(03-19-2013 08:04 PM)Texas2Step Wrote:  The arguing about who's ***** is bigger is sickening. We're all in this together, like it or not, so everybody get used to it. We all need to start pulling each other up and encouraging each other to kick the crap out of the REAL enemies. The "Power 5" teams. Tulane with a new stadium coming, Memphis with increased focus on the field, ECU continuing to build their basketball brand as well as continued success on the field, SMU restoring their brand to the forefront (the right way), as well as all of the other schools doing what it takes to get to the top is what will bring ALL OF US to the "top tier". This "I'm better than you" madness is ridiculous.

But back to the real subject, I think Aresco has been dealt a short hand from the get go. Think about when he came in and the circumstances surrounding the conference at that time. He's a graduate of Tufts U who's been in the industry for a very long time, and has a solid reputation nationwide. To say that a PBS employee could do what he's done is a bitter, spiteful, hate-filled, childish insult that's really uncalled for. It isn't his fault that most of our teams can't bring fans to our stadiums or arenas, or can't sustain winning teams in our major sports. You need to take that up with your athletic directors and put your $ where your mouths are. I'm in the minority that believes that although the money may not be all roses, I do believe the exposure will be huge for all of our schools, and may eclipse the exposure of the "old" Big East. I think even UConn, Cincy, and USF (Old Guard) fans will be surprised by how well our exposure is in the coming years. All we can do is kick back, and watch it unfold...

(03-20-2013 07:28 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

If the ACC loses two teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut.

If the ACC loses four teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut and hold at 12.

If the ACC loses 6 teams: they will add Cincinnati, Connecticut, USF, and UCF/Temple.

Pretty simple when you break it down...

Its not that simple, and nothing is guaranteed....lol......man you people are naive

(03-20-2013 09:18 AM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

Didn't you make a post about a month ago, where an "admin" spoke candidly with you about Temple and within that candid conversation revealed that Temple has not even initiated contact with the ACC? Now you mean to tell us Temple went from not talking to an ACC that isn't expanding to being in the ACC within two years in less than a month? Sorry, does not compute.

The Trustee said that Temple had not been in talks with the ACC, and he was correct in the respect that the President and BOT had not been in conversation with the ACC. But someone on here posted that people in the athletic department had been. When I started snooping around, I found out that was true.

When I found this out, I had a discussion again with the Trustee when I bumped into him in the cafeteria at work. He said that he heard similar comments being made by "people in the know" at the VCU game and that Temple is further along in discussions with the ACC than most people realize. He was relieved to find this out as the Board previously didn't know. Additionally, there was an emergency Board meeting called around athletics sometime over the past week (i think yesterday or the previous Tuesday).

That's all the information I know. But yes, even Trustees sit around and complain just like we do on this forum...lol. My reason for posting that was to show that everyone is upset with how this realignment is going. With that being said, he seemed very confident that Temple would go to the ACC within the next couple years which was pretty much what I heard from the coaches too.

(03-20-2013 07:28 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

If the ACC loses two teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut.

If the ACC loses four teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut and hold at 12.

If the ACC loses 6 teams: they will add Cincinnati, Connecticut, USF, and UCF/Temple.

Pretty simple when you break it down...

I think Temple is probably more competitive than you realize, especially since the ACC lost Maryland and will looking to have a team in the lower mid-Atlantic region.

(03-20-2013 01:29 PM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 07:28 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

If the ACC loses two teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut.

If the ACC loses four teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut and hold at 12.

If the ACC loses 6 teams: they will add Cincinnati, Connecticut, USF, and UCF/Temple.

Pretty simple when you break it down...

Its not that simple, and nothing is guaranteed....lol......man you people are naive

I know, right? Some people have learned nothing from this process. If you ever say... "Pretty simple when you break it down" as concerns realignment, that probably won't be the case.

Was the BE adding Tulane predictable? Was the B1G adding Maryland predictable?

(03-20-2013 05:28 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 07:28 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

If the ACC loses two teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut.

If the ACC loses four teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut and hold at 12.

If the ACC loses 6 teams: they will add Cincinnati, Connecticut, USF, and UCF/Temple.

Pretty simple when you break it down...

I think Temple is probably more competitive than you realize, especially since the ACC lost Maryland and will looking to have a team in the lower mid-Atlantic region.

These regions don't matter the way you think they do. In DC, Maryland has a huge presence. It's actually in metro DC. I've been in DC for 8 years and have not met one Temple fan/alum. I'm sure the reverse is true in Philly.

The ACC will never need to add Temple or anyone to have presence in the DMV region. Because of DC's economy and the Federal government's reach/magnetism, this region is crawling with Va Tech, UVA, UNC, Wake, GT, BC, FSU grads. With the poaching of Cuse and Pitt, the own Bmore-DC-Philly stretch of 95 more than ever.

If the ACC wants to target growth, my guess is they will look outside their existing footprint. UConn makes sense, but so do Cincinnati, Houston, and even Tulane if the Wave can put two winning FB seasons together. All are in states where there is no ACC presence, which means a new market. That also means there is no resistance from within the state (E.g., FSU not wanting to elevate UCF or USF).

(03-20-2013 06:28 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 05:28 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 07:28 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

If the ACC loses two teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut.

If the ACC loses four teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut and hold at 12.

If the ACC loses 6 teams: they will add Cincinnati, Connecticut, USF, and UCF/Temple.

Pretty simple when you break it down...

I think Temple is probably more competitive than you realize, especially since the ACC lost Maryland and will looking to have a team in the lower mid-Atlantic region.

These regions don't matter the way you think they do. In DC, Maryland has a huge presence. It's actually in metro DC. I've been in DC for 8 years and have not met one Temple fan/alum. I'm sure the reverse is true in Philly.

The ACC will never need to add Temple or anyone to have presence in the DMV region. Because of DC's economy and the Federal government's reach/magnetism, this region is crawling with Va Tech, UVA, UNC, Wake, GT, BC, FSU grads. With the poaching of Cuse and Pitt, the own Bmore-DC-Philly stretch of 95 more than ever.

If the ACC wants to target growth, my guess is they will look outside their existing footprint. UConn makes sense, but so do Cincinnati, Houston, and even Tulane if the Wave can put two winning FB seasons together. All are in states where there is no ACC presence, which means a new market. That also means there is no resistance from within the state (E.g., FSU not wanting to elevate UCF or USF).

I'm in DC. You don''t know how disappointed I am that Temple won't get to play Georgetown in conference at the Verizon Center. It would have been a great matchup! You can't really say Pitt has all of PA. The state is so large, that people in Philly don't really have a lot in common with people in Pittsburgh. Then, there is Penn State, that probably has the most statewide presence, but of course, they are in the B1G, so they don't count for ACC footprint purposes.

(03-20-2013 06:28 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 05:28 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 07:28 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 10:55 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-19-2013 03:40 PM)True Bearcat Wrote:  Interesting to say the least. The Tier A teams are Cincinnati, Connecticut, Temple, and Houston. Two of the four teams are on the rumored next two in for realignment. No mentions of Central or South Florida. Two thoughts/questions on this.

1. Since ESPN holds all the cards, could they sink the conference by suggesting to the Big XII or ACC to take two of the Tier A teams? Thus making the contract null and void.

2. This thought is based on rumors flying around the internet that the Big XII is interested in adding Central Florida and South Florida which are Tier B schools. Would ESPN "allow" the Big XII to have them to have a greater tv audience in Florida for BIG XII games?

It seems with each passing day that ESPN is the sole responsible party for realignment.

I don't think there is a doubt about those schools being involved in realignment.

Last week I was at Temple and speaking to a couple coaches. They casually said that the athletic department is in talks with the ACC, and the department believes a move to the ACC is almost certain within the next 2 years.

I'd take this with a grain of salt right now, but obviously, something is going on.

If the ACC loses two teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut.

If the ACC loses four teams: they will add Cincinnati and Connecticut and hold at 12.

If the ACC loses 6 teams: they will add Cincinnati, Connecticut, USF, and UCF/Temple.

Pretty simple when you break it down...

I think Temple is probably more competitive than you realize, especially since the ACC lost Maryland and will looking to have a team in the lower mid-Atlantic region.

These regions don't matter the way you think they do. In DC, Maryland has a huge presence. It's actually in metro DC. I've been in DC for 8 years and have not met one Temple fan/alum. I'm sure the reverse is true in Philly.

The ACC will never need to add Temple or anyone to have presence in the DMV region. Because of DC's economy and the Federal government's reach/magnetism, this region is crawling with Va Tech, UVA, UNC, Wake, GT, BC, FSU grads. With the poaching of Cuse and Pitt, the own Bmore-DC-Philly stretch of 95 more than ever.

If the ACC wants to target growth, my guess is they will look outside their existing footprint. UConn makes sense, but so do Cincinnati, Houston, and even Tulane if the Wave can put two winning FB seasons together. All are in states where there is no ACC presence, which means a new market. That also means there is no resistance from within the state (E.g., FSU not wanting to elevate UCF or USF).

I think you are underestimating how many Temple alumni are in DC. After graduating, the majority of Temple grads either stay in Philly or move to DC or NYC. But that's beside the point.

I think my comment was taken a bit too literally. What I meant was with Maryland gone, there is no school in the ACC between DC and NYC. While UConn is a great school, Boston College is already somewhat nearby. Meanwhile, Temple sits in what would be the largest city in the ACC with the nearest ACC member being almost 5 hours away. We are a solid basketball add. And not that I have this information, but I'm willing to bet that Temple is financially valued higher than UConn and maybe even Cinci in terms of what we bring to a TV package. That doesn't mean I think we are better -- I'm speaking strictly on what I think the financials reflect. And we all know that ESPN has a great deal of pull with the ACC.

I find it in poor form that Temple fans are talking their school up about getting an ACC invite. Remember where you are posting...

(03-20-2013 08:50 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I find it in poor form that Temple fans are talking their school up about getting an ACC invite. Remember where you are posting...

Sorry. That was not my intent. I was only relaying rumors that I've heard. As I've said many times, I like this conference. But to be fair, it's very obvious that Temple and UConn don't really fit in as we want a focus on basketball and potential for schools like UMass to be added -- while most new CUSA adds want football and Tulsa/USM. All disagreements in terms of how this conference should be built would be resolved with the exit of Temple and UConn.

(03-20-2013 09:02 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 08:50 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I find it in poor form that Temple fans are talking their school up about getting an ACC invite. Remember where you are posting...

Sorry. That was not my intent. I was only relaying rumors that I've heard. As I've said many times, I like this conference. But to be fair, it's very obvious that Temple and UConn don't really fit in as we want a focus on basketball and potential for schools like UMass to be added -- while most new CUSA adds want football and Tulsa/USM. All disagreements in terms of how this conference should be built would be resolved with the exit of Temple and UConn.

It sounds like Temple and UConn folks kinda regret being in the football business. If that's the case, you guys should bump down your football program and join the C7 -- a bball centric conference. The Major 5 Conferences, C-TBD, and the MWC are focusing on football.

I've heard rumours from recruits that Memphis football coaches are telling kids we will be in the BIG 12.

(03-20-2013 09:10 PM)egrizzard Wrote:  I've heard rumours from recruits that Memphis football coaches are telling kids we will be in the BIG 12.

Larry Porter was telling recruits that back two years ago

(03-20-2013 11:53 AM)Raleighwood Pirate Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:02 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Dont believe under your scenario that the ACC can afford contractwise and safety wise to stay at 12. The door opens for USF /UCF if FSU leaves. Miami is not strong enough to bring much of the Florida market outside of the SE part of the state.

No slap against your respective schools, but ACC fans want nothing to do with USF or UCF. Most of them don't know who you guys are. Some of them may have heard about USF because Skip Holtz left ECU to go to them. They made it a point to rub it in our face about how bad a school ECU is if Skip left to go to USF in the Big East.

I can say that if any teams leave, the one they are considering is UConn. No one really wants Cincy, but the consenus is that they will take them if they can't get anyone else from the other conferences. That is the word on the street up here in ACC country. We will see if that happens.

Remember that the ACC still puts its emphasis on basketball despite football closing that gap over the last decade. Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville are not football powers. They are basketball powers. If you don't have a top 25 basketball team, that has a history of winning like many of the programs in the ACC then chances are they are not going to take USF or UCF. That is just the reality of things.

Sorry, but this is just false. After beating FSU, Miami, Clemson, and routing UNC and NCSt recently, they know who USF is.

By the way, it was a slap, even if you prefaced it by saying it wasn't

(03-20-2013 09:08 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:02 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 08:50 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I find it in poor form that Temple fans are talking their school up about getting an ACC invite. Remember where you are posting...

Sorry. That was not my intent. I was only relaying rumors that I've heard. As I've said many times, I like this conference. But to be fair, it's very obvious that Temple and UConn don't really fit in as we want a focus on basketball and potential for schools like UMass to be added -- while most new CUSA adds want football and Tulsa/USM. All disagreements in terms of how this conference should be built would be resolved with the exit of Temple and UConn.

It sounds like Temple and UConn folks kinda regret being in the football business. If that's the case, you guys should bump down your football program and join the C7 -- a bball centric conference. The Major 5 Conferences, C-TBD, and the MWC are focusing on football.

UConn and Temple are spending a lot of money to improve their football programs. But most of the value that Temple and UConn bring is from basketball. Why would either of these schools want to be in a conference that weakens their value by having weak basketball schools? And lets be honest here, this conference will never be a powerhouse football conference. So we need to be good at something to worth anything.

Temple and UConn will be good at football when they are in a conference that also has football and basketball. Until then, I see no problem with these schools not wanting to take 5 steps back in basketball to take 1 step forward in football.

(03-20-2013 10:06 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:08 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:02 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 08:50 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I find it in poor form that Temple fans are talking their school up about getting an ACC invite. Remember where you are posting...

Sorry. That was not my intent. I was only relaying rumors that I've heard. As I've said many times, I like this conference. But to be fair, it's very obvious that Temple and UConn don't really fit in as we want a focus on basketball and potential for schools like UMass to be added -- while most new CUSA adds want football and Tulsa/USM. All disagreements in terms of how this conference should be built would be resolved with the exit of Temple and UConn.

It sounds like Temple and UConn folks kinda regret being in the football business. If that's the case, you guys should bump down your football program and join the C7 -- a bball centric conference. The Major 5 Conferences, C-TBD, and the MWC are focusing on football.

UConn and Temple are spending a lot of money to improve their football programs. But most of the value that Temple and UConn bring is from basketball. Why would either of these schools want to be in a conference that weakens their value by having weak basketball schools? And lets be honest here, this conference will never be a powerhouse football conference. So we need to be good at something to worth anything.

Temple and UConn will be good at football when they are in a conference that also has football and basketball. Until then, I see no problem with these schools not wanting to take 5 steps back in basketball to take 1 step forward in football.

I think you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay underselling the potential of the 4 Texas and Florida schools.

In an institutional sense, those schools can provide a power structure. The main question is whether the economic gap will allow for this conference to be a power in football.

Nevertheless, it's far beyond 1 step for Temple. Even if its just for being in a conference with our peers, and institutions that have made their mark in college sports.

(03-20-2013 10:16 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:06 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:08 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:02 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 08:50 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I find it in poor form that Temple fans are talking their school up about getting an ACC invite. Remember where you are posting...

Sorry. That was not my intent. I was only relaying rumors that I've heard. As I've said many times, I like this conference. But to be fair, it's very obvious that Temple and UConn don't really fit in as we want a focus on basketball and potential for schools like UMass to be added -- while most new CUSA adds want football and Tulsa/USM. All disagreements in terms of how this conference should be built would be resolved with the exit of Temple and UConn.

It sounds like Temple and UConn folks kinda regret being in the football business. If that's the case, you guys should bump down your football program and join the C7 -- a bball centric conference. The Major 5 Conferences, C-TBD, and the MWC are focusing on football.

UConn and Temple are spending a lot of money to improve their football programs. But most of the value that Temple and UConn bring is from basketball. Why would either of these schools want to be in a conference that weakens their value by having weak basketball schools? And lets be honest here, this conference will never be a powerhouse football conference. So we need to be good at something to worth anything.

Temple and UConn will be good at football when they are in a conference that also has football and basketball. Until then, I see no problem with these schools not wanting to take 5 steps back in basketball to take 1 step forward in football.

I think you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay underselling the potential of the 4 Texas and Florida schools.

In an institutional sense, those schools can provide a power structure. The main question is whether the economic gap will allow for this conference to be a power in football.

Nevertheless, it's far beyond 1 step for Temple. Even if its just for being in a conference with our peers, and institutions that have made their mark in college sports.

I agree with you about the potential of schools. I've even posted numerous times how I think ECU could become a lot like WVU or UCF like UF. So we agree on potential. What I'm saying is this conference will never be a powerhouse football conference. Even if our teams were great, most of the country would still shrug and not care. And without schools that can draw a national audience, the conference cannot rise to a powerhouse status, which is where the big bucks are made in football.

Yes, this conference is a step up from the MAC for Temple. But yet again, people in Philly will shrug when a bunch of these teams come to play. Most powerhouse teams and conferences can draw support outside of their alumni. But because this conference lacks flagship schools or brand name programs, it will be difficult to pull support from outside of our alumni networks.

I'm not saying any of that to be negative, because I like this conference. I am only pointing out that it's going to be extremely difficult for us to build a strong football conference that is on the level to bring in money. It can be done, but it'll take time. While that is occurring, we cannot ignore basketball as that is where the majority of our value is today. Strengthen our strengths. Slowly convert our weaknesses into strengths. That's the key to success for this conference.

(03-20-2013 09:47 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:24 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Pretty much agree with you, except I do believe that if ACC loses 4 teams, then USF and UCF or Temple will be added also. Why do you ask? Well at that point, USF would have so many advocates in the new ACC (as there would be so many former BE members now a part of ACC, that I believe USF would get in, but would also need to bring a partner, whoever that may be. This is just my opinion.

Really depends on if FSU and Miami are still in the league at that point. If UNC and UVA go to the B1G and VTech and NC State move to the SEC then the ACC will remain in a holding pattern at 12 after adding Cincinnati and Connecticut (*). USF and UCF invites into the ACC are completely dependent on FSU and, to a lesser extent, Miami being poached.

Why would the SEC take NCST or VTech if the the BIG take the flagship schools from the two states. What would the return value be except gamble that they could move those schools to the forefront instead of the flagship schools.

As far as FSU is concerned, they could move to the Big12-2, but have doubts now that they would pick UM, but probably take UL, a team WVU is familiar with. I really don't see the SEC making any moves, except FSU at this point. What is available to them that is attractive enough to make a difference. Not another Florida school, maybe UL or WVU if the GOR does not hinder them.

If FSU, NC, and UV do go, would the ACC be left out of the next round where there would only be the Big 4 anyway.

(03-20-2013 09:11 PM)CalallenStang Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:10 PM)egrizzard Wrote:  I've heard rumours from recruits that Memphis football coaches are telling kids we will be in the BIG 12.

Larry Porter was telling recruits that back two years ago

That was the joke.

(03-20-2013 10:48 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:16 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 10:06 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:08 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(03-20-2013 09:02 PM)ScreamShatter Wrote:  Sorry. That was not my intent. I was only relaying rumors that I've heard. As I've said many times, I like this conference. But to be fair, it's very obvious that Temple and UConn don't really fit in as we want a focus on basketball and potential for schools like UMass to be added -- while most new CUSA adds want football and Tulsa/USM. All disagreements in terms of how this conference should be built would be resolved with the exit of Temple and UConn.

It sounds like Temple and UConn folks kinda regret being in the football business. If that's the case, you guys should bump down your football program and join the C7 -- a bball centric conference. The Major 5 Conferences, C-TBD, and the MWC are focusing on football.

UConn and Temple are spending a lot of money to improve their football programs. But most of the value that Temple and UConn bring is from basketball. Why would either of these schools want to be in a conference that weakens their value by having weak basketball schools? And lets be honest here, this conference will never be a powerhouse football conference. So we need to be good at something to worth anything.

Temple and UConn will be good at football when they are in a conference that also has football and basketball. Until then, I see no problem with these schools not wanting to take 5 steps back in basketball to take 1 step forward in football.

I think you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay underselling the potential of the 4 Texas and Florida schools.

In an institutional sense, those schools can provide a power structure. The main question is whether the economic gap will allow for this conference to be a power in football.

Nevertheless, it's far beyond 1 step for Temple. Even if its just for being in a conference with our peers, and institutions that have made their mark in college sports.

I agree with you about the potential of schools. I've even posted numerous times how I think ECU could become a lot like WVU or UCF like UF. So we agree on potential. What I'm saying is this conference will never be a powerhouse football conference. Even if our teams were great, most of the country would still shrug and not care. And without schools that can draw a national audience, the conference cannot rise to a powerhouse status, which is where the big bucks are made in football.

Yes, this conference is a step up from the MAC for Temple. But yet again, people in Philly will shrug when a bunch of these teams come to play. Most powerhouse teams and conferences can draw support outside of their alumni. But because this conference lacks flagship schools or brand name programs, it will be difficult to pull support from outside of our alumni networks.

I'm not saying any of that to be negative, because I like this conference. I am only pointing out that it's going to be extremely difficult for us to build a strong football conference that is on the level to bring in money. It can be done, but it'll take time. While that is occurring, we cannot ignore basketball as that is where the majority of our value is today. Strengthen our strengths. Slowly convert our weaknesses into strengths. That's the key to success for this conference.

Heres the thing---only people ina praticular region would be able to follow a school doing well in CUSA or the Mountain West even if they wanted to. Most games were regional telecasts--assuming the game was on TV at all. It was almost impossible for schoos in regional conferences like the MAC or CUSA to ever make much national noise.

The Big Unnamed 12 will have EVERY home football game televised and 90% of those games will be on national networks. Thats huge. If a school gets on a Boise/TCU roll it can develop a national following because the freakin games are actually available to be watched on a national basis.

The rumor is that Fox Sports-1 is the most likley home for much of the national inventory that ESPN does not show. For Houston and SMU, that means that for the first time I can remember we will be on national television on the same networks as the Big-12 teams (ESPN and Fox). Thats going to help our recruiting significantly.

For basketball, few CUSA games are even televised, much less televised nationally. Every single one of the 170 Big East basketball games will be televised. 107 of these games will be national telecasts on networks like ESPN, ESPN-2, ABC, and CBS-Broadcast (not CBS-Sports). Again, for all the CUSA schools, this is a huge new recruiting tool.

While we are not going to get paid like a power conference, we are going to get national exposure that is quite similar to a power conference. The average fan has no idea how much the media contract is for the Big-10 or CUSA. Its not important to them. All they know is they find Big-10 games on the major networks. They dont find CUSA and Mountain West games there much. If you are on those major networks for an extended period---and perform well, then that will change perception.