(02-24-2018 12:42 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 12:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Can't blame Delany for pushing the envelope by putting it in New York, but moving the tourney up a week should have been recognized as a bad idea from the start. It was bad for their regular season and tournament.

It was pure hubris. Delany wanted to be in MSG because he thought the Big Ten would overshadow the Big East in "its" building.

I'm not sure. I don't think Delany sees the Big East as the main foe here. It's the ACC. And the ACC is also doing the same thing, holding its tourney in NYC and DC as well for a couple years.

I was in DC last year when the B1G was being held there, and it felt weird. Basically, there was little to no "buzz" in the area about the tournament and IIRC, overall attendance was down significantly compared to when they hold it in their traditional mid-western footprint.

Delany is playing a longer game here. He thinks it's worth losing 25,000 fans by holding it in DC or NYC, if it advances the larger goal of building the B1G brand in that potentially insanely lucrative DC-NYC corridor.

Delany is in an all-out battle with the ACC for hegemony in NYC-DC. Adding MD and Rutgers was part of that, and matching the ACC's efforts to hold its tournament in DC and NYC is too.

Like I said, having it in the NYC metro area is expected, but this really was not the year with the ACC in Brooklyn and of course the Big East at MSG. I'm pretty sure the Prudential Center is open and it's in a state that is actually home to a Big Ten school. Now, the Big Ten will be out of everyone's minds come Selection Sunday. We'll see how it plays out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Little Caesars Arena is home to a future Big Ten tourney-that place looks like a palace (but not of Auburn Hills).

(02-24-2018 09:19 AM)esayem Wrote:  Like I said, having it in the NYC metro area is expected, but this really was not the year with the ACC in Brooklyn and of course the Big East at MSG. I'm pretty sure the Prudential Center is open and it's in a state that is actually home to a Big Ten school. Now, the Big Ten will be out of everyone's minds come Selection Sunday. We'll see how it plays out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Little Caesars Arena is home to a future Big Ten tourney-that place looks like a palace (but not of Auburn Hills).

When the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt in 2011, that was the signal that they intended to try to make the ACC the power conference of the NYC-DC corridor. It was a very bold move, one the ACC had been contemplating for years, and the first job was to strip the old Big East, the nominal power in that area. Mission accomplished pretty quickly.

But, the B1G and Delany immediately saw this, and pretty much immediately decided to contest it. Stealing Maryland and adding Rutgers were his big counter-moves, and mimicking the ACC strategy of playing the tournament in DC and NYC is too.

This battle will continue, the Delany retreat from MSG is just a tactical move in the bigger picture of the ongoing ACC/B1G battle for the NYC-DC corridor.

Overall, and related to all-important football, the B1G has the advantage. But in basketball, the ACC does. Setting even Syracuse aside, Duke vs North Carolina has the kind of appeal that will draw interest and a big crowd anywhere. They could play a Duke/UNC tournament final in San Diego and draw 15,000 fans. B1G hoops doesn't have anyone of that superstar stature to do the same for its event.

Contrary to what some believe not EVERY conference can lay claim to NYC. Like it or not conferences have an identity. Even with a change in membership, this identity is associated with a region or city. Even with their push into the northeast the B1G and ACC still have an identity of being from elsewhere. BIG is Midwest at its core. Stay in Chicago or Indianapolis. ACC is southeastern at its core. Stay in NC or Atlanta.
Yes a city the size of New York has plenty of alumni from BIG and ACC schools but I imagine there is more of a buzz in Chicago, Indianapolis, Atlanta or Raleigh for these tourneys than there is in NYC. I mean mostly from the community and the average fans that may not have the means to travel to NYC.

I cant imagine Michigan State in the west. As a Spartan I want to play against Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan every year. The only benefit I see of being in the west would be playing Wisconsin every year.

(02-23-2018 10:39 PM)hoops22 Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 09:33 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-23-2018 09:12 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Yeah he should have learned from the ACC's failure to knock the BE out of MSG for tournament week. I can't see the BIG being content with holding its tournament in Brooklyn or Newark. If/when the BIG tournament comes East again I gotta think it will be in D.C. or Philly.

I wouldnt say that. The ACC was not willing to abandon its roots in the south to play all of their tournaments at MSG. MSG would not do a deal with the ACC unless it was long term on an annual basis. MSG is not being run by idiots. Why would they do a deal with the ACC for 2 years out of a 8 or 10 year period when they have the BE for all ten? Now, it is the BIG who truly failed.

You're acting like there was a standing offer to the ACC, where they could have had MSG had they been willing to commit long term. There was never any such offer as I'm sure you're aware. March basketball at MSG is synonymous with the Big East Tournament. It continues to sell out today, just as it did when Syracuse was there. The vast majority of ACC schools have their roots in the south, and honor that tradition by playing the majority of their tournaments in those friendly confines. While the ACC and others may occasionally come to NYC in March, The City remains Big East Territory.

If that's what I was trying to say, that's what I would have said. MSG already had a bird in the hand, namely, the BE. The ACC was NOT going to commit to a long term deal in MSG. The ACC had NO leverage, so I doubt there was very much discussion going on. But that doesnt mean that the ACC tried to knock the BE out of MSG and failed. From my understanding, MSG did not even submit a bid for the ACC Tourney. Neither did Barclays.

(02-24-2018 10:13 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Contrary to what some believe not EVERY conference can lay claim to NYC. Like it or not conferences have an identity. Even with a change in membership, this identity is associated with a region or city. Even with their push into the northeast the B1G and ACC still have an identity of being from elsewhere. BIG is Midwest at its core. Stay in Chicago or Indianapolis. ACC is southeastern at its core. Stay in NC or Atlanta.
Yes a city the size of New York has plenty of alumni from BIG and ACC schools but I imagine there is more of a buzz in Chicago, Indianapolis, Atlanta or Raleigh for these tourneys than there is in NYC. I mean mostly from the community and the average fans that may not have the means to travel to NYC.

Delany is definitely making a calculated risk. He's giving up a guaranteed successful event in the B1G's traditional footprint in an attempt to expand the B1G market to DC and NYC. It just looks like a fish out of water to me.

When I saw this week's TV schedule with Iowa vs. Illinois in New York, it made me scratch my head. Those schools have played each other over 150 times, but never in a daytime pigtail bracket game in an empty Madison Square Garden. I'm shaking my head.

The B1G will never be able to grab New York's attention like the Big East, especially playing in MSG a week early. Sure, it's New York, and it's the most famous arena in the world. But, the B1G is not New York's conference, and New York will never fully be a B1G city. (Big, yes. B1G, no.)

I hope it's worth it for them to chase the dollars. The B1G needs to go home to Chicago and Indianapolis, or maybe the new Detroit arena.

(02-24-2018 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:19 AM)esayem Wrote:  Like I said, having it in the NYC metro area is expected, but this really was not the year with the ACC in Brooklyn and of course the Big East at MSG. I'm pretty sure the Prudential Center is open and it's in a state that is actually home to a Big Ten school. Now, the Big Ten will be out of everyone's minds come Selection Sunday. We'll see how it plays out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Little Caesars Arena is home to a future Big Ten tourney-that place looks like a palace (but not of Auburn Hills).

When the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt in 2011, that was the signal that they intended to try to make the ACC the power conference of the NYC-DC corridor. It was a very bold move, one the ACC had been contemplating for years, and the first job was to strip the old Big East, the nominal power in that area. Mission accomplished pretty quickly.

But, the B1G and Delany immediately saw this, and pretty much immediately decided to contest it. Stealing Maryland and adding Rutgers were his big counter-moves, and mimicking the ACC strategy of playing the tournament in DC and NYC is too.

This battle will continue, the Delany retreat from MSG is just a tactical move in the bigger picture of the ongoing ACC/B1G battle for the NYC-DC corridor.

Overall, and related to all-important football, the B1G has the advantage. But in basketball, the ACC does. Setting even Syracuse aside, Duke vs North Carolina has the kind of appeal that will draw interest and a big crowd anywhere. They could play a Duke/UNC tournament final in San Diego and draw 15,000 fans. B1G hoops doesn't have anyone of that superstar stature to do the same for its event.

Duke vs North Carolina has never had 15,000 when it’s played at Duke.

Big 10 should have added Syracuse and UConn to secure the Northeastern Market. If the Big 10 were to add Syracuse and UConn. The ACC should add Cincinnati and West Virginia.

(02-26-2018 08:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:19 AM)esayem Wrote:  Like I said, having it in the NYC metro area is expected, but this really was not the year with the ACC in Brooklyn and of course the Big East at MSG. I'm pretty sure the Prudential Center is open and it's in a state that is actually home to a Big Ten school. Now, the Big Ten will be out of everyone's minds come Selection Sunday. We'll see how it plays out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Little Caesars Arena is home to a future Big Ten tourney-that place looks like a palace (but not of Auburn Hills).

When the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt in 2011, that was the signal that they intended to try to make the ACC the power conference of the NYC-DC corridor. It was a very bold move, one the ACC had been contemplating for years, and the first job was to strip the old Big East, the nominal power in that area. Mission accomplished pretty quickly.

But, the B1G and Delany immediately saw this, and pretty much immediately decided to contest it. Stealing Maryland and adding Rutgers were his big counter-moves, and mimicking the ACC strategy of playing the tournament in DC and NYC is too.

This battle will continue, the Delany retreat from MSG is just a tactical move in the bigger picture of the ongoing ACC/B1G battle for the NYC-DC corridor.

Overall, and related to all-important football, the B1G has the advantage. But in basketball, the ACC does. Setting even Syracuse aside, Duke vs North Carolina has the kind of appeal that will draw interest and a big crowd anywhere. They could play a Duke/UNC tournament final in San Diego and draw 15,000 fans. B1G hoops doesn't have anyone of that superstar stature to do the same for its event.

Duke vs North Carolina has never had 15,000 when it’s played at Duke.

Cameron Indoor has a capacity of 9,314.

(02-26-2018 08:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 08:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:19 AM)esayem Wrote:  Like I said, having it in the NYC metro area is expected, but this really was not the year with the ACC in Brooklyn and of course the Big East at MSG. I'm pretty sure the Prudential Center is open and it's in a state that is actually home to a Big Ten school. Now, the Big Ten will be out of everyone's minds come Selection Sunday. We'll see how it plays out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Little Caesars Arena is home to a future Big Ten tourney-that place looks like a palace (but not of Auburn Hills).

When the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt in 2011, that was the signal that they intended to try to make the ACC the power conference of the NYC-DC corridor. It was a very bold move, one the ACC had been contemplating for years, and the first job was to strip the old Big East, the nominal power in that area. Mission accomplished pretty quickly.

But, the B1G and Delany immediately saw this, and pretty much immediately decided to contest it. Stealing Maryland and adding Rutgers were his big counter-moves, and mimicking the ACC strategy of playing the tournament in DC and NYC is too.

This battle will continue, the Delany retreat from MSG is just a tactical move in the bigger picture of the ongoing ACC/B1G battle for the NYC-DC corridor.

Overall, and related to all-important football, the B1G has the advantage. But in basketball, the ACC does. Setting even Syracuse aside, Duke vs North Carolina has the kind of appeal that will draw interest and a big crowd anywhere. They could play a Duke/UNC tournament final in San Diego and draw 15,000 fans. B1G hoops doesn't have anyone of that superstar stature to do the same for its event.

Duke vs North Carolina has never had 15,000 when it’s played at Duke.

Cameron Indoor has a capacity of 9,314.

Yes it does...

(02-26-2018 09:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 08:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 08:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 09:19 AM)esayem Wrote:  Like I said, having it in the NYC metro area is expected, but this really was not the year with the ACC in Brooklyn and of course the Big East at MSG. I'm pretty sure the Prudential Center is open and it's in a state that is actually home to a Big Ten school. Now, the Big Ten will be out of everyone's minds come Selection Sunday. We'll see how it plays out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Little Caesars Arena is home to a future Big Ten tourney-that place looks like a palace (but not of Auburn Hills).

When the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt in 2011, that was the signal that they intended to try to make the ACC the power conference of the NYC-DC corridor. It was a very bold move, one the ACC had been contemplating for years, and the first job was to strip the old Big East, the nominal power in that area. Mission accomplished pretty quickly.

But, the B1G and Delany immediately saw this, and pretty much immediately decided to contest it. Stealing Maryland and adding Rutgers were his big counter-moves, and mimicking the ACC strategy of playing the tournament in DC and NYC is too.

This battle will continue, the Delany retreat from MSG is just a tactical move in the bigger picture of the ongoing ACC/B1G battle for the NYC-DC corridor.

Overall, and related to all-important football, the B1G has the advantage. But in basketball, the ACC does. Setting even Syracuse aside, Duke vs North Carolina has the kind of appeal that will draw interest and a big crowd anywhere. They could play a Duke/UNC tournament final in San Diego and draw 15,000 fans. B1G hoops doesn't have anyone of that superstar stature to do the same for its event.

Duke vs North Carolina has never had 15,000 when it’s played at Duke.

Cameron Indoor has a capacity of 9,314.

Yes it does...

Your first response was specious, this one is just baffling.

(02-26-2018 08:39 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:   Big 10 should have added Syracuse and UConn to secure the Northeastern Market. If the Big 10 were to add Syracuse and UConn. The ACC should add Cincinnati and West Virginia.

They couldn’t have added Connecticut because the ACC couldn’t afford to lose Pennsylvania forever – which would’ve happened had they chosen Connecticut over Pitt.

Pitt would’ve simply gone to the Big 12 (it had a standing invite) and that would’ve created more problems than what ultimately happened for a league looking to dominate the eastern seaboard in the same way the Pac-12 does the West Coast.

I think the biggest mistake was made by the Big 12 when it failed add Louisville and Cincinnati along with West Virginia. I think that was very shortsighted on their part and I think they will pay for that up through the bitter end.

Now that the mistake has been made, I still think they should very seriously consider adding the two directional Florida schools. I think that’s their best hope of long-term survival.

I always thought that the Big Ten screwed up in taking Maryland and especially Rutgers. I heard all the rationalizations for why it was secretly a brilliant move but I don’t buy any of it. Nobody wants to add a program that is perpetually horrible in both major sports every single year.

It is one thing to say that the team is going to have a tough time winning a conference when it is in a division with such economic powerhouses as Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. I get that part. However, it is quite another whenever that team is being regularly beaten by those teams by 60 and 70 point margins. That’s an entirely different kettle of fish because it ultimately impacts the credibility of the entire league.

Now, I fully expect Rutgers to improve. I mean seriously, how many times can you lose 78–0? Maryland looks like it’s already on that path. However, how much can they really improve if this is their starting point?

I thought the Big Ten should have gone hard after Florida State and Georgia Tech. Together they are not New York City and the beltway but I would imagine that the amount of college football fans in the state of Florida and Georgia dwarfs that in the DC corridor and the Big Apple metropolitan area. Also, they are probably attainable. I always knew that the Tobacco Road schools were non-starters. They are not leaving their situation unless they absolutely have to leave it. Really, why should they? However, Florida State is an absolute free agent and they could be had for the right price/situation.

That said, in Delany’s defense, I have read recently that was the B1G’s original intention but it ultimately fell through. I can’t really blame the B1G for that as THAT would have actually MUCH made sense, but it takes two to tango.

(02-28-2018 12:43 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I always thought that the Big Ten screwed up in taking Maryland and especially Rutgers. I heard all the rationalizations for why it was secretly a brilliant move but I don’t buy any of it. Nobody wants to add a program that is perpetually horrible in both major sports every single year.

Problem with this logic is, the B1G has absolutely thrived since adding Rutgers and Maryland, and is at the apex of its power and money-making ability. With Rutgers and Maryland, it just signed massive new deals that make it the #1 money conference.

In contrast, when the Big 12 was thinking about adding Houston or USF or SMU or UCF last year, they were told by their networks that this was a bad move, that it would hurt conference revenue. As a USF fan i don't like that, but it's apparently the way it is.

UCONN has been the most hosed of all the schools. At one time, I’m sure they were fairly convinced that they were the next program in the queue for ACC membership. However, they have now been passed over by Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville. And I have a feeling that should there be more realignment, they will likely be passed over again by teams like UCF and USF.

Also, I don’t think it has anything to do with their involvement with Big East’s former lawsuit against the ACC or Boston College or anything else. I think it’s just the way things have unfolded has made the Huskies less and less valuable with each passing year.

I also think some of the ways they have prioritized their resources has been odd as well. Women’s basketball is a great sport and UCONN’s success in women’s basketball has been undeniably spectacular. What they are doing in women’s basketball makes what UCLA did in men’s basketball in the 60s and 70s look like a nice little run. It is complete and utter dominance unlike the sport has ever seen men or women.

However, if I were a UCONN fan, I could not help but ask myself if at least some of the money they are continually pouring into that program wouldn’t be better spent elsewhere?

I know that sentiment is going to get me in trouble here with some but seriously, who cares about dominating in any sport aside from the two biggies? I’m sure Syracuse loves its lacrosse program and Stanford takes great pride in its swimming success. However, is anyone else really envious of that? Also, if you found out that you were spending it an inordinate amount of money in those sports while your more high profile sports were struggling, wouldn’t that bother you?

I think there’s a reason why most teams around the country have not followed Connecticut’s lead and poured a crazy amount of resources into their womens basketball programs. They understand that it is not really worth it and that the money is better spent on one of the two big sports, where you have a legitimate chance to actually recoup your investment.

(02-28-2018 01:01 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Also, I don’t think it has anything to do with their involvement with Big East’s former lawsuit against the ACC or Boston College or anything else. I think it’s just the way things have unfolded has made the Huskies less and less valuable with each passing year.

The explanations aren't mutually exclusive, they might actually reinforce each other. E.g., perhaps thanks to their involvement with the ACC lawsuit, in 2011 UConn was passed over by the ACC in favor of Syracuse.

Now that the ACC has Syracuse, which taps into the New York market, UConn is less potentially valuable to the ACC, reducing their chances of getting a bid going forward.

(02-28-2018 01:01 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I also think some of the ways they have prioritized their resources has been odd as well. Women’s basketball is a great sport and UCONN’s success in women’s basketball has been undeniably spectacular. What they are doing in women’s basketball makes what UCLA did in men’s basketball in the 60s and 70s look like a nice little run. It is complete and utter dominance unlike the sport has ever seen men or women.

However, if I were a UCONN fan, I could not help but ask myself if at least some of the money they are continually pouring into that program wouldn’t be better spent elsewhere?

I mean, it's not like UConn's neglected spending on other sports to boost women's basketball (which isn't particularly expensive, either). They run an AD budget that's something like nearly 50% higher than the next G5 school.

If we believe Frank the Tank, UConn’s biggest obstacle is their relatively young FBS program that is keeping them from joining a club that prioritizes history and tradition above all. Didn’t they make the jump to FBS in 2004? Syracuse and Pittsburgh might not been relevant for a long time but they’re still seen as part of the old guard. Rutgers does not have a good football record but they’re still old school.

I think its important to take a step back at look at - from UConn's perspective - what would their ideal conference look like? Obviously, there are regional schools in different conferences, but - if it was up to them - who would they be aligned with? I think the basketball schools would be out, as they do not sponsor football. I think Rutgers would absolutely be one. Boston College, despite its religious affiliation, would probably be one as well. Syracuse and Pittsburgh would surely be added. My guess is Penn State would be one. Maybe a combination of Maryland/Virginia Tech/West Virginia as well. To get an even ten members, they could get a Cincinnati or Temple to close it out.

Naturally, such as conference will not exist in the near-term (possibly decades into the future, if ever). So, how does UConn find its right fit? B1G would be nice, but they do not have AAU status, do not have the history, tradition or prestige as Nebraska/Maryland/Rutgers. ACC would, too, be nice, but that conference already has Syracuse/Pittsburgh/Boston College in the Northeast, and they are a Southern-based league. Any addition to either conference would be predicated on football, and UConn Football has been down for a long time now - and it is very probable that they will be unable to leapfrog programs like UCF, USF, Memphis and Houston due to their recruiting areas.

I honestly don't know what UConn does. I know some think that the Big East is a realistic possibility, but that doesn't put UConn where it wants to be. Even everyone in the BE is thrilled about being there. I don't think a reunion there is as natural as some believe it to be.