Interesting to note since the new Big East started.

The football schools are 15-10, the nonfotball members are 13-11
that gap should get even wider this year with 5 football schools going to the dance and only 2 nonfootball members doing the same.

During same time period Memphis is 11-3

(03-13-2009 07:21 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Interesting to note since the new Big East started.

The football schools are 15-10, the nonfotball members are 10-10
that gap should get even wider this year with 5 football schools going to the dance and only 2 nonfootball members doing the same.

During same time period Memphis is 11-3

Not sure what you are referring to, but the NCAA units earned by the league over the past four years is 26-25 in favor of ND and the bb schools.

That should definitely change after this season.

Cheers,
Neil

I was referring to the NCAA tourney records in past three years

I made a correction on first post.
omni can you show me that breakdown for past 4 years, it doesnt seem to match what I found on tourney history.
I have it as 25-24 in favor of the FB schools unless Im missing someone

(03-13-2009 07:57 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I made a correction on first post.
omni can you show me that breakdown for past 4 years, it doesnt seem to match what I found on tourney history.
I have it as 25-24 in favor of the FB schools unless Im missing someone

I'll get it later. Right now, too involved with the SU-WVU game.

Although my original post should be the last 3 years. This is obviously the 4th year where the scales should tip decidely toward the football schools.

Cheers,
Neil

Ok I have corrected my original post:
In past three years
Football schools are 15-10 for 25 NCAA shares
nonFootball schools are 14-12 for 26 NCAA shares
Memphis is 11-3 for 14 shares in same three years

Shares by Year:
2006 FB 10 non FB 9
2007 FB 5 nonFB 8
2008 FB 10 nonFB 9

What's ND total, ND certainlly would be invited if there is a split.
What's WBB total

ND is 1-2 for 3 shares

If we split, we better not bring the Irish along...

The Big East schools are raking in the shares from this NCAA tourney

(03-28-2009 09:23 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The Big East schools are raking in the shares from this NCAA tourney

Yep. A record 22 so far (old record was 21 by the 1985 BE). Saturday's and Sunday's games will wrap this up. The worse the BE will do this year is 23 and the best is 25.

Cheers,
Neil

(03-28-2009 11:23 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(03-28-2009 09:23 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The Big East schools are raking in the shares from this NCAA tourney

Yep. A record 22 so far (old record was 21 by the 1985 BE). Saturday's and Sunday's games will wrap this up. The worse the BE will do this year is 23 and the best is 25.

Cheers,
Neil

So how much cheddar are we talking about here. Is there anyway to approximate this Neil?

(03-28-2009 11:29 AM)WacoBearcat Wrote:  

(03-28-2009 11:23 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(03-28-2009 09:23 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The Big East schools are raking in the shares from this NCAA tourney

Yep. A record 22 so far (old record was 21 by the 1985 BE). Saturday's and Sunday's games will wrap this up. The worse the BE will do this year is 23 and the best is 25.

Cheers,
Neil

So how much cheddar are we talking about here. Is there anyway to approximate this Neil?

NCAA units accumulate in six year increments, so this year the BE is being paid for units earned from 2003-2008 tournies. The total units earned were 94 and the league is being paid $19,365,877 or basically $ 206,020 per unit. The amount per unit goes up each year.

The total number of units will now go up from 94, since the 14 earned in 2003 will be dropped off to get to 80 and the ones earned in this year's tourney will be added to it. So the league will have a total of between 103-105 units next year. Those 23-25 units earned this year will continue to earn $$$ for the league from 2009-10 through 2014-2015.

Due to the league's expansion to 16 teams, the average per team is still less than what the ACC receives, but since expansion the ACC is basically earning less than 12 units per year while the BE is between 18-19 units per year (this year's spectacular rake compensates for a poor showing in 2007 of only 13 units - the league earned 19 units each of the other two years).

Cheers,
Neil

(03-28-2009 12:43 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(03-28-2009 11:29 AM)WacoBearcat Wrote:  

(03-28-2009 11:23 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(03-28-2009 09:23 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The Big East schools are raking in the shares from this NCAA tourney

Yep. A record 22 so far (old record was 21 by the 1985 BE). Saturday's and Sunday's games will wrap this up. The worse the BE will do this year is 23 and the best is 25.

Cheers,
Neil

So how much cheddar are we talking about here. Is there anyway to approximate this Neil?

NCAA units accumulate in six year increments, so this year the BE is being paid for units earned from 2003-2008 tournies. The total units earned were 94 and the league is being paid $19,365,877 or basically $ 206,020 per unit. The amount per unit goes up each year.

The total number of units will now go up from 94, since the 14 earned in 2003 will be dropped off to get to 80 and the ones earned in this year's tourney will be added to it. So the league will have a total of between 103-105 units next year. Those 23-25 units earned this year will continue to earn $$$ for the league from 2009-10 through 2014-2015.

Due to the league's expansion to 16 teams, the average per team is still less than what the ACC receives, but since expansion the ACC is basically earning less than 12 units per year while the BE is between 18-19 units per year (this year's spectacular rake compensates for a poor showing in 2007 of only 13 units - the league earned 19 units each of the other two years).

Cheers,
Neil

Thanks Neil. Go Big Beast!!

Why is there a need to distinquish between the fb"s and bb"s only? How about just the referring to everyone as the BE?

Since you asked. There was a thread awhile back in which there was a discussion about NCAA shares and how would the teams do if they were in separate conferences. This is the reason showing those #s.

Yes we are all in the Big East together and we all want the league to succeed but that doesnt hide that half our league does NOT participate in the biggest revenue producing sport and thus doesnt have to worry about improvements in that sport.

True, but they also dont share in the revenue of that sport. The exposure from FB may or may not benefit the BB only's. In my opinion a school like USF or UC gets more from its BB team being associated with schools like Villanova and Marquette, than Marquette and SH get from USF or WVU having FB. Others I'm sure disagree

gosports1, having a BCS level football league that competes in the fall helps with exposure for the conference brand which Nova and Marquette are part of. Sure Nova and Marquette are considered power teams and enhance the reputation of the Big East in other sports not named football but football has the biggest exposure. Truth be told the average person in the country doesn't start watching college hoops until the conference tournaments unless its some huge hyped up #1 vs. #2 matchup. That even goes for me and I'm a college sports addict.

(03-31-2009 07:13 AM)brista21 Wrote:  gosports1, having a BCS level football league that competes in the fall helps with exposure for the conference brand which Nova and Marquette are part of. Sure Nova and Marquette are considered power teams and enhance the reputation of the Big East in other sports not named football but football has the biggest exposure. Truth be told the average person in the country doesn't start watching college hoops until the conference tournaments unless its some huge hyped up #1 vs. #2 matchup. That even goes for me and I'm a college sports addict.

Would the average person in the country care to watch more Big East football if ECU or Memphis were part of the conference? I think not.

(03-31-2009 07:00 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  True, but they also dont share in the revenue of that sport. The exposure from FB may or may not benefit the BB only's. In my opinion a school like USF or UC gets more from its BB team being associated with schools like Villanova and Marquette, than Marquette and SH get from USF or WVU having FB. Others I'm sure disagree

I don't necessarily disagree but there is another side to this as well. Would Villanova and Marquette bb get the recruits they are getting if they weren't playing the likes of UConn, SU, Louisville, and Pitt in addition to each other, ND, and G'Town?

And yes, the markets of the bb schools can help with recruiting for the football schools not already established in terms of bb such as USF.

But as Brista points out - the football schools keep the brand name of the conference out there in the media during the fall in college's most watched sport. Other than a few name match-ups, college bb doesn't start to heat up until late January or so.

Both sides help each other, which is why it appears that they will remain together for the foreseeable future.

Cheers,
Neil