he was saying most or all of the schools that have moved up to power conferences have proved their way in, but the fact that he mentions only 3 schools, and schools that have all won BCS bowls the past 5 years, means he's obviously not including schools like Memphis, SMU, Temple, etc. in that grouping.

Quo, see all the bold points and connect the dots for the contradiction.

Come on. Including Boise as joining a power conference is clearly a slip of the tongue on his part, and not a Freudian one, eh?

If people like this guy continue to blab about how poor the Big East is in a clear attempt to devalue it, then I will hold them accountable for literally every sentence. And if Cowen can't string four sentences together without looking stupid, then I have no problem with anyone pointing it out.

(04-01-2012 11:52 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  As much as he might dislike the BCS. It has given schools like Utah,TCU, Boise and Hawaii opportunities to play in big games. Those bowls were closed to those schools in the past. As for his Big East comment, well what can you expect from a CUSA school that has been left behind.

This.

A few years ago, Cowan took the lead in threatening to sue the BCS over alleged restraint of trade. Although some legal experts opined there might be merit in such a suit, as a practical matter, it was a dumb idea. Without going over all the reasons, it was always my view that if the non-AQ conferences won, they faced a good chance of the kind of Pyhrric victory that the USFL gained against the NFL. That is to say a jury finding of a violation of the Sherman Act but with such nebulous damages that the non-AQs would be awarded $1 for their effort.

Now Cowan is the primary architect of the CUSA-MWC merger, which particularly for the MWC is the dumbest idea ever. Nothing like aligning yourselves with not just mighty Tulane but UAB and Rice. All three are fine universities academically but none has accomplished much of worth in football over the last 15 years and there's no reason to think that's going to change. Indeed, not only do they lose at least 2/3 of their games, their attendance has been abysmal. Yeah, like the MWC should be following THAT guy to football riches.

(04-03-2012 05:02 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 02:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:27 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:05 AM)justinslot Wrote:  You forgot the whole quote! You know, where he contradicts himself two sentences later:

"Every school in the Big East with the exception of Rutgers and UConn will have come from Conference USA and the Mountain West. My view is that the Big East is not a power conference, and anyone who thinks they are doesn’t know athletics. The power conferences now are the Big 12, the Pac-12, the ACC, the Big Ten and the SEC. The other thing I’ve seen is that the parity is getting much better even between the power conferences and all the rest. When I was fighting the fight back in 2003 around the BCS, the Boise States, the TCUs, the Utahs were never thought of in the same breath as the power conferences. Now, they’re all joining the power conferences because they’ve proved their way in football."

Not sure i see the contradiction? He's saying there are 5 power conferences, but that the gap between the powers and non-powers has narrowed, and that a few of the former non-power schools have proved their way into the power ranks ... There would only be a contradiction if he was saying most or all of the schools that have moved up to power conferences have proved their way in, but the fact that he mentions only 3 schools, and schools that have all won BCS bowls the past 5 years, means he's obviously not including schools like Memphis, SMU, Temple, etc. in that grouping.

Quo, see all the bold points and connect the dots for the contradiction.

Come on. Including Boise as joining a power conference is clearly a slip of the tongue on his part, and not a Freudian one, eh?

If people like this guy continue to blab about how poor the Big East is in a clear attempt to devalue it, then I will hold them accountable for literally every sentence. And if Cowen can't string four sentences together without looking stupid, then I have no problem with anyone pointing it out.

lol... He should invoke an old Yogi Berra quote "I didn't really say everything I said".