Big East Bunch Packs Punch

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/fo...M_ID=19400

Anyone else feel like there's this tone to the article of man BC you never shoulda bailed out. Think about it this way we could have three top ten teams right now if BC were here, 4 in the Top 25, and 6 getting votes all together out of 9 schools.

I wish I could find the article, but I remember reading an article 2 or 3 years ago where the reporter asked BC's AD that if he knew that the Big East would retain it's BCS slot if he would have moved to the ACC. And the AD, DeFillipo I believe his name is, got kind of anxious and then said something along the lines that he was only doing what was best for BC and then kind of hinting that BC would have stayed if he had known that the Big East would retain it's bid.

Deep down inside, the administration at BC knows that they should have done the right thing and stayed in the Big East, but they panicked and secretly begged for supposed salvation from the ACC because they are followers rather than leaders. The noted reaction by their duplicitous AD gives further credence to my theory that when this current administration is gone, hopefully before the next seven years have all passed, BC will eventually get sick of consistent redheaded stepchild treatment from the ACC and will be more than open to the idea of coming back home with the Big East football schools where they truly belong.

7 yrs is ambitious. but I agree with you... eventually. I think it could take up to 15 years.

I don't think you can fault BC for leaving. At the time the BE's BCS bid was on thin ice. Had they known that the BE would blow up they way we have they surely would have stayed. It's a shame too because they're such a natural fit for the BE but they got scared and jumped, now they're stuck in a southern league with no natural rivals.

Krocker more and more I like that 10 team proposition of yours. It could become the Northern + Florida & Kentucky version of the SEC.

Great article. Finally the truth is printed. We are one. :ugaexams: Continued growth and success will bring on more love like this. :bcs: Forget BC. Would you rather have a "team member" like BC that stabs :schwartz: you in the back and runs out on you in a time of trouble , or a partial member like Notre Dame that says "stick'm up" :noisycricket:and give me all your bowl money, robbing you blind in a face to face confrontation. :smokie:

RealDeal Wrote:I don't think you can fault BC for leaving. At the time the BE's BCS bid was on thin ice. Had they known that the BE would blow up they way we have they surely would have stayed. It's a shame too because they're such a natural fit for the BE but they got scared and jumped, now they're stuck in a southern league with no natural rivals.

It's not the fact that they left it was how they stabbed the conference in the back. They said to the conference's face they were staying (even telling Louisville and Cincinnati the same thing) and then about a week later, after begging the ACC to re-consider, ran off to the ACC.

Bearcat 1984 Wrote:7 yrs is ambitious. but I agree with you... eventually. I think it could take up to 15 years.

It could happen in 2 or 3 years, and the BC administration could decide that they don't want to admit a mistake was made and BC never comes back. You never know.

Bearcat 1984 Wrote:7 yrs is ambitious. but I agree with you... eventually. I think it could take up to 15 years.

It is ambitious but nothing in life gets accomplished without ambition. At this point, if BC is not ready to come back by 2014, screw them because there is no way we will wait 15 years for anyone. By 2014, perhaps Temple might have things back together enough that they would make an acceptable tenth member, and we can just move forward from there. At any rate, we will need to have a school in either Boston (the actual city) or Philadelphia (the actual city), leaving both of them uncovered would be a major mistake that we would start to regret almost immediately after it happens.

Temple won't be back unless they start winning the MAC, and averaging about 40,000 fans.

It would be stupid to bring them back to be the Temple of old. Syracuse has taken that slot.

Do people actually read the posts or do they just fire off rapid responses? Everybody who ever mentions the possibility of Temple returning someday clearly and unequivocally says "if they improve" as a caveat to those statements. No one on this board has ever said take Temple back without any improvement.

Temple won't improve. That is why the qualification is stated. They have to win, and that means beating BCS teams. They'll never be able to do that consistently.

bitcruncher Wrote:Temple won't be back unless they start winning the MAC, and averaging about 40,000 fans.

It would be stupid to bring them back to be the Temple of old. Syracuse has taken that slot.

Layoff the Syracuse shots. We carried this league along with VT when you guys were stinkin, and Miami was down. Its about time you return the favor.

WVU has been competitive all the while, except at the end of Nehlen's career, and the first year of Coach Rod's. Syracuse has been down much longer. They've been down since McNabb left.

bitcruncher Wrote:WVU has been competitive all the while, except at the end of Nehlen's career, and the first year of Coach Rod's. Syracuse has been down much longer. They've been down since McNabb left.

Nope, it just seems that way to someone who does not pay attention. Syracuse has had only 3 losing seasons since McNabb left in 1999, just one more than WV during that same time span, and has gone to 5 bowl games. Yes Syracuse is down from its McNabb/Mcpherson years, but not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. But The Cuse still carried the league when Miami was down, along with VT. Thanks for returning the favor.

cuseroc Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:Temple won't be back unless they start winning the MAC, and averaging about 40,000 fans.

It would be stupid to bring them back to be the Temple of old. Syracuse has taken that slot.

Layoff the Syracuse shots. We carried this league along with VT when you guys were stinkin, and Miami was down. Its about time you return the favor.

Temple is on the way back. They are on a 1 game win streak and half way there on the attendence figure. They are averaging 22,500 of the required 40k to return too. Just think when they return CUSE, L'Ville, and Pitt will have somebody they can beat.

panite Wrote:

cuseroc Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:Temple won't be back unless they start winning the MAC, and averaging about 40,000 fans.

It would be stupid to bring them back to be the Temple of old. Syracuse has taken that slot.

Layoff the Syracuse shots. We carried this league along with VT when you guys were stinkin, and Miami was down. Its about time you return the favor.

Temple is on the way back. They are on a 1 game win streak and half way there on the attendence figure. They are averaging 22,500 of the required 40k to return too. Just think when they return CUSE, L'Ville, and Pitt will have somebody they can beat.

I dont know if I would put Louisville in the same category as Pitt and Cuse. Defense wise, sure, but that team is still very dangerous. A team like Rutgers and Uconn have a very good chance to lose to that team. Their offense is not nearly as good as last season but they can still put some points on the board. I would be very concerned about Louisville. Cuse just caught them at the right time, and still barely hung on for the win.

I agree with you about L'ville but I had to take a shot at them any way. It will be a struggle for Rutgers to beat L'ville even if they never find their defense this year. That score could easily end up 42 to 38. Rutgers usually tops out in the high 30's while L'ville has had a few 40 point games this year. Rutgers defense holds them off for a 38 to 35 win.