I just don't get it if the final plan REALLY is to end up at this:

Blue: Boise, Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, Rutgers, Temple and the 14th team
Red: Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Navy, San Diego State, USF and SMU

If that's REALLY the case then why not just start next year with the Blue minus 14th team and the Red minus Navy?

It doens't make much sense to me to have two years of geographic divisons and then totally shake up the mix.

Can anybody explain to me the upside of doing this?

We'll have to worry about that if it actually gets announced that this is the case.

(11-13-2012 06:14 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  We'll have to worry about that if it actually gets announced that this is the case.

It makes me question the accuracy of the rumors. If they are accurate then I think totally switching teams around after just two years is short sighted and makes the league more unstable than it actually is.

(11-13-2012 06:18 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(11-13-2012 06:14 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  We'll have to worry about that if it actually gets announced that this is the case.

It makes me question the accuracy of the rumors. If they are accurate then I think totally switching teams around after just two years is short sighted and makes the league more unstable than it actually is.

This. I am pretty sure things will stay East/West divisions. The old BE schools want to stay together since they got some history now. It makes no sense to split them up.

The Biggest Benefit is the ability to adjust on the fly once you know who the other addition is, but again I think part of the arrangement for getting Temple to go out west is going to end up being giving them games against Rutgers and UConn for the next two years. And I think We'll see Boise playing UC, Louisville and maybe Rutgers as well. I think the Big East is going to really sell matchups the first two year. After that other teams can rise up and you never know what the landscape will be, but I think by doing the divisions like this, the Big East thought it create the best possible matchups for TV for a couple of years and keep everyone relatively happy.

This may help, I posted in the divisions thread already.

Per Greg Auman:

"Big East commissioner Mike Aresco says every conference team will play all 11 others in 2013-14. No fixed cross-division games 1st 2 years."

https://twitter.com/gregauman/status/268493196819050496"

(11-13-2012 06:36 PM)TheRock Wrote:  This may help, I posted in the divisions thread already.

Per Greg Auman:

"Big East commissioner Mike Aresco says every conference team will play all 11 others in 2013-14. No fixed cross-division games 1st 2 years."

https://twitter.com/gregauman/status/268493196819050496"

Interesting. That obviously verifies the 8 conference games per season.

I don't buy the zipper switch in 15. Geo is here to stay. What is left open for me is how many conference games in 15?

6+2 or 6+3 or 6+4? I mean is the goal to cycle through every matchup in two years? If so, 6+2 will not work.

Let's hope we don't switch to zippers in 2015. It's unwieldly, unneeded, and will hinder starting or continuing rivalries.

There is no benefit unless tv is finding some. The best thing I've heard is we'll cycle through eachother the next 2 years - we need to start building some history and that is reason number 1 what ever we're going with the next 2 years is what we should stay with

Navy and the new team will move to west, and Temple back east. then you have a balanced East West break down.

(11-13-2012 10:06 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Navy and the new team will move to west, and Temple back east. then you have a balanced East West break down.

Yes, but it would be even more balanced if we did this:

EAST ****

UConn
Rutgers
Temple
Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
USF
UCF

WEST ****

Houston
SMU
Air Force
BYU
Boise
Fresno
SDSU
Navy

That gets Memphis with Louisville & Cincinnati, and it gives us a complete western division (Boise & SDSU would be on Cloud 9). But we're not going to 16 .............

(11-13-2012 10:25 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(11-13-2012 10:06 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Navy and the new team will move to west, and Temple back east. then you have a balanced East West break down.

Yes, but it would be even more balanced if we did this:

EAST ****

UConn
Rutgers
Temple
Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
USF
UCF

WEST ****

Houston
SMU
Air Force
BYU
Boise
Fresno
SDSU
Navy

That gets Memphis with Louisville & Cincinnati, and it gives us a complete western division (Boise & SDSU would be on Cloud 9). But we're not going to 16 .............

^ I'm Mestophalies and I approve this message.

Everyone wants access to recruiting in Florida, Texas, and California... that's why they'll switch to the zippers... if there is one member from each state in each division it works... and your cross-division rival, will be your guaranteed part of your schedule!

That's why it makes sense -- you need to take advantage of the coast-to-coast nature of such a vast league... and considering you only travel 4-games a year, they won't all be cross country or right next door, so it makes the travel component fair for everyone.

(11-14-2012 02:28 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  Everyone wants access to recruiting in Florida, Texas, and California... that's why they'll switch to the zippers... if there is one member from each state in each division it works... and your cross-division rival, will be your guaranteed part of your schedule!

That's why it makes sense -- you need to take advantage of the coast-to-coast nature of such a vast league... and considering you only travel 4-games a year, they won't all be cross country or right next door, so it makes the travel component fair for everyone.

Zippers maximize travel cost
Zippers minimize regional alliance strength

Only a pure IDIOT would have zippers that go from east coast to west coast

From an interview with the Idaho Statesman:

"My goals have been from the very beginning to minimize travel, to make sure we keep some natural rivalries and to make sure that the divisions have clear identities," Big East Commissioner Mike Aresco said during a visit to Boise last month. "I think sometimes you see divisional play where there's not a clear identity. You don't know who's in this division or that division."

While divisions could see a shakeup in membership in 2015, zippers are not going to happen.

Anybody who says zippers ARE going to happen, or are NOT going to happen, is doing nothing but stating an opinion, not a fact.

IMO, the league has not decided beyond the first 2 years yet. It could still go either way.

(11-13-2012 06:13 PM)3601 Wrote:  I just don't get it if the final plan REALLY is to end up at this:

Blue: Boise, Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, Rutgers, Temple and the 14th team
Red: Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Navy, San Diego State, USF and SMU

If that's REALLY the case then why not just start next year with the Blue minus 14th team and the Red minus Navy?

It doens't make much sense to me to have two years of geographic divisons and then totally shake up the mix.

Can anybody explain to me the upside of doing this?

None, although I admit to having an unabashed hatred of zipper divisions overall.

divisions should be built around UC/UL/UM and UCONN/RU/Temple

(11-14-2012 08:07 PM)FuzzyHasek Wrote:  divisions should be built around UC/UL/UM and UCONN/RU/Temple

That's how I feel, too. I doubt that one flies, though.

(11-13-2012 06:13 PM)3601 Wrote:  What is benefit of doing these divisions for 2 years and then switching?

Hell if I know, but damn good question, 36...