Why does the Big East insist on avoiding schools like East Carolina (Though they finally got in) and Southern Miss? I find this baffling. I can see why Southern Miss was passed back in the Big East's heyday. Being in another timezone and out of the way of the rest of the members. I think East Carolina should have been added back in the mid 90's. That's history, though.

The main reason I started this thread is for current day Southern Miss. Yes, they just had an extremely bad season. But that's an anomaly for them. They had 18 consecutive winning season until this year. They have rivalries with East Carolina, Memphis, and Tulane. They had an absolutely horrendous season, and the smallest crowd they had was 22,874 against UAB. The only knock you can give them is they aren't located in a large market.

It's extremely silly that the Big East refuses to add them, when they can provide something Big East football drastically needs - respect.

(01-20-2013 09:56 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Why does the Big East insist on avoiding schools like East Carolina (Though they finally got in) and Southern Miss? I find this baffling. I can see why Southern Miss was passed back in the Big East's heyday. Being in another timezone and out of the way of the rest of the members. I think East Carolina should have been added back in the mid 90's. That's history, though.

The main reason I started this thread is for current day Southern Miss. Yes, they just had an extremely bad season. But that's an anomaly for them. They had 18 consecutive winning season until this year. They have rivalries with East Carolina, Memphis, and Tulane. They had an absolutely horrendous season, and the smallest crowd they had was 22,874 against UAB. The only knock you can give them is they aren't located in a large market.

It's extremely silly that the Big East refuses to add them, when they can provide something Big East football drastically needs - respect.

They don't bring TV sets.....

They would win too much.

I like So Miss. They are usually always a good team. I just wish they carried a larger market in a bigger state.

Mississippi put a large amount of players in the NFL. A great recruiting ground not named Florida or Texas.

We are waiting for Louisville Cinci Clemson FSU and two others to go to the Big 12

No additions until that is sorted out

Thank you OrangeCrush for your post...It's a shame actually why the NBE doesn't appear to have interest in USM.
I know it's markets these days but...
People forget they were in the Metro for ten years.
It's in the top 30 all-time winning % in NCAA history.
Good football, baseball & now basketball programs.
They've been good for so long because there's an extremely deep pool of athletes within 1.5 hours of Hattiesburg.
Actually, they would actually bring a little SEC-type gravitas to the conference & they want to be there.

(01-20-2013 09:59 PM)buffdog Wrote:  They don't bring TV sets.....

(01-20-2013 10:12 PM)bearcat29 Wrote:  I like So Miss. They are usually always a good team. I just wish they carried a larger market in a bigger state.

Yeah, because every conference that has expanded for TV market purposes has done so well.

(01-20-2013 10:24 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Mississippi put a large amount of players in the NFL. A great recruiting ground not named Florida or Texas.

Then why are Ole Miss and Mississippi State normally at the bottom of the SEC?

(01-20-2013 09:56 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  They had an absolutely horrendous season, and the smallest crowd they had was 22,874 against UAB. The only knock you can give them is they aren't located in a large market.

It's extremely silly that the Big East refuses to add them, when they can provide something Big East football drastically needs - respect.

Okay if you think 22,847 is a respectable crowd when Alabama 1 state over averages 100,000 you are wrong in that regard.

Who respects a program that was 0-12 on the football field last year? No solid program pulls out an 0-12.

(01-20-2013 09:56 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Why does the Big East insist on avoiding schools Southern Miss?

Because we went 0-12 last year.

Read it on CSNBBS, true story.

(01-21-2013 01:48 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  Who respects a program that was 0-12 on the football field last year? No solid program pulls out an 0-12.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!


Like clockwork.

Mississippi is a poor state. They dont bring any money. Hattiesburg, MS would be the poorest city in the Big East.

Same reason that a group of schools that Arkansas State is 12-3 against the last 4 years are joining CUSA while Arkansas State remains Sun Belt.

With the additions of Tulane's awesomeness and now Tulsa, this may be changing, but before Louisville and Rutgers left the Big East had delusions of competing as a semi-power-conference in football. That takes money, and the idea was that TV would pay big money for teams in top 20 or 30 or 50 markets that were competitive on the field and/or had major conference history.

ECU and Southern Miss did not fit that strategy.

(01-21-2013 01:48 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(01-20-2013 09:56 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  They had an absolutely horrendous season, and the smallest crowd they had was 22,874 against UAB. The only knock you can give them is they aren't located in a large market.

It's extremely silly that the Big East refuses to add them, when they can provide something Big East football drastically needs - respect.

Okay if you think 22,847 is a respectable crowd when Alabama 1 state over averages 100,000 you are wrong in that regard.

Who respects a program that was 0-12 on the football field last year? No solid program pulls out an 0-12.

Awesome, let's play the if you think game with USM relative to programs in big markets that qualify for the Big East....

If you think 20,894 is a respectable crowd (in a market of 2.5 million people)while in the same state Texas is averaging 100,000 you are wrong in that regard.

Who respects a program that went 1-11 in back to back seasons on the football field as recently as 2007 and 2008? No solid program does that back to back seasons.

Hello SMU.

If you think 19,276 is a respectable crowd (in a market of 640,000 people)while in the same state LSU is averaging 100,000 you are wrong in that regard.

Who respects a program that went 2-11 and 2-10 in back to back seasons on the football field as recently as 2011 and 2012? No solid program does that back to back seasons.

Hello TULANE.

Thanks for playing.

[/quote]

Then why are Ole Miss and Mississippi State normally at the bottom of the SEC?
[/quote]

Good question. I wonder what would happen to the 'On field" product if all of the Mississippi 4 and 5 star recruits went to only one in-state power house, rather than 2 or 3? A small state, like MS, although very good in football, only has so much talent. They aren't FL or TX, or even AL for that matter.

(01-21-2013 08:02 AM)eaglerock Wrote:  

(01-21-2013 01:48 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(01-20-2013 09:56 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  They had an absolutely horrendous season, and the smallest crowd they had was 22,874 against UAB. The only knock you can give them is they aren't located in a large market.

It's extremely silly that the Big East refuses to add them, when they can provide something Big East football drastically needs - respect.

Okay if you think 22,847 is a respectable crowd when Alabama 1 state over averages 100,000 you are wrong in that regard.

Who respects a program that was 0-12 on the football field last year? No solid program pulls out an 0-12.

Awesome, let's play the if you think game with USM relative to programs in big markets that qualify for the Big East....

Hello SMU.

Hello TULANE.

Thanks for playing.

Clearly you're applying based on different criteria than they're using for applicants. To gatecrash this group based on attendance, apparently you need 50K (ECU), or based on on-the-field success, you need some BCS bowl trophies (Boise State.)

Now, the cast of characters making decisions is changing. The guys who brought in UCF, Houston and SMU first, and then MEmphis and Temple, are long gone. Now you need to convince the guys who brought in Tulane and are about to bring in Tulsa.

Soon you'll just have to convince a bunch of schools you've been in a conference with for ten or twenty years. Houston, Tulane, Memphis, ECU 1996-2013, SMU, UCF and Tulsa 2005-2013, Cincinnati 1996-2005, USF for a while. Some of those are off by a year or two, but the point is they're very familiar with your program and what you can and can't do.

Why does the ACC add programs like Syracuse? There are reasons for every decision. Why do fans of schools fleeing the BE have so much concern about the future makeup of the BE?

Further to johnbragg's point, there's an inherent bias against directional schools as you go farther up the food chain (and when I say "directional schools" I don't mean ones that just happen to have a direction in their names like USC). Once you get past the top 12 or so "king" programs, generally speaking, top flagships and the equivalent of flagships (e.g. UCLA, Texas A&M, FSU) are at the top of the food chain. The university presidents then tend to favor private institutions for academic branding reasons, while ADs and fans gravitate toward "metro" schools (e.g. Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis). Schools like USF and UCF might have directions in their names, but the nature of their institutions are that they're really metro schools - they could have easily been called the "University of Tampa" (if one didn't already exist) or the "University of Orlando". Directional schools are simply the last to be picked, as they're looked at as schools with hyper regional fan bases in small markets. Even the MWC doesn't have any directional schools as members and ECU is really the only school that fits that category in the power 5 conferences plus the Big East and MWC. So, you effectively see the top 7 conferences avoiding them if at all possible. They'd still rather have a private school like Tulsa and Tulane for branding purposes even if the attendance is subpar.