StillJonesing Wrote:

esayem Wrote:Your right, football does drive expansion for historically strong basketball leagues. That's why if there were a split the football schools would need a little love in the hoops department.

Nah, football is still king, for ANY conference regardless of the conference it's what those schools protect. Even at a place like UNC football where they have elite level basketball & well not so great football it still makes more money than the 2nd fiddle sport &'s more important to the athletic department.

UNC
Football earnings $17,548,006
Basketball earnings $15,234,321

I totally understand your point. You're right, football is where the money is at, but not many non-BCS schools east of the Mississippi make crazy dollas. On the other hand, if you're the BE football league post split, and you have to make sure the hoops league can compete with not only the BE Catholic schools, but the ACC as well, ECU and UCF (the 2 best football schools that would accept membership) are not going to improve a damaged basketball image like Temple or Memphis. Remember, how would UConn, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt vote? I can't say who would get picked up, I just know (in no order) Memphis, UCF, Temple, and ECU are the best options.

There is no doubt that after a split we would absolutely need to add some strong basketball schools to keep our basketball on par with the ACC, SEC, and Big 10. Obviously football makes the most money, but we need our basketball to stay elite as well.

With a split, theres no doubt that Memphis is the #1 add. Essential, no brainer. After them there is quite a drop off imo. Temple football will never be bcs worthy. If they could get their football up to even Memphis' level as far as attendance and performance goes they would be another no brainer, but i cant even see that happening. ECU would do themselves well to improve their other sports. If there is no split and we just add a football only member they have locked themselves in as the top option, but with a split their basketball could hold them back from the invite theyve been asking about for a long time. UCF would be a good addition across the board, but only after USF has established themselves as an elite program. If the options are a perennial top 10 USF and no UCF, or USF and UCF with the 2 of them spending most of their time in the others receiving votes section, its no question the big east would prefer the former. Best case scenario is USF becomes an elite program, and then after a few years of that UCF is brought in.

Another thing. If we split I think UMASS would become an option. Hold onto them for a while for their basketball, while pressing them to get their football to 1a. In the long run they could be an excellent program for us right in our footprint. Huge student population.

There is also the outside chance that Villanova or Georgetown ever decide to move up to 1a football, though i wouldnt hold my breath.

Or there is the even bigger shot in the dark. Penn State, Notre Dame, Maryland, Virginia, or Boston College. Obviously thats a pipe dream, but any of them moving here would certainly cause a shake up.

Definitly a lot of options, and some of them will end up getting left out. I just hope something happens eventually, this hybrid conference causes too many problems.

BullsBEAST Wrote:I just hope something happens eventually, this hybrid conference causes too many problems.

What problems is the hybrid causing? The only real problem is that the football schools need more than 8 members to have a balanced shedule and so that they don't have to play an extra OOC game which can be difficult to schedule mainly due to monetary concerns--and that it puts them at a disadvantage to leagues that can play more in conference matchups.

buckaineer Wrote:Louisville and WVU fans might differ with your "just get another" point. You don't just replace great coaches --and look where ECU has been since 1999-that is a long time. ECU has looked strong in two games this season but this doesn't make them a top program, just a good team this season so far.

My point is anyone can have their coach taken, even LSU or FL. Good programs don't stay down for ever though. We have had proven success under several coaches, just as your programs.

Quote:The tv coverage is all well and good, but what are the financials and what are the ratings nationally when they are on. This is what will determine if they would be viable for adding to a major conference or not.

I'm sure if you added Temple with their major market & all there would have been more people watching their game. Well except they never get on ESPN or or national TV really.

Quote:The Big East schools are reportedly not interested in a football only school. It isn't going to do the remaining schools any good to play ECU but not get any revenue for it, and I'm pretty sure that ECU won't like this deal for very long either. And if there were a year like this where an ECU might make it to the top-how would that go over?

Really? Tell that to all the football coaches who keep asking for another football team. That's the only option until you spilt, & no one has really has called for a split I am aware of. Also according to the Conn. paper that printed the terms the BCS bowl would be in play if we won the conference, the others wouldn't though if I recall correctly, & we would manage our own TV deal, & bowl tie ins exept a BCS one if we were to win the conference.

Quote:Not great to have a sort of member win the conference.

You did it for years with Temple and Virginia Tech.

Quote:As far as that offer being off the table now, don't get too overconfident. Your team has beaten one BE team. Don't know how that team will finish up in conference. They haven't escaped without an in conference loss yet, even with Rodriguez. Remember, ECU has just beaten one BE team, not the whole conference yet. Also, the Big East still holds the cards and it is up to them if they would include an ECU in future expansion, not up to ECU just because they have one win over WVU.

We are #14 in the nation this week, that's a little bigger than just one win. & we are certainly have more leverage this week than 3 weeks ago.

Quote:I'd like to see a fanbase and team like yours in the league, but only if it would make financial sense. The network won't care about VT comparisons, VT is an established power, ECU is not.

They were HARDLY an established power when the Big East added VT, in fact they stunk & had stunk for a decade, & had less fan support than we even had 15 years ago. I'm just throwing that out there as their markets didn't seem to matter to the Big East then. They won & grew with BCS membership. Like I said though I take pride in the fact we have built our program back up without those advantages. What if we had them? That's what the Big East needs to think about & look at where VT is now.

StillJonesing Wrote:They were HARDLY an established power when the Big East added VT, in fact they stunk & had stunk for a decade, & had less fan support than we even had 15 years ago. I'm just throwing that out there as their markets didn't seem to matter to the Big East then. They won & grew with BCS membership. Like I said though I take pride in the fact we have built our program back up without those advantages. What if we had them? That's what the Big East needs to think about & look at where VT is now.

1986, when talks were going on. VaTech= 10-1-1 Peach Bowl champs.

They struggled for a few years, but somebody knew a little we didn't because they were 9-3 in 1993, Independence Bowl champs.

buckaineer Wrote:

BullsBEAST Wrote:I just hope something happens eventually, this hybrid conference causes too many problems.

What problems is the hybrid causing? The only real problem is that the football schools need more than 8 members to have a balanced shedule and so that they don't have to play an extra OOC game which can be difficult to schedule mainly due to monetary concerns--and that it puts them at a disadvantage to leagues that can play more in conference matchups.

Thats exactly it. We cant get a 9th football team because the basketball schools will block any move. We have 2 different types of schools and both of them are just looking out for their best interests.

esayem Wrote:1986, when talks were going on. VaTech= 10-1-1 Peach Bowl champs.

They struggled for a few years, but somebody knew a little we didn't because they were 9-3 in 1993, Independence Bowl champs.

1986 ?? Really? I think you need to check your time table considering that would have put them in talks about the Big East, seven years before Big East football even started. Truth is Big East football didn't decide to start up until September 1990 & schools were still talking to the Metro about going there instead at that point so nothing was even finalized until then & certainly not in 1986.

Virginia Tech
1987 2-9
1988 3-8
1989 6-4-1
1990 6-5
1991 5-6
1992 2-9

Quote:in 1990 the college sports landscape began to change dramatically, as college football independents gradually realized the benefits of joining conferences. The Metro conference did its best to capitalize. According to the Louisville Courier-Journal, that year the Metro held a two-day expansion meeting with eight football schools — Boston College, East Carolina, Miami, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple and West Virginia. Miami, intrigued by the possibility of joining their hated rivals the Seminoles in the conference, came away from the meetings calling the Metro a "viable option."

However, two months later Louisville football coach Howard Schnellenberger came out publicly opposed to conference affiliation, saying that it would hamper his ability to play a national (read Notre Dame-type) schedule. He specifically said he wanted no part of a conference that included supposedly lackluster football programs at Cincinnati, Memphis, South Carolina, Southern Miss, Tulane and Virginia Tech. Also, according to the Courier-Journal, Louisville was asking for a revenue-sharing commitment from Florida State should they join the league in football, while at the same time, looking for assurances that its massive college basketball television profits wouldn't be diminished.

In September 1990, Florida State chose instead to bolt for the Atlantic Coast Conference. At virtually the same time, the Big East would found a football league, scooping up most of the Metro's expansion prospects. Soon after that, South Carolina left for the Southeastern Conference.

http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/columns/k...050911.htm

buckaineer Wrote:Not great to have a sort of member win the conference. (football only)

You do relize West Virginia started as a football only in the Big East, along with Rutgers, Temple, & Virginia Tech. Temple & Virginia Tech were football onlys for a decade +

Okay, maybe talks were not going (what do we really know) on that early, but the memory of that season was not gone. Obviously they were not horrible for decades. If you want to know why VaTech was picked over ECU, it's simple: They would have been just the 2nd school from Virginia in a power conference and they are closer to Syracuse, BC, and Pitt. Maybe also their relationship with Miami, but Im not sure on that one.

People don't realize that the state of North Carolina loves football too, it's not just a basketball state. ECU is a proud program, and yeah I give you guys crap cuz you only beat us twice in history, but is the Pirate football program BCS worthy? Yes. I look back in the 80's and I don't understand why the Metro didn't get a football league together, all the schools were there for it to happen if they took ECU. That should be the main question. Why didn't the Metro start a football conference with ECU? Was it all Schnellenfarb? I doubt it, prob the thought of Metro schools losing affiliation with Louisville hoops, I don't really know.

StillJonesing Wrote:

buckaineer Wrote:Louisville and WVU fans might differ with your "just get another" point. You don't just replace great coaches --and look where ECU has been since 1999-that is a long time. ECU has looked strong in two games this season but this doesn't make them a top program, just a good team this season so far.

My point is anyone can have their coach taken, even LSU or FL. Good programs don't stay down for ever though. We have had proven success under several coaches, just as your programs.

Most Big East schools have had much more success than ECU with various coaches since your last ranked team in 1999. Coaches that can pull an ECU up to BCS levels don't grow on trees

StillJonesing Wrote:

Quote:The tv coverage is all well and good, but what are the financials and what are the ratings nationally when they are on. This is what will determine if they would be viable for adding to a major conference or not.

I'm sure if you added Temple with their major market & all there would have been more people watching their game. Well except they never get on ESPN or or national TV really.

I didn't mention Temple, you did. The Big East Football Conference kicked Temple out for not meeting standards. However, you can bet than in the gigantic Philadelphia market, just as many people are watching Temple football (which IS on TV there from time to time) as watch ECU football. It isn't game #1 in Philly, or maybe even 3, but the market is so large that TV executives and advertisers who pay their bills will notice them, especially if they become competitive with other BCS schools. ECU doesn't have that advantage and as I said the actual numbers are what is important. I don't know who is watching the cable outlets that you say ECU is on or what money those channels and your school are making from that. If the numbers aren't strong enough to bump other BE schools financials if ECU were added, it won't matter.

StillJonesing Wrote:

Quote:The Big East schools are reportedly not interested in a football only school. It isn't going to do the remaining schools any good to play ECU but not get any revenue for it, and I'm pretty sure that ECU won't like this deal for very long either. And if there were a year like this where an ECU might make it to the top-how would that go over?

Really? Tell that to all the football coaches who keep asking for another football team. That's the only option until you spilt, & no one has really has called for a split I am aware of. Also according to the Conn. paper that printed the terms the BCS bowl would be in play if we won the conference, the others wouldn't though if I recall correctly, & we would manage our own TV deal, & bowl tie ins exept a BCS one if we were to win the conference.

The football coaches never said they want a football only program in the Big East. In the meetings they considered a few schools for this and ECU wasn't one considered--they opted not to go this route. ECU suggested what would be in play, BE schools didn't accept any of it if you'll remember. The Big East still holds the cards. The Big East isn't going to add a program if they don't bring something significant to the existing teams. ECU making money and tv deals for themselves does nothing to improve existing BE schools situations or financials.

StillJonesing Wrote:

Quote:Not great to have a sort of member win the conference.

You did it for years with Temple and Virginia Tech.

Temple, VT, Rutgers, and WVU were not always members in other sports (Temple never became other than football). They were full members of football though. They shared in bowls, tv, etc. When they played they represented the league. ECU's proposed deal would give ECU BCS status without having to give anything back to the league. The media, other conferences, etc. would ridicule the BE endlessly if such a situation were set up. ECU is NOT Notre Dame.

StillJonesing Wrote:

Quote:As far as that offer being off the table now, don't get too overconfident. Your team has beaten one BE team. Don't know how that team will finish up in conference. They haven't escaped without an in conference loss yet, even with Rodriguez. Remember, ECU has just beaten one BE team, not the whole conference yet. Also, the Big East still holds the cards and it is up to them if they would include an ECU in future expansion, not up to ECU just because they have one win over WVU.

We are #14 in the nation this week, that's a little bigger than just one win. & we are certainly have more leverage this week than 3 weeks ago.

Don't kid yourself, ECU is having a nice season so far, but is not the most saught after program in the world yet. ECU has 0 leverage when it comes to the BCS, the BCS leagues have all the leverage, along with the networks. The Big East offices DO have other options you realize, including doing nothing. Starting one season badly after multiple BCS bowl winning seasons has quieted the shouts for more than one year.

StillJonesing Wrote:

Quote:I'd like to see a fanbase and team like yours in the league, but only if it would make financial sense. The network won't care about VT comparisons, VT is an established power, ECU is not.

They were HARDLY an established power when the Big East added VT, in fact they stunk & had stunk for a decade, & had less fan support than we even had 15 years ago. I'm just throwing that out there as their markets didn't seem to matter to the Big East then. They won & grew with BCS membership. Like I said though I take pride in the fact we have built our program back up without those advantages. What if we had them? That's what the Big East needs to think about & look at where VT is now.

Virginia Tech, as much as I now hate them, was an up and coming program around the time of the formation of the Big East. They had been playing other north east independents for years and had wins against programs like WVU when Major Harris was at the helm. They had been playing WVU for years on an equal basis --and they were pushed for membership by WVU and others due to this. VT was also getting on national TV in some of these games. Also, they were only to be the second major team, far away from the other team, in their growing state. ECU was a virtually unkown nationally directional school with poor academics in a state with four major conference teams.

Quote:Most Big East schools have had much more success than ECU with various coaches since your last ranked team in 1999. Coaches that can pull an ECU up to BCS levels don't grow on trees

Yet, we have found successful coaches through out our history, Clarance Stasovich, Sonny Randel, Pat Dye, Ed Emory, Bill Lewis, Steve Logan, & Skip Holtz. We screwed up with one really bad hire, but things are clearly back on track.

buckaineer Wrote:ECU was a virtually unkown nationally directional school with poor academics in a state with four major conference teams.

So what's that make West Virginia? A directional 2nd fiddle state with poor people & poor academics by comparison to schools like VT as well, & to a real state called Virginia? It's a new era, enjoy your new coach. I think we are doing just fine without the Big East.