CyberBull Wrote:UCF -- nice on-campus facilities, but nothing that is better than most big east schoosl. Fanbase is unproven as compared to ECU, plus their administration has burned a lot of bridges.

CB...very good points...as USF had NEITHER of the above...and Big East still offered an invite.

Now UCF has very good on-campus facilities plus GOOD attendance (and very strong season tix sales), as the Knights would seem to be much of a less gamble for a future invite vs the status of USF back in Nov 2003.

cuseroc Wrote:A little reading comprehension is in order here. This is what MT said:

I think our directors would like to add one more football team but I don't think there's much support for it because I don't think there's a team out there that can make our league better.

He did not say there is not a team out there that is better than the BE teams. He said nothing about being equivilent. He said there is no one out there that will make our league better. Its true to a point. Louisville, when they came to the BE, it instantly made the BE a better fb league.

I read just fine, thanks.....I was replying to the notion put forth in the post above mine....as you can see if you look back at my post (I won't personally attack your reading skills), I also addressed the actual MT verbiage in my post as well.

....and FTR, your statement, "Its true to a point." seems to parallel what I said.....I believe any program that the BE would consider brings at least something to the conference that would make it "better" in some way.....despite if any of you on the inside looking out want to believe it or not.....

Jackson1011 Wrote:-- IMO expanding the BE tourney was a step away from the split, not towards one

-- If it does happen, I am on board with the Krocker/Maize plan of UCF and Temple. However, it depends on how forsighted the presidents are. Going in that direction may mean less football money in the short run because we are going to have two more BCS mouths to feed and TU and UCF probably aren't going to add a lot to the TV contract right now

Would you give up money now in return for the possibility of having a much stronger league in the future??

Jackson

That would be called vision.

cuseroc Wrote:A little reading comprehension is in order here. This is what MT said:

I think our directors would like to add one more football team but I don't think there's much support for it because I don't think there's a team out there that can make our league better.

He did not say there is not a team out there that is better than the BE teams. He said nothing about being equivilent. He said there is no one out there that will make our league better. Its true to a point. Louisville, when they came to the BE, it instantly made the BE a better fb league.

Memphis would make our league a little better in bb, but then again, it goes without saying that we dont need any more bb schools. They would add nothing in fb.
Neither ECU or UCF would make our league instantly better in fb. And both programs add nothing to basketball. Niether program in question would add significant revenue increases, or significant exposure increases, if any.

Now I do believe that if ECU and UCF and to a lesser degree, Memphis, were given bcs status and an opportunity to recruit at that level over several years could certainly make the BE better in football, similar to the way Cincy and USF made the BE better. There is no question about that.
So I agree that there is no one out there that would make our league better the instant that they started playing fb in the BE, but I do believe that the programs in question could eventually make the BE league better.

That is true. Give Memphis, UCF, and ECU BCS status and their football program and fan attendance would grow, without question. Also, without question, give a NonBCS conference BCS status, and that entire NonBCS conference would improve its performance just like Cincy or USF. Of course, that is not going to happen.

Tigeer Wrote:

Jackson1011 Wrote:-- IMO expanding the BE tourney was a step away from the split, not towards one

-- If it does happen, I am on board with the Krocker/Maize plan of UCF and Temple. However, it depends on how forsighted the presidents are. Going in that direction may mean less football money in the short run because we are going to have two more BCS mouths to feed and TU and UCF probably aren't going to add a lot to the TV contract right now

Would you give up money now in return for the possibility of having a much stronger league in the future??

That would be called vision.

I bring up concepts requiring vision with certain inside people as much as possible. Their responses are usually weird looks or awkward periods of silence. I can easily imagine similar scenes taking place at athletic directors meetings.

Tallgrass Wrote:

cuseroc Wrote:A little reading comprehension is in order here. This is what MT said:

I think our directors would like to add one more football team but I don't think there's much support for it because I don't think there's a team out there that can make our league better.

He did not say there is not a team out there that is better than the BE teams. He said nothing about being equivilent. He said there is no one out there that will make our league better. Its true to a point. Louisville, when they came to the BE, it instantly made the BE a better fb league.

Memphis would make our league a little better in bb, but then again, it goes without saying that we dont need any more bb schools. They would add nothing in fb.
Neither ECU or UCF would make our league instantly better in fb. And both programs add nothing to basketball. Niether program in question would add significant revenue increases, or significant exposure increases, if any.

Now I do believe that if ECU and UCF and to a lesser degree, Memphis, were given bcs status and an opportunity to recruit at that level over several years could certainly make the BE better in football, similar to the way Cincy and USF made the BE better. There is no question about that.
So I agree that there is no one out there that would make our league better the instant that they started playing fb in the BE, but I do believe that the programs in question could eventually make the BE league better.

That is true. Give Memphis, UCF, and ECU BCS status and their football program and fan attendance would grow, without question. Also, without question, give a NonBCS conference BCS status, and that entire NonBCS conference would improve its performance just like Cincy or USF. Of course, that is not going to happen.

agreed, but there also has to be a level of commitment by the program as well otherwise temple would still be here. also this time around i think it takes more than potential for the big east to add someone else, they need a program that can give the conference a lift, if that's not there than expect the conference to stay pat. if we do split i think it will be due more to lack of ncaa tourney bids and unbalanced scheduling, in football why would we want to add another mouth to feed with very little return?

Mike that is exactly why the BE will do nothing.. If there is not a real... and fairly big pop for the conf right out of the box.. they will add nothing.. and right now.. there is no school out there that will give them a big imediate pop... and the prez don't look long term very well... they are not visionarys.. if they were they wouldn't have stayed in school both as students.. and administrators their whole lives.. they stayed.. and worked in their confort zones.. without stepping out on a limb..

goodknightfl Wrote:Mike that is exactly why the BE will do nothing.. If there is not a real... and fairly big pop for the conf right out of the box.. they will add nothing.. and right now.. there is no school out there that will give them a big imediate pop... and the prez don't look long term very well... they are not visionarys.. if they were they wouldn't have stayed in school both as students.. and administrators their whole lives.. they stayed.. and worked in their confort zones.. without stepping out on a limb..

i agree, i'm not sure if it's lack of vision just the risk, the media backlash, and the permanent damaging of relationships, is just too much to warrant a split, unless we add someone big. schools like cuse, pitt, rutgers, and uconn just have too much history with the basketball schools and notre dame to leave them without a good enough reason.

I agree with many, the longer the BE remains in it's current form, the less likely it will split of add another member. I thought, due to scheduling problems, the the BE might add a football only member. I don't see that happening, since a football only school would put pressure on the other schools to become a full member. As far as Krocker's notion of adding 2 schools, I think the conference would just be too big. If you are going to add two schools, why not ECU and Richmond or ECU and Charlotte? Had to get that in there.

Capital Pirate Wrote:

cuseroc Wrote:A little reading comprehension is in order here. This is what MT said:

I think our directors would like to add one more football team but I don't think there's much support for it because I don't think there's a team out there that can make our league better.

He did not say there is not a team out there that is better than the BE teams. He said nothing about being equivilent. He said there is no one out there that will make our league better. Its true to a point. Louisville, when they came to the BE, it instantly made the BE a better fb league.

I read just fine, thanks.....I was replying to the notion put forth in the post above mine....as you can see if you look back at my post (I won't personally attack your reading skills), I also addressed the actual MT verbiage in my post as well.

....and FTR, your statement, "Its true to a point." seems to parallel what I said.....I believe any program that the BE would consider brings at least something to the conference that would make it "better" in some way.....despite if any of you on the inside looking out want to believe it or not.....

My post was not directed at you. Next time I will make sure that I quote the post that I am commenting on.

I think ECU w/ BCS status would be a good fit....I can see them easily selling out for ranked BE games and I can also see them being able to recruit easily vs. UNC, NCST, Wake and cough cough, Duke w/ BCS status....

here is the problem some on this board do not want to deal with. There is sentiment for adding another team, thats what MT was talking about BUT, and it's a very BIG, HUGE BUT...when the AD's consider it it always comes down to taking a huge slice of their money and giving it to someone else...dividing up the pie another way.

My solution...I'd get rid of Notre Dame and add another football school thus staying at 16 but thats just me. Phase in their share of football BCS money over ten years so the pain is not so bad and the league would probably do it.

he is also right that there is nobody out there who would go that would help the league. Most of the names I hear thrown around here would actally make it weaker.

chrisRU Wrote:If Temple wanted to leave the A-10 to become a full Big East member, why didn't they do that in the 90's? I would think the Big East would not mind having Temple on their BB roster.

So, I was under the impression Temple was happy playing BB in the A-10. Is this not correct?

BTW, if Temple replaced ND and was a full member, it would throw the conference out of BB/FB balance, which seems to be something that is key to the BB schools since the BE reorganized.

Temple was NOT OFFERED BB MEMBERSHIP because Villanova did not want to share the Philly market. Temple was football only because the BE wanted them football only. My understanding is that Temple very much wanted full membership.

TopCoog Wrote:here is the problem some on this board do not want to deal with. There is sentiment for adding another team, thats what MT was talking about BUT, and it's a very BIG, HUGE BUT...when the AD's consider it it always comes down to taking a huge slice of their money and giving it to someone else...dividing up the pie another way.

My solution...I'd get rid of Notre Dame and add another football school thus staying at 16 but thats just me. Phase in their share of football BCS money over ten years so the pain is not so bad and the league would probably do it.

he is also right that there is nobody out there who would go that would help the league. Most of the names I hear thrown around here would actally make it weaker.

We agree on this one!

Bearcat 1984 Wrote:

chrisRU Wrote:If Temple wanted to leave the A-10 to become a full Big East member, why didn't they do that in the 90's? I would think the Big East would not mind having Temple on their BB roster.

So, I was under the impression Temple was happy playing BB in the A-10. Is this not correct?

BTW, if Temple replaced ND and was a full member, it would throw the conference out of BB/FB balance, which seems to be something that is key to the BB schools since the BE reorganized.

Temple was NOT OFFERED BB MEMBERSHIP because Villanova did not want to share the Philly market. Temple was football only because the BE wanted them football only. My understanding is that Temple very much wanted full membership.

If Temple had been a full member of the league, it would have been much tougher to kick them out, and I'm not sure that there would have been enough support to get rid of them.

We just need to sit down with ND tell them they are in, in football or they're out in everything, and have either Temple, ECU, or UCF to hop in.

ND probably at this point needs a conference tie in to boost recruiting some, the landscape of football has changed dramatically, and may have left ND behind for the time being.

dgrace4cards Wrote:We just need to sit down with ND tell them they are in, in football or they're out in everything, and have either Temple, ECU, or UCF to hop in.

ND probably at this point needs a conference tie in to boost recruiting some, the landscape of football has changed dramatically, and may have left ND behind for the time being.

lol, i'm no notre dame apologist but that's too funny. sure let's make enemies with one of the most powerful figures in college football, so we can add ecu, temple, or ucf. brilliant! at least i won't have to hear people b!tching about scheduling ever again, but i'm sure something else will take it's place.

dgrace4cards Wrote:We just need to sit down with ND tell them they are in, in football or they're out in everything, and have either Temple, ECU, or UCF to hop in.

ND probably at this point needs a conference tie in to boost recruiting some, the landscape of football has changed dramatically, and may have left ND behind for the time being.

Agree

Bearcat 1984 Wrote:

chrisRU Wrote:If Temple wanted to leave the A-10 to become a full Big East member, why didn't they do that in the 90's? I would think the Big East would not mind having Temple on their BB roster.

So, I was under the impression Temple was happy playing BB in the A-10. Is this not correct?

BTW, if Temple replaced ND and was a full member, it would throw the conference out of BB/FB balance, which seems to be something that is key to the BB schools since the BE reorganized.

Temple was NOT OFFERED BB MEMBERSHIP because Villanova did not want to share the Philly market. Temple was football only because the BE wanted them football only. My understanding is that Temple very much wanted full membership.

-- That is my understanding as well. If memory serves the Big East(I'm guessing it was Nova and its voting allies) used some BS reason about not wanting two teams in the same market. Having Rutgers/Seton Hall/St Johns and Pitt/West Virginia is fine, but for some reason Nova/Temple "wouldn't work"

Quote:If Temple had been a full member of the league, it would have been much tougher to kick them out, and I'm not sure that there would have been enough support to get rid of them.

-- Agreed. A lot of people forget how good Temple bball was in the late 1980s and early to mid 1990s. It was probably better then Nova during that period.

I always thought that having two teams in Philly would have been good for the BE. But, I have always had a soft spot for Temple because of the bball history with West Virginia

Jackson

Yes, it is true, Villanova filibustered a possible all sports membership for the Owls in the early 90s and subsequently are responsible for the near demise of our football program. Their argument (Villanova) was that Temple was too big to allow them to survive and Nova convinced the other Nazi (Catholic) schools to vote against an all sports membership for Temple. Personally, I think Temple fits in perfectly with the current FB schools but we need to continue to improve our basketball and football programs to even start talking about readmittance.