Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

(08-10-2018 03:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

I think Tulane gets in anyway. Good history with many of the schools dating to original CUSA and the Metro, and Houston and SMU would appreciate a neighborhood school with good academics.

The question then turns to what happens if Navy still wants to put football in the now-10-team AAC. They probably still go for it, but the calculus changes for finding the 12th football team.

(08-10-2018 03:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

Big 12 had no reason to push for a title game until the CFP committee chair (Jeff Long) made the infamous "13th data point" comment in December 2014 and used that as an excuse for putting Ohio State in the playoff. Such a bogus reason given that, since that time, the committee has put two teams in the playoff that lacked the "13th data point".

(08-10-2018 04:05 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

I think Tulane gets in anyway. Good history with many of the schools dating to original CUSA and the Metro, and Houston and SMU would appreciate a neighborhood school with good academics.

The question then turns to what happens if Navy still wants to put football in the now-10-team AAC. They probably still go for it, but the calculus changes for finding the 12th football team.

If you recall, the very last 3 to get invited were ECU (FB only), Tulane, and then later Tulsa.

If ECU and Tulane were #10 and #11 and. ECU was willing to be FB only you better believe that a 10 team AAC would have featured ECU over Tulane.

Also recall that Tulane was allegedly the reason why the Catholic 7 left. You could concievably still have Big East football with 8 full FB members, + Navy & ECU FB, + the Catholic 7 & likely one more private basketball school like Butler to maintain the old balance.

(08-10-2018 05:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 04:05 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

I think Tulane gets in anyway. Good history with many of the schools dating to original CUSA and the Metro, and Houston and SMU would appreciate a neighborhood school with good academics.

The question then turns to what happens if Navy still wants to put football in the now-10-team AAC. They probably still go for it, but the calculus changes for finding the 12th football team.

If you recall, the very last 3 to get invited were ECU (FB only), Tulane, and then later Tulsa.

If ECU and Tulane were #10 and #11 and. ECU was willing to be FB only you better believe that a 10 team AAC would have featured ECU over Tulane.

Also recall that Tulane was allegedly the reason why the Catholic 7 left. You could concievably still have Big East football with 8 full FB members, + Navy & ECU FB, + the Catholic 7 & likely one more private basketball school like Butler to maintain the old balance.

People like to blame Tulane but the C7 had made up their mind to leave before then

(08-10-2018 05:29 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 05:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 04:05 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

I think Tulane gets in anyway. Good history with many of the schools dating to original CUSA and the Metro, and Houston and SMU would appreciate a neighborhood school with good academics.

The question then turns to what happens if Navy still wants to put football in the now-10-team AAC. They probably still go for it, but the calculus changes for finding the 12th football team.

If you recall, the very last 3 to get invited were ECU (FB only), Tulane, and then later Tulsa.

If ECU and Tulane were #10 and #11 and. ECU was willing to be FB only you better believe that a 10 team AAC would have featured ECU over Tulane.

Also recall that Tulane was allegedly the reason why the Catholic 7 left. You could concievably still have Big East football with 8 full FB members, + Navy & ECU FB, + the Catholic 7 & likely one more private basketball school like Butler to maintain the old balance.

People like to blame Tulane but the C7 had made up their mind to leave before then

Exactly.

I always laugh at that claim because Tulane was added as an all-sports team at the same meeting where ECU was only added as a "football only". The reason? The Catholic 7 blocked ECU. Furthermore, at the time, there were only 3 BE football playing schools that still had full voting rights. Thus, any 3 basketball schools could block anyone---which means at least FIVE of 7 basketball schools had to support the Tulane invitation. The "Tulane made the C7 leave" is a convenient false narrative used as a throw down excuse when the C7 finalized their exit plan a few weeks later. The truth is---the C7 could have easily blocked Tulane if they wanted and the fact that Tulane was invited is factual evidence that at least 5 (or more) basketball schools voted for Tulane.

We were operating under the Marinatto/Tagliabue "get the big markets" model. And under that model, Tulane was the next pick on the draft board after Orlando, Houston and Dallas, and Philadelphia and Memphis.

That was the presidents' thinking anyway. Then it got to the ADs.

And this was happening in the context of everyone expecting a big contract payday, and increasing signals that there was no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow.

I don't know how much a rule saying 10 got you a CCG mattered--we were bound and determined to have 14 football teams.

(08-10-2018 06:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 05:29 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 05:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 04:05 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Had The Big 12 pushed for a title game with 10 teams sooner both Tulsa and Tulane would still be sitting in C-USA.

I think Tulane gets in anyway. Good history with many of the schools dating to original CUSA and the Metro, and Houston and SMU would appreciate a neighborhood school with good academics.

The question then turns to what happens if Navy still wants to put football in the now-10-team AAC. They probably still go for it, but the calculus changes for finding the 12th football team.

If you recall, the very last 3 to get invited were ECU (FB only), Tulane, and then later Tulsa.

If ECU and Tulane were #10 and #11 and. ECU was willing to be FB only you better believe that a 10 team AAC would have featured ECU over Tulane.

Also recall that Tulane was allegedly the reason why the Catholic 7 left. You could concievably still have Big East football with 8 full FB members, + Navy & ECU FB, + the Catholic 7 & likely one more private basketball school like Butler to maintain the old balance.

People like to blame Tulane but the C7 had made up their mind to leave before then

Exactly.

I always laugh at that claim because Tulane was added as an all-sports team at the same meeting where ECU was only added as a "football only". The reason? The Catholic 7 blocked ECU. Furthermore, at the time, there were only 3 BE football playing schools that still had full voting rights. Thus, any 3 basketball schools could block anyone---which means at least FIVE of 7 basketball schools had to support the Tulane invitation. The "Tulane made the C7 leave" is a convenient false narrative used as a throw down excuse when the C7 finalized their exit plan a few weeks later. The truth is---the C7 could have easily blocked Tulane if they wanted and the fact that Tulane was invited is factual evidence that at least 5 (or more) basketball schools voted for Tulane.

Tulane provided the perfect scapegoat for the C7 to leave and take their name with them. True, they already made the decision. They just wanted the perfect excuse and Tulane provided that.

I have no insider information on the Tulane/ECU invitations, but my thought was always this: the C7 began talks to break away between September and December of 2012, after Notre Dame announced they were leaving. With the constant rumors of further exodus - UConn to the ACC, Louisville to the Big 12, etc. - there would soon be literally nothing left to salvage of the Big East. At this point, UCF, SMU, Houston and Memphis were already on board (replacing Syracuse, Pittsburgh and West Virginia). By November, when Rutgers and Maryland had received invitations to power conferences, Fox reached out to the C7 about a basketball-only conference (news broke in December about the C7's intentions to depart).

The key aspect here, IMO, is that the C7 did not know whether or not they would be able to depart in 2013 or 2014. Originally, it was announced that 2015-16 would be the first year of this new conference. With that in mind, the C7 - in voting for these new memberships - likely were in self-preservation mode for the basketball conference for this one season. With Tulane and ECU under consideration for membership at this time, the C7 likely were willing to only take one in for basketball purposes (not both). Both had remarkably poor basketball programs (and still do to an extent) that likely were putting the C7 on edge for basketball (even if it was only for one season). Even playing one season with several programs that would be bringing along incredibly weak programs - UCF, SMU, ECU and Tulane - would not help the C7 in the near-term or the long-term (especially in establishing value for their new conference). However, since Tulane was a private school, and has very strong academics, the C7 likely favored them (and considered them somewhat a peer) over ECU as a full-member. ECU not only had awful basketball, but low academic rankings as well. It is important to note, it was widely assumed that ECU would eventually become a full-member (even those within the C7 believed this), even if it was a football-only arrangement to start - so it's not like the C7 were preventing membership against ECU and/or Tulane; they were just trying to protect their own best interests.

It's pretty clear that the ADs and coaches were not involved with these discussions. These talks were strictly at the Presidential levels, which is why it caused so much confusion and backlash from some ADs and coaches (namely, Marquette's). Like so many realignment accounts, times during this period were chaotic and based purely on survival. It's quite a miraculous conclusion of the old Big East that you found seven schools find unity and harmony with each other in order to survive. Every one was out for their own.

(08-10-2018 02:46 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  I’d wager there are a lot more OU and OSU fans than TU supporters in the Tulsa area.

When you look at the overall profile of the school (enrollment, financial resources, academic reputation, media market, etc.), the school would seem much better suited for I-AA.

Conference affiliation aside, Tulsa is a solid rung below SMU or Rice interms of resources it takes to be compete at the highest level.

Especially as the cost of doing business continues to escalate.

There have been some studies done on the number of fans each school has in Oklahoma. IIRC it showed about 70-75% of college football fans in Oklahoma are OU fans and about 20-25% are OSU fans. In the city of Tulsa I would estimate the ratio would be a little better for OSU than the statewide ratio. OSU is somewhat closer to Tulsa than OU.

In the city of Tulsa that leaves roughly about 5% to be split among TU, Notre Dame, Arkansas, and other neighboring state schools etc.

TU has virtually no fans outside of the Tulsa area. So you can see their dielima and it has been that way for decades.

(08-10-2018 03:07 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Tulsa's facilities are on par with SMU and far superior to Rice.

How's that Tulsa baseball stadium? Have you seen the new Rice end zone facility, or the new tennis stadium? I challenge "far superior".

(08-10-2018 09:20 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:07 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Tulsa's facilities are on par with SMU and far superior to Rice.

How's that Tulsa baseball stadium? Have you seen the new Rice end zone facility, or the new tennis stadium? I challenge "far superior".

Tulsa vs Rice. I chose Rice all day long.

(08-10-2018 09:20 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:07 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Tulsa's facilities are on par with SMU and far superior to Rice.

How's that Tulsa baseball stadium? Have you seen the new Rice end zone facility, or the new tennis stadium? I challenge "far superior".

That Tennis facility ever held the NCAA championships?

End zone facility? You mean like the case center?

How's that basketball arena?

Football stadium?

Softball field?

Soccer stadium?

Rowing center?

https://tulsahurricane.com/sports/2015/6...ities.aspx

(08-10-2018 08:58 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 02:46 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  I’d wager there are a lot more OU and OSU fans than TU supporters in the Tulsa area.

When you look at the overall profile of the school (enrollment, financial resources, academic reputation, media market, etc.), the school would seem much better suited for I-AA.

Conference affiliation aside, Tulsa is a solid rung below SMU or Rice interms of resources it takes to be compete at the highest level.

Especially as the cost of doing business continues to escalate.

There have been some studies done on the number of fans each school (OU and OSU) has in Oklahoma. IIRC it showed about 70-75% of college football fans in Oklahoma are OU fans and about 20-25% are OSU fans. In the city of Tulsa I would estimate the ratio would be a little better for OSU than the statewide ratio. OSU is somewhat closer to Tulsa than OU.

In the city of Tulsa that leaves roughly about 5% to be split among TU, Notre Dame, Arkansas, and other neighboring state schools etc.

TU has virtually no fans outside of the Tulsa area. So you can see their dielima and it has been that way for decades.

As I mentioned in another thread, TU has always competed at the highest level possible. They have punched way above their weight. I was shocked when they moved to the AAC. I thought that was a big stretch for them. But, they like being in a conference with Tulane, Houston, and SMU. They also like now having their old MVC rival Wichita State in their conference. It wasn't that long ago that Tulsa was playing Illinois State and Drake.

OU and OSU definitely suck up all the oxygen there. TU has a following, but it's small. In addition, you're right that they have next to no following outside of the Tulsa market. It's a small private school that is getting smaller due to its own selectivity. I grew up in central Oklahoma, and am still connected with a lot of friends and family there. I've spent most of my adult life in Texas. This is random and anecdotal, but I don't think I've ever known anyone that went to TU for their undergraduate work....maybe one or two. I've known people that went there for law school and other graduate work, but that's it.

It's a well-endowed school with a proud legacy. There's just not much connection with the general public. That can be said for a lot of private schools.

(08-10-2018 06:00 AM)NoDak Wrote:  https://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/t...65987.html

The AAC needs a higher $ conference TV contract as Tulsa shows sign of stress.

I expect these stress cracks will grow even with a good AAC contract. Even with a good one the money gap with the A5 will grow, putting more stress on strivers determined to keep pace.

(08-10-2018 08:54 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I have no insider information on the Tulane/ECU invitations, but my thought was always this: the C7 began talks to break away between September and December of 2012, after Notre Dame announced they were leaving. With the constant rumors of further exodus - UConn to the ACC, Louisville to the Big 12, etc. - there would soon be literally nothing left to salvage of the Big East. At this point, UCF, SMU, Houston and Memphis were already on board (replacing Syracuse, Pittsburgh and West Virginia). By November, when Rutgers and Maryland had received invitations to power conferences, Fox reached out to the C7 about a basketball-only conference (news broke in December about the C7's intentions to depart).

The key aspect here, IMO, is that the C7 did not know whether or not they would be able to depart in 2013 or 2014. Originally, it was announced that 2015-16 would be the first year of this new conference. With that in mind, the C7 - in voting for these new memberships - likely were in self-preservation mode for the basketball conference for this one season. With Tulane and ECU under consideration for membership at this time, the C7 likely were willing to only take one in for basketball purposes (not both). Both had remarkably poor basketball programs (and still do to an extent) that likely were putting the C7 on edge for basketball (even if it was only for one season). Even playing one season with several programs that would be bringing along incredibly weak programs - UCF, SMU, ECU and Tulane - would not help the C7 in the near-term or the long-term (especially in establishing value for their new conference). However, since Tulane was a private school, and has very strong academics, the C7 likely favored them (and considered them somewhat a peer) over ECU as a full-member. ECU not only had awful basketball, but low academic rankings as well. It is important to note, it was widely assumed that ECU would eventually become a full-member (even those within the C7 believed this), even if it was a football-only arrangement to start - so it's not like the C7 were preventing membership against ECU and/or Tulane; they were just trying to protect their own best interests.

It's pretty clear that the ADs and coaches were not involved with these discussions. These talks were strictly at the Presidential levels, which is why it caused so much confusion and backlash from some ADs and coaches (namely, Marquette's). Like so many realignment accounts, times during this period were chaotic and based purely on survival. It's quite a miraculous conclusion of the old Big East that you found seven schools find unity and harmony with each other in order to survive. Every one was out for their own.

Boise State, San Diego State and TCU were sold to get on board before Rutgers and West Virginia left. TCU then got invited to the Big 12 before they could play a season in the Big East, and that was enough for Boise State and San Diego State leaving along with Louisville jumped ship. I do think it is the non-football schools caused the Big East to break apart. When you have football schools wanted to add more schools that play football to join, but they keep blocking which got them to lose the AQ. Lets say that the C7 left before Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Louisville, Notre dame and West Virginia left? AAC would look like this as an AQ conference today.

Cincinnati
Notre Dame
Syracuse
UConn.
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
USF
West Virginia

New members"
TCU
Boise State (football only)
San Diego State (football only)

I could see Houston would have been grabbed to go to 12.

Then lets say TCU, Houston, Syracuse and Pittsburgh leaves? Plus Notre Dame.

Grab SMU, UCF, Rice, Navy (football only), Temple and Memphis. Add Wichita State to offset Navy. AAC would still have the AQ bid. Tulane and Tulse would be left out in the cold along with ECU. Rutgers and Louisville leaves? ECU and ODU gets in. Could always move Cincinnati to the east and add UTSA. UTSA and Rice do have more of a fan support than Tukane and Tulsa right now. So does ODU.

I think with Tulsa's budget crisis might even hurt the next AAC's TV contract.

(08-10-2018 09:35 PM)va-eagle Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 09:20 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:07 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Tulsa's facilities are on par with SMU and far superior to Rice.

How's that Tulsa baseball stadium? Have you seen the new Rice end zone facility, or the new tennis stadium? I challenge "far superior".

Tulsa vs Rice. I chose Rice all day long.

I'd choose a bullet to my heart before either.

(08-10-2018 09:55 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 09:20 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:07 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Tulsa's facilities are on par with SMU and far superior to Rice.

How's that Tulsa baseball stadium? Have you seen the new Rice end zone facility, or the new tennis stadium? I challenge "far superior".

That Tennis facility ever held the NCAA championships?

End zone facility? You mean like the case center?

How's that basketball arena?

Football stadium?

Softball field?

Soccer stadium?

Rowing center?

https://tulsahurricane.com/sports/2015/6...ities.aspx

That’s nice and all but it’s an incomplete show case of Tulsa facilities “ you left out the GAZEBO! “, where’s the justice ?

(08-10-2018 09:55 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 09:20 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:07 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Tulsa's facilities are on par with SMU and far superior to Rice.

How's that Tulsa baseball stadium? Have you seen the new Rice end zone facility, or the new tennis stadium? I challenge "far superior".

That Tennis facility ever held the NCAA championships?

End zone facility? You mean like the case center?

How's that basketball arena?

Football stadium?

Softball field?

Soccer stadium?

Rowing center?

https://tulsahurricane.com/sports/2015/6...ities.aspx

I'm not sure anybody has better site lines than Rice in football.

(08-11-2018 10:44 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State, San Diego State and TCU were sold to get on board before Rutgers and West Virginia left. TCU then got invited to the Big 12 before they could play a season in the Big East, and that was enough for Boise State and San Diego State leaving along with Louisville jumped ship. I do think it is the non-football schools caused the Big East to break apart. When you have football schools wanted to add more schools that play football to join, but they keep blocking which got them to lose the AQ. Lets say that the C7 left before Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Louisville, Notre dame and West Virginia left? AAC would look like this as an AQ conference today.

Cincinnati
Notre Dame
Syracuse
UConn.
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
USF
West Virginia

New members"
TCU
Boise State (football only)
San Diego State (football only)

I could see Houston would have been grabbed to go to 12.

Then lets say TCU, Houston, Syracuse and Pittsburgh leaves? Plus Notre Dame.

Grab SMU, UCF, Rice, Navy (football only), Temple and Memphis. Add Wichita State to offset Navy. AAC would still have the AQ bid. Tulane and Tulse would be left out in the cold along with ECU. Rutgers and Louisville leaves? ECU and ODU gets in. Could always move Cincinnati to the east and add UTSA. UTSA and Rice do have more of a fan support than Tukane and Tulsa right now. So does ODU.

I think with Tulsa's budget crisis might even hurt the next AAC's TV contract.

The Boise State, San Diego State and Navy additions are irrelevant in terms of the C7 because not only were those football-only additions, but none of those schools were a threat to become a full member due distance (Boise/SDS) or commitment to basketball (Navy). TCU was invited before Syracuse and Pittsburgh left. As soon as Texas A&M, Nebraska, Missouri and Colorado bolted the Big 12, TCU was gone.

You can blame the non-football schools all you want for the Big East to fall apart, but Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Rutgers, Notre Dame and Louisville all left the conference before the C7 did. For a league that was originally created for basketball only, who's to say that Georgetown, Villanova, Seton Hall, St. Johns and Providence (and later DePaul/Marquette) did not have a right to protect their top sport either? With the later additions, not only was the competitive levels at risk, but now you are stretching out a league into Texas with multiple members and adding another member in Florida. No way could that have been argued as a benefit.

The Big East Football members had options around 2010 to increase their TV contract value, as well as add a Conference Championship Game. You already had TCU approved as a full-member. Memphis would have been a great compromise selection (TCU was bad at basketball), as they would have been approved by the C7 as well considering their strong basketball history and recent National Championship game appearance. You could have then added Temple and ECU as football-only members to get to 12 teams as a legitimate power conference. Basketball would have gone to twenty.

Big East Football
Cincinnati
UConn
ECU (Football-only)
Louisville
Memphis
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
Syracuse
TCU
Temple (Football-only)
USF
West Virginia

Big East Basketball
Cincinnati
UConn
DePaul
Georgetown
Louisville
Marquette
Memphis
Notre Dame
Pittsburgh
Providence
Rutgers
Seton Hall
St. Johns
Syracuse
TCU
USF
Villanova
West Virginia