(04-11-2011 10:50 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  You afraid of what will happen if they invite UCF?

What would UCF do with all that BCS money? I think they would, in time, challenge UF and FSU as Orlando is a glorified college town as they have no big time sports (other than the Magic) to compete with. Then imagine the I-4 rivalry that would take place each year; it would get ugly (in a good way) and even help to solidify USF's place on the map.

The BE could have a monster on its hands if it only invited UCF to mitigate this Nova issue. By the way, USF should embrace this monster, it would be healthy for both programs and the BE.

I am not exactly sure what is going on but it seems to me that maybe Villanova is getting screwed in this deal. You northerners have strange ways. If Nova was in Texas, we'd just pull out a shotgun and say, "You ain't good enuff, now git!"

(04-11-2011 01:06 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 05:58 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  The conference already voted to go to 10 teams, so that plan is already in place and voted on. The same group put a stop to Nova being the 10th yesterday. I doubt they plan on backstepping on their announcement and still plan to go to 10. The 9/17 concept won't last IMO. I have to imagine the conference want all teams in or announced by the time the new tv contract is issued. Those in favor here of 9/17, are you thinking this setup for another year or so, or all the way through the next tv contract?

Back in May of 2003 the ACC agreed to expand to 12 which allowed the conference to proceed with contacting candidates. But come June, they still had to vote on each program to add.

Same thing applies here. TCU had to be voted upon by all 16 teams prior to getting an actual invite. The BE office and the expansion committee do not have carte blanche to just add any 10th member.

Cheers,
Neil

Exactly. A lot of people are fixated on the vote that the BE wants 10 FB members. That doesn't mean anything about *who* that 10th FB member would be - the conference and/or FB schools can't just add any random school that they want as an all-sports member. Any all-sports member still has to be approved by the 16 schools (17 once TCU has officially joined).

(04-10-2011 10:18 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-10-2011 10:01 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  This is bizarre, you'd think the BE football members would have all been on board if they had given Nova even an "informal" invite. But I share their concern about the stadium - when will the expansion happen to 30k, assuming it happens? It's still not an ideal situation, even at 30k.

I don't understand why Villanova can't expand its home stadium to 25,000 seats? Any of the other models suggested like the soccer stadium or Franklin Field are stupid.

VU in a 25k on its stadium grounds would be able to offer the city an alternative to Temple's downtown location. A lot of VU alumni live off the mainline and can quickly get to games back on campus.

The stadium has a track, if they removed it and lowered the field I would think fairly easily they could get to 20k+ and that would be better than leasing at PPL park, a total BS move.

http://www.villanova.com/facilities/nova...adium.html

You forget about the people who live near Villanova's stadium. Those people have some $$, and the last thing they want to see is a bigger, noisier stadium in their neighborhood. Right now, they tolerate it, but if it got bigger, they couldn't handle it. Living by a hs stadium myself, I have to admit, I agree with those folks. As it is, I don't care to have a stadium that I can see from my backyard with the bright lights and noisy teenagers to begin with. But I know that it does die down eventually, and is somewhat tolerable. If said hs were to try to expand its stadium and move up in classification, I'd have to talk to the principal and voice my opposition to that. With a bigger stadium means more traffic and more fans, making it harder for me to sleep (I work the graveyard shift at a big retail store), and forcing me to get up earlier so I can beat the traffic going to work. If I had a big salary, I'd get the city involved to stop the hs from expanding their stadium , which is basically what the residents of Radnor Township (where 'Nova plays) have done. This is why 'Nova is looking at off campus options.

(04-10-2011 10:06 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  June 1st is the date another school has to leave its conference by in order to play in the Big east in 2012, right? So...a little over a month and a half.

No matter what happens, Villanova will not be playing in the Big East in 2012, or even 2013, probably not even in 2014. There has to be a transistion period.

(04-11-2011 02:14 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  That being said, no one likes my new Big East line up? That line up would pass the ACC and get more $$$ than the ACC.

In addition to the fact that your set up would be for a 14 team league, how on Earth would this set up make more money than the SEC, when you have just added six schools that four other conferences have repeatedly said they did not want? It is just a scenario that has no merit.

(04-11-2011 03:03 AM)Frog People Wrote:  I can't imagine them signing off on a 2nd dead weight basketball program just to appease football.

Perhaps the basketball schools noticed something this year, that I have been saying since I joined this site. The best thing that could happen to teams ike Cincinnati, St. Johns, and even DePaul, teams that had been good int he past, but had been struggling, would be the addition of a lower tier team. And what happened this year when the Big East was void of true top level teams? Cincinnati and St. Johns made the NCAA tournament. The best thing that will happen to Big East basketball is the addition of TCU, which will help balance out the league that has too top heavy. This will allow the teams in the middle 1/3 of the conference to flourish, in much the same way that they did this year with only one top seed, to the point that all 11 would have gotten in even in a 65 team field (based on seed).

(04-11-2011 09:59 AM)The Brown Bull Wrote:  Well it definately shows there is a power struggle going on in the Big East. Obviously, we are not seeing a united front from the Big East.

There has never been a united front. The reason there hasn;t been expansion in the past, is that none of the temas could agree on a team. This includes football progemas not beign able to agree on which football program to add. TCU was added, because it was easy to clearly see their value. Nova was also at the top because no one has a reason to disagree with them being invited, since they are already family. Thaqt is the difference. No other teams have gotten a concensus, either league-wide, or even within a given faction.

9/17. Just leave it be.

(04-11-2011 11:57 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  What's the compelling reason to do so now when the basketball league is at the peak of its powers (including a resurgent St. John's that's invaluable to the NYC market) and the football league is in a down-cycle? How does that make sense? Why does that make more revenue on a per-school basis when BB TV revenue is higher in the BE? What ESPN or CBS or Fox or Comcast executive is going to pay a premium for UCF or Houston football when they aren't paying a premium for way more established West Virginia and Pitt football programs? No one ever comes up with reasonable explanations for this to financially support a split.

There seems to be this notion among a lot of FB fans that basketball is somehow holding back football in the Big East. In reality, the only freaking reason why BE FB even got ANY TV deal with ESPN after the ACC raid was the strength of BE basketball.

This post was just so on the money, I wanted to repost it.

(04-11-2011 12:10 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I think you're underselling what a conference like the Big East sans the BBall only schools would rake in, television-wise. Add in three programs like ECU/UCF/Houston, a conference championship game, and I think the per-team rake would be just as good if not better than it is currently. You'd still have one of the stronger Basketball conferences in the nation with the teams remaining, and every member of the conference would be adding value to the conference in football, which cannot be said for the Basketball only schools.

Here is where this goes wrong: How does having the basketball-only schools hurt football? They certainly help basketball a whole lot. And just having a good on the field product is not enough: the Big XII has at worst the third best football field product, maybe second best, and third best basketball product, yet they are fifth in revenue.

Here's what really happens. You have to ask yourself, why is Big East basketball so valuable? It is valuable because:

• 1) You have a 16 team conference, with 12 historically good or relevant basketball programs, with two more that would be in the top half historicall of 3 or 4 of the other five BCS conferences.
  
  2) Market size - This big East covers 40% of homes in America. If you split, both sides lose out on huge chunks of that. The basketball-only programs home turf accounts for the 4 largest marktes, and 6 of the top ten. They Catholic schools represent lose to 70% of the market the conference owns, and that number is actually skewed by the fact that three schools claim large chunks of their state.
  
  3) Market location - Currently the Big EAst has the Northeast corridor as its home market, and encompasses four of the 6 most vocal sports media towns. The Big East is the top dog in the North East, and has a secondary presence is portions of the Midwest and even Southeast. A split means you have no footprint where you are top dog. That is bad marketing.
  
  4) The sheer size and unique nature of this Beast means that the combined conference, along with the vast market presence the conference covers, is worth more than each could get on its own combined. There is no set up possible of any teams one would remotely consider "available," that could make as much or more per team for basketball as the current set up allows for.
  
  5) What is there to gain? You can expand to ten football teams pretty comfortably in the current set up, maybe 11 if Villanova is one. Hell you could even go 12 i fone of the other two football playing schools in the conference moves up, but fat chance on one, and the other can't afford to do it. While some say a 12/20 formula coudl work, I do not think it is sustainable in the long temr. Thus the only reason to have to split is if you truely desire 12 teams. So you have to ask yourself, what two teams plus a low paying championship game, will replace the loss of 70% of our market, our most marketable asset, and whatever you lose per team on the basketball side, plus what you have lost in NCAA credits? This is usually where the talk of a split stops, because there is no answer. And yes, even if the Big XII North was available, they still do not meet this standard.
  
  Adding Kansas and Missouri, two schools who so far have been passed over by the Big XII South (they tried to leave them), the Pac 10, the Big 10, and the SEC (when they talked of expansion, neither were getting an invite), whose combined makets do not increase the number of households per team, who are mid to lower level BCS football programs, whose location is smack dab between two other more prominant conferences, how on Earth are they going to increase the Big East's payout per team, and increase it enough to offset the loss of the BE's biggest asset?And that is just to break even.

Even if your premise was based off the notion that you coudl add teams that were as good or better than those lost by a split, even that is incorrect:

On the field
Vill, GT, SJU, Marq, ND, Dep >>> any combination of available schools

Market size
On the field
SJU, Dep, Vill, GT, SH,Marq, Prov, DP >>> any combination of available schools

One last important thing. The Big East can still sell the markets of those above teams as part of their football proposal, but they do not have to split the money with those teams. That is a BIG, BIG bonus, that a struggling league needs. If any conference could add markets, without having to split the pie more ways, they would take it.

There is just no benefit to a split.

(04-11-2011 03:39 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  There is just no benefit to a split.

When the best of the Metro and Great Midwest merged to form C-USA, the new league earned less NCAA bids than the 2 old leagues did combined.

The Big East perhaps experienced the same phenomenon from 2006-2010, where 16 teams produced 7.4 bids per year. There's an argument to be made that two 8-team leagues over those 5 years would have produced more than a combined 37 bids.

Now this year, Big East basketball is riding high with 11 bids, with a national champ who finished 9th in the league. We'll see if this season was an aberration. History suggests it was.

(04-11-2011 04:13 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 03:39 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  There is just no benefit to a split.

When the best of the Metro and Great Midwest merged to form C-USA, the new league earned less NCAA bids than the 2 old leagues did combined.

The Big East perhaps experienced the same phenomenon from 2006-2010, where 16 teams produced 7.4 bids per year. There's an argument to be made that two 8-team leagues over those 5 years would have produced more than a combined 37 bids.

Now this year, Big East basketball is riding high with 11 bids, with a national champ who finished 9th in the league. We'll see if this season was an aberration. History suggests it was.

Well, I should have not said there is "no benefit" to a split. You will get more NCAA bids in a smaller conference. Especially when your small conference only makes you play 14 conference games (like the GMC and Metro did). The ACC, Big Ten, and Big XII tend to get 50% or more of their conference in the NCAA tournament, whereas the Big East has only done that twice in seven years. Some of that is due to the extra two conference games (although that is overplayed a bit since our conference tends to play less quality OOC games), but more of it was due to having 3-5 dominant teams every year, who simply beat up on the bottom half of the conference and split with each other. Also C-USA had more than double the combined TV contracts of what the Metro and GMC had.

What I meant by there is no benefit to a split, was that you will not get more money for your fourth and fifth expansion options* (who do not add inventory on a per team basis), plus a championship game, minus 70% of your markets, than you would have with only your first and second options, and all of your large market assets and teams.


*the third option is Nova passing on expansion leading to a split, and three more teams added),

ECU fans get ready! I have a strong feeling the Pirates are going to get a football only invite soon! The football schools have the approval and seeing ECU needs time to develop their BBall program, the conference will probably add ecu so we wont have another bball program and a strong 10 team football conference! Personally, I hope it happens because I love playing the Pirates.

(04-11-2011 06:01 PM)thecomet89 Wrote:  ECU fans get ready! I have a strong feeling the Pirates are going to get a football only invite soon! The football schools have the approval and seeing ECU needs time to develop their BBall program, the conference will probably add ecu so we wont have another bball program and a strong 10 team football conference! Personally, I hope it happens because I love playing the Pirates.

I really really doubt that happens. I want it to, and Nova being shut down certainly improves our chances eventually, but even so the BE will just pick someone else besides us.

I'd love to see it, but I'm not getting my hopes up. I don't think the BE is going to go the football only route.

(04-11-2011 06:01 PM)thecomet89 Wrote:  ECU fans get ready! I have a strong feeling the Pirates are going to get a football only invite soon! The football schools have the approval and seeing ECU needs time to develop their BBall program, the conference will probably add ecu so we wont have another bball program and a strong 10 team football conference! Personally, I hope it happens because I love playing the Pirates.

I would be perfectly happy inviting ECU. Great program, great fans, good geography, strong leadership, etc.....

(04-10-2011 10:22 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Too bad there's not a stadium like FedEx Field available. Or RFK Stadium. (Oh, wait...)

Maybe they could play there?

(04-11-2011 02:39 PM)Lonestar Lizard Wrote:  If Nova was in Texas, we'd just pull out a shotgun and say, "You ain't good enuff, now git!"

Kind of like what DeLoss Dodds did to TCU, SMU, UH, and Rice.

(04-11-2011 09:28 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 02:39 PM)Lonestar Lizard Wrote:  If Nova was in Texas, we'd just pull out a shotgun and say, "You ain't good enuff, now git!"

Kind of like what DeLoss Dodds did to TCU, SMU, UH, and Rice.

Deloss didn't leave TCU, SMU, Rice and UH behind. Politics and their lack of fans left those schools behind. Initially, UT & A&M were the only schools bolting the SWC but Texas politics got Tech and Baylor in the Big 12, not Deloss Dodds. The other schools simply had no other options or support. Simple as that.

Today, that is an entirely different story. The 24 or so Houston (TX) Legislators didn't have enough pull to get UH in the Big 12 this past summer after it was announced that Nebraska and Colorado were leaving.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/spor...53360.html

Quote:Khator and Rhoades must do their best to convince UT president Bill Powers and athletic director DeLoss Dodds that UH would be an asset to the Big 12. If we learned anything the last few days, it's that these two men have the power.

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/sports/l...g-12-entry

Quote:The third largest university in Texas now has the support of almost two dozen Texas lawmakers. They're joining a new push to get UH in the same conference as UT, A&M, Tech, and Baylor.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/f...g-12_N.htm

Quote:Earlier this week, Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder said he believed any new member of the Big 12 would have to bring $15 million in value.

"I don't really think right now that there's anybody that brings that kind of value, and then it would complicate matters if you had 11 schools," he said. "I think 10's a good number. I really believe that it gives our conference champion a better chance to advance to the BCS championship game."

(04-11-2011 09:53 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 09:28 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 02:39 PM)Lonestar Lizard Wrote:  If Nova was in Texas, we'd just pull out a shotgun and say, "You ain't good enuff, now git!"

Kind of like what DeLoss Dodds did to TCU, SMU, UH, and Rice.

Deloss didn't leave TCU, SMU, Rice and UH behind. Politics and their lack of fans left those schools behind.

LOLOLOL UNT

(04-11-2011 10:00 PM)canewton Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 09:53 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 09:28 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 02:39 PM)Lonestar Lizard Wrote:  If Nova was in Texas, we'd just pull out a shotgun and say, "You ain't good enuff, now git!"

Kind of like what DeLoss Dodds did to TCU, SMU, UH, and Rice.

Deloss didn't leave TCU, SMU, Rice and UH behind. Politics and their lack of fans left those schools behind.

LOLOLOL UNT

LOLOLOL Coog.

Can you dispute anything I said? In 1993, did UH Rice, SMU and TCU have any kind of Texas legislative support demanding that those schools be included in the Big 12 instead of Baylor and Tech? No. Did UH, Rice, SMU and TCU have attendance issues and in some cases NCAA problems? Yes.

So instead of laughing at me for pursuing a 2nd degree at UNT, please explain what I have written is incorrect?

(04-11-2011 11:57 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  What's the compelling reason to do so now when the basketball league is at the peak of its powers (including a resurgent St. John's that's invaluable to the NYC market) and the football league is in a down-cycle? How does that make sense? Why does that make more revenue on a per-school basis when BB TV revenue is higher in the BE? What ESPN or CBS or Fox or Comcast executive is going to pay a premium for UCF or Houston football when they aren't paying a premium for way more established West Virginia and Pitt football programs? No one ever comes up with reasonable explanations for this to financially support a split.

There seems to be this notion among a lot of FB fans that basketball is somehow holding back football in the Big East. In reality, the only freaking reason why BE FB even got ANY TV deal with ESPN after the ACC raid was the strength of BE basketball.

No reasons to financially support a split? Are you kidding?

You won't be saying that if the Big East loses it's AQ status! You let the basketball schools push you around for much longer and that's exactly what's going to end up happening. Although TCU was a nice addition, this football conference is still ripe for the picking and will be until a split occurs and they can expand.

In the event of a split, the TV package that the football schools will get for hoops would be significantly larger than what the hoops schools will get by themselves anyway. And they wouldn't have to split it as many ways; even if they expanded following the split and added several other football schools. The football schools are driving the bus on the basketball end of things as well. So really, that's a moot point on your part.

Clearly, there is a strong financial incentive for the football schools to eventually split away from the basketball schools. Not saying it's going to happen now, but it will happen.

(04-11-2011 11:06 PM)GO_TU Wrote:  

(04-11-2011 11:57 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  What's the compelling reason to do so now when the basketball league is at the peak of its powers (including a resurgent St. John's that's invaluable to the NYC market) and the football league is in a down-cycle? How does that make sense? Why does that make more revenue on a per-school basis when BB TV revenue is higher in the BE? What ESPN or CBS or Fox or Comcast executive is going to pay a premium for UCF or Houston football when they aren't paying a premium for way more established West Virginia and Pitt football programs? No one ever comes up with reasonable explanations for this to financially support a split.

There seems to be this notion among a lot of FB fans that basketball is somehow holding back football in the Big East. In reality, the only freaking reason why BE FB even got ANY TV deal with ESPN after the ACC raid was the strength of BE basketball.

No reasons to financially support a split? Are you kidding?

You won't be saying that if the Big East loses it's AQ status! You let the basketball schools push you around for much longer and that's exactly what's going to end up happening. Although TCU was a nice addition, this football conference is still ripe for the picking and will be until a split occurs and they can expand.

In the event of a split, the TV package that the football schools will get for hoops would be significantly larger than what the hoops schools will get by themselves anyway. And they wouldn't have to split it as many ways; even if they expanded following the split and added several other football schools. The football schools are driving the bus on the basketball end of things as well. So really, that's a moot point on your part.

Clearly, there is a strong financial incentive for the football schools to eventually split away from the basketball schools. Not saying it's going to happen now, but it will happen.

Its not the hybrid model or # of teams that makes a league "ripe for picking". It is the availability of better options for the schools if another AQ league wanted to offer. Adding any of "the usual suspects" won't make the BE a more lucrative arrangement than the SEC, Big Ten, Big12, Pac12, or ACC.

If anything the Hoops schools make rebuilding the BE an easier task as they ensure a strong RPI in a potentially rebuilt league even if UConn, Syracuse, and WVU were taken away.

Revenue per school is the key factor and bringing in 2-3 CUSA schools or Temple won't help that enough to change the game.