(07-05-2009 12:18 PM)UofL07 Wrote:  

(07-04-2009 09:22 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  As I have mentioned in the past, the Eastern Indies had an affinity for ND, Miami, VT, Louisville, and Cincinnati. JoePa's dreams of Maryland were never going to happen. But as for the rest of the Eastern Indies, each of them had reasons for championing one or more of those 5 institutions.

Just out of curiosity Omni, do you know who favored Louisville?

Miami and Pitt from what I heard.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-05-2009 11:44 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  What kind of cheese?

I've always preferred the Extra Sharp White Cheddar myself.

How about you?


Neil

You know, I like you bit, but this post you made has to be the most egotistical, paranoid post I have ever seen. I rank it right up there with Kentucky fans. I mean seriously. Let me respond to it:

If WVU were in the MAC or CUSA, it would be the MAC or CUSA that would have a BCS bid, and The BEast that would be on the outside looking in. I didn't forget who saved everybody's @ss when the BCS bid was on the line. Without WVU, you'd all be in the same boat as CUSA...

Wow. I mean, you seriously have to be high on drugs to think this, no disrespect. First of all, the Big East keeping its BCS bid was a team effort. Some of you guys conveniently ignore Louisville's Top 10 ranking that counted towards the Big East the year BEFORE West Virginia's big win over Georgia. As for C-USA or the MAC being a BCS conference if West Virginia were in it, if that were true then the Big East wouldn't have been sweating bullets about their BCS bid back in 2003 now would they? I didn't forget who saved our @sses. We saved our OWN @sses, only an egomanic would take credit for an entire conference's success. It was Louisville's, Pittsburgh's and West Virginia's rankings that helped the Big East, and it was our markets that helped us.

West Virginia has always worked FOR West Virginia's best interest, since nobody else will. But WVU never had any clout. That's the problem of being from a small state without a huge population base, and very rugged terrain. And no, WVU doesn't have any clout now. Advertising revenue drives things now, and WVU still doesn't have a huge fan base. We have a small, loyal fan base. One that will follow the Mountaineers to the end of the Earth, if that's where the game is. But still that doesn't give us much clout...

If that's true, then maybe West Virginia should be a team player and help EVERYONE? I know West Virginia has, you're the only one who thinks that everyone is out to get WVU. Last I checked we worked for what's best for the BIG EAST, and by proxy West Virginia because I believe you're still in the conference right?

As for other schools working against us...

Really, who are these Big East schools who are working against you, I'm curious. I really am, because this is getting into "There's someone around the corner looking for me" type of paranoia.

The ACC didn't want us around because Morgantown was a b!tch to get to, and the Mountaineer basketball program, at the time of the inception of the ACC, was one of the dominant programs in the nation. The Tobacco Road schools effectively blocked us, to avoid long road trips - and serious competition...

What does that have to do with Big East schools allegedly being out to get you?

The Metro Conference never got off the ground due to outside forces pulling proposed members apart, so WVU stopped playing old Southern Conference foes and concentrated on eastern schools. Then the Big East came along and took key members of the proposed eastern all-sports conference, when things were just starting to take shape. And don't give me that crap about JoePa's revenue requests. WVU wasn't going to agree to that, and Paterno knew it...

Take your pick. At every turn, whenever WVU has had an opportunity to create or join an all-sports conference, somebody was there to prevent it...

It's always been West Virginia against the world. We're used to it...

Cry me a river. You want people to feel sorry for poor old West Virginia? At least you had access to a Big Six conference. While you guys were running off to the Big East and ACC us and Louisville were stuck in non-BCS purgatory. Yet, you want us to feel sorry for you? It was Cincinnati and Louisville that was against the world, the Big Six world, because we were fighting the mid-major perception every day. Trust me, WE'RE used to it. We're the ones that actually had to fight that. And then West Virginia asks for OUR help, and instead of giving us credit for helping West Virginia the last few years you (meaning bit) are making posts crying about how everybody is out to get West Virginia and West Virginia single-handedly saved and carried the conference? Sorry dude, nobody's buying it, especially from the Louisville and Cincinnati side of the room.

(07-05-2009 11:05 AM)esayem Wrote:  That ten team league would have been great, but Miami would still have a lot of traveling to do. I feel like they would have accepted ACC membership regardless.

Perhaps. VT surely would have. Wonder if the ACC would have taken VT without Miami?

Cheers,
Neil

(07-05-2009 12:46 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(07-05-2009 11:05 AM)esayem Wrote:  That ten team league would have been great, but Miami would still have a lot of traveling to do. I feel like they would have accepted ACC membership regardless.

Perhaps. VT surely would have. Wonder if the ACC would have taken VT without Miami?

Cheers,
Neil

I seriously doubt it. Virginia Tech had been fighting to get into the ACC and were turned down for decades. Virginia Tech's entrance into the ACC is very similar to Cincinnati's entrance into the Big East. It took a huge upheaval for a slot to open for them.

(07-04-2009 11:53 PM)Maize Wrote:  I actually don't want to split right now with the Basketball schools because the BBall schedule is just out of this world. What I do want is the league office to treat football and basketball on equal terms instead of getting on it knees for ND and the basketball schools.

Every Cards fan I've ever talked to absolutely loves the Big East because of the quality of basketball. Back in C-USA, you could get up for maybe 4 conference games a year (UC, Marquette, DePaul, Memphis) and that was it. In the Big East, almost every conference game is exciting and gets the Hall rockin'. But I think the biggest change I've notice is that many Cards fans now watch conference games that don't involve the Cards. That never happened in C-USA but now it is quite common for Cards fans to tune in to other big East basketball contests.

With that said; however, I do think that there are certain split/expansion scenarios that would provide a very good/exciting basketball schedule for fans. For example, consider a ten team conference that added UMass/Delaware and Memphis.

Basketball

- With 10 teams, the conference would be able to hold an 18 game, double round robin schedule during the regular season. Here's a hypothetical schedule for Louisville under this format.

January 7 Connecticut
January 10 @ Pittsburgh
January 12 Rutgers
January 17 @ USF
January 21 UMass/Delaware
January 25 @ West Virginia
January 28 Syracuse
January 31 @ Memphis (rivalry)
February 2 Cincinnati (rivalry)
February 8 @Connecticut
February 12 Pittsburgh
February 15 @ Rutgers
February 18 USF
February 21 @ UMass/Delaware
February 23 West Virginia
March 1 @ Syracuse
March 4 Memphis (rivalry)
March 7 @ Cincinnati (rivalry)

- While playing Rutgers, USF, and UMass/Delaware twice wouldn't be all that appealing, Cards fans would get to play UC and Memphis (biggest historic basketball rivals) twice on the court. In addition, we'd also get treated to playing 'Cuse, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, and WVU twice as well.


Football

- While a ten team league would have an unbalanced 9 game conference slate, we would only need to schedule three OOC games. UK could be scheduled @PJCS in years when we had a 4-5 home-away schedule. Let's look at a hypothetical two year schedule.

Year 1

August 31 Kentucky
September 6 FCS opponent
September 17 Upper non-BCS team or BCS team
September 26 @ Connecticut
October 10 Pittsburgh
October 18 @ Rutgers
October 25 West Virginia
November 1 @ Umass/Delaware
November 8 Syracuse
November 14 @ USF
November 22 Memphis
December 4 @ Cincinnati

7 home, 5 away


Year 2

September 5 FCS opponent
September 19 @ Upper non-BCS team or BCS team
September 26 @ Kentucky
October 2 Connecticut
October 10 @ Pittsburgh
October 17 Rutgers
October 24 @ West Virginia
October 31 UMass/Delaware
November 7 @ Syracuse
November 14 USF
November 21 @ Memphis
November 27 Cincinnati

6 home, 6 away

(07-05-2009 12:45 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  Cry me a river. You want people to feel sorry for poor old West Virginia? At least you had access to a Big Six conference. While you guys were running off to the Big East and ACC us and Louisville were stuck in non-BCS purgatory. Yet, you want us to feel sorry for you? It was Cincinnati and Louisville that was against the world, the Big Six world, because we were fighting the mid-major perception every day. Trust me, WE'RE used to it. We're the ones that actually had to fight that. And then West Virginia asks for OUR help, and instead of giving us credit for helping West Virginia the last few years you (meaning bit) are making posts crying about how everybody is out to get West Virginia and West Virginia single-handedly saved and carried the conference? Sorry dude, nobody's buying it, especially from the Louisville and Cincinnati side of the room.

Agreed. The Big 6 didn't even enter into the lexicon of college football until the Bowl Alliance was formed in 1992. Prior to that, that was a foreign concept. West Virginia had a seat at the table once college football exploded into the sports world in both popularity and $$$.

But I do wonder IF Louisville and Cincinnati had sunk more resources into their athletics a decade and half earlier than they did, might they also have had a seat at that table?

Had they done so, a split back in 1994 might have been more palatable for the BE football schools?

Still, I'm a firm believer that everything happens for a reason. And who knows, perhaps the delay that led to that investment and ultimately no Big East split in the 1994 was so that UConn and USF would have time to develop their 1-AA programs into solid 1-A programs. Just as losing Miami, VT, and BC to the ACC is allowing for UC, Rutgers, USF, and UConn to develop more quickly than had the BE football schools split in 2003 to form an all-sports conference in response to an unsuccessful ACC raid.

Well, that's my belief, and I'm sticking to it.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil,
BTW, it was Maryland and South Carolina that were the driving forces in putting the ACC together in 1953.

(07-05-2009 12:31 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

Quote:On topic, I know Cincinnati's on the move now, but many forget just how pathetic things were in the early 1990's. We had an 8-3 team with little or no fan support in 1993, and our coach left for HARVARD. I'll repeat that: HARVARD!

Anyway, it would have been a huge risk for that would-be league to take Cincinnati at that point in time.

You're wrong. At the time Cincinnati's basketball was strong enough to help carry that league, something that they needed. Also, people forget that Virginia Tech actually had a worse football program then Cincinnati at the time, and just as bad a fan base. It was actually more a gamble to pick up Virginia Tech then it was to pick up Cincinnati.

I actually thought about the basketball thing after I posted, so, good point on that one.

But, no way, no how UC's fan base, in football, anyway, could have been considered better than VT's back then. If so, I doubt it was much different. I don't have the numbers, but we were probably in the low teen-K range (IF THAT) around that time.

There was a damn good reason the 1993 UC football team that finished 8-3 was denied a bowl. At least, the bowl committees considered it a damn good reason, and it's their opinions that count.

(07-05-2009 12:20 PM)Jackson1011 Wrote:  Does WVU fit perfectly in the BE? No. Its a rural/southern state school with a rural/southern fan base in a league of urban/northern schools. However, our football program has built in advantages in the current BE that we never enjoyed before. Yeah, it would be nice to have games in Va and North Carolina from time to to me because a huger % of our fans live there...but there is a real opportunity for our football program to become something very special here. I wouldn't bash our conference situation too much.

Jackson

Hail Jackson!

I've always felt as though there was a considerable difference between deep southern culture of the SEC states and what mid-atlantic states like Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia want to pass off as southern culture, but truly isn't. But I'm a northeastern, pure and true, so what do I know.

Anyway, regardless of culture, West Virginia is wedded to the northeast in terms of football, as can be seen by the current FBS programs they have interacted with the most in their history:

Pitt - 101
PSU - 59
SU - 56
VT - 51
MD - 46
RU - 36
Temple - 36
BC - 33

VT is the closest of these to WVU in terms of being rural/southern. Interestingly enough, even the ACC isn't full of those rural/southern type of institutions. VT and Clemson are the two off the top of my head I'd considered to be rural/southern.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-05-2009 12:20 PM)Jackson1011 Wrote:  Bit, don't worry about the stuff that happened 50 years ago. I can't tell you how many times I have heard the: well if WVU was located in Charleston we would have been in the SEC and if WVU was located in Harpers Ferry it would have been in the ACC...but WVU is 80 miles from Pittsburgh so its in the BE chat..

Does WVU fit perfectly in the BE? No. Its a rural/southern state school with a rural/southern fan base in a league of urban/northern schools. However, our football program has built in advantages in the current BE that we never enjoyed before. Yeah, it would be nice to have games in Va and North Carolina from time to tome because a huger % of our fans live there...but there is a real opportunity for our football program to become something very special here. I wouldn't bash out conference situation too much

Jackson

I don't want people to feed me sh!t and tell me it's steak...

(07-05-2009 01:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  Neil,
BTW, it was Maryland and South Carolina that were the driving forces in putting the ACC together in 1953.

I stand corrected, although Duke needs to be added to the above.

Brief History of the ACC

As the late Roy Clogston, Athletic Director of N.C. State from 1948-69 noted, “Jim Tatum (Maryland), Rex Enright (South Carolina) and Eddie Cameron (Duke) were the ring leaders in forming this conference. I just went along for the ride.”

Of course, this only convinces me even moreso that Maryland isn't likely to ever leave the ACC.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-05-2009 12:29 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

(07-05-2009 09:03 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  Cuban the advantage is with the FB schools,
however if FB schools took a vote, I don't think they get 6 [75%] votes.
they proabally agreed on unamious vote to split.

Syc & Pitt are no votes

Ummm, how do you know that Syracuse and Pitt are no votes? Syracuse talked to Cincinnati in October of 2003 and asked them what they thought about potentially splitting. The rumor going around was that after Boston College and Syracuse were turned down by the ACC they got together and put together a plan for a Big East split. That was probably why then-Syracuse AD Jake Crouthamel called up then-Cincinnati AD Bob Goin and asked his opinion on the matter. Pittsburgh has been vocal about adding a 9th member and expansion in the past.

I think this may be mixing up the timelines. When UL and UC were first approached, it was about being in an all-sports league separate from the Big East. By October, the decision had pretty much been made that the Big East would stay together. If Crouthamel did indeed call, and I believe he did, it would have been to ask Goin and Zimpher what they thought about NOT splitting, but staying in the Big East as a 16-team conference. In that call, he would have likely outlined the reasons why the football schools were considering staying together for at least 5 years - possible loss of the BCS bid (since the league's name was on the contract); loss of bb units; etc..

But you are correct, that initially, UC (and UL) were approached about the possibility of being part of a separate all-sports conference. So Syracuse, BC, and the others were initially for a split as the July 2003 Big East minutes show.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-05-2009 01:25 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(07-05-2009 12:31 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  

Quote:On topic, I know Cincinnati's on the move now, but many forget just how pathetic things were in the early 1990's. We had an 8-3 team with little or no fan support in 1993, and our coach left for HARVARD. I'll repeat that: HARVARD!

Anyway, it would have been a huge risk for that would-be league to take Cincinnati at that point in time.

You're wrong. At the time Cincinnati's basketball was strong enough to help carry that league, something that they needed. Also, people forget that Virginia Tech actually had a worse football program then Cincinnati at the time, and just as bad a fan base. It was actually more a gamble to pick up Virginia Tech then it was to pick up Cincinnati.

I actually thought about the basketball thing after I posted, so, good point on that one.

But, no way, no how UC's fan base, in football, anyway, could have been considered better than VT's back then. If so, I doubt it was much different. I don't have the numbers, but we were probably in the low teen-K range (IF THAT) around that time.

There was a damn good reason the 1993 UC football team that finished 8-3 was denied a bowl. At least, the bowl committees considered it a damn good reason, and it's their opinions that count.

Agreed.

Btw, I don't think UC and UL would have made it into the this new all-sports league immediately if the Big East football schools had split in 1994 to form their own conference. However, I do think each institution would have been approached about possible future membership depending upon investments made into their athletics programs over the next three to five years or so. They would likely have been in competition with UConn who I think would also have been approached in the same manner.

Cheers,
Neil

Cincinnati has always played a fairly competitive schedule. In 1979, the Bearcats played Southern Miss, Louisville, Villanova, Pitt, Temple, Florida State, Ohio, and Memphis.

Virginia Tech has really changed. Back then, its end of season rivalry game was VMI, and it had series with Virginia, Appalachian State, William & Mary, and Richmond.

(07-05-2009 01:27 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(07-05-2009 12:20 PM)Jackson1011 Wrote:  Does WVU fit perfectly in the BE? No. Its a rural/southern state school with a rural/southern fan base in a league of urban/northern schools. However, our football program has built in advantages in the current BE that we never enjoyed before. Yeah, it would be nice to have games in Va and North Carolina from time to to me because a huger % of our fans live there...but there is a real opportunity for our football program to become something very special here. I wouldn't bash our conference situation too much.

Jackson

Hail Jackson!

I've always felt as though there was a considerable difference between deep southern culture of the SEC states and what mid-atlantic states like Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia want to pass off as southern culture, but truly isn't. But I'm a northeastern, pure and true, so what do I know.

Anyway, regardless of culture, West Virginia is wedded to the northeast in terms of football, as can be seen by the current FBS programs they have interacted with the most in their history:

Pitt - 101
PSU - 59
SU - 56
VT - 51
MD - 46
RU - 36
Temple - 36
BC - 33

VT is the closest of these to WVU in terms of being rural/southern. Interestingly enough, even the ACC isn't full of those rural/southern type of institutions. VT and Clemson are the two off the top of my head I'd considered to be rural/southern.

Cheers,
Neil

True...Appalachian or southern Appalachian is probably much more accurate then southern when it comes to WV. Culturally WV is much more aligned with Kentucky, western Va, western MD etc. This IMO was one of the major reasons Va Tech/WVU was such a great series. The two are almost sister schools (although Va Tech is better academically) and the fan bases where off the exact same culture

I can't argue with WVUs historical eastern leanings either. I always thought that WVUs first choice would have been to be in an all sports league with Pitt and Penn St. If that option were on the table in 1989, the Mountaineers would have selected it over any possible overatures from the SEC/Big 10

Although, to be fair many of the eastern heritage came after WVU left the southern conference. Its always been my view, and I may be wrong, that WVU leaving the Southern Confernece was the admittance that the ACC invite was never going to come. WVU had already been playing Pitt, PSU and SU yearly by that point...so it just slid into being an Eastern school. The point I was trying to make earlier is that WVU sticks out like a sore thumb when reading the roster of current BE schools. Like I said, a lot of private or urban or both type of unviersities on the roster

Long story short...historically WVU stronly prefered the ACC...but post-1970..West Virgnia wanted to be where Pitt and PSU are...and that is still very much true

Quote: don't want people to feed me sh!t and tell me it's steak...

-- I'm trying to feed you reality. Your not being fair to where we are as a program if you think we go to the SEC tomorrow and our fooball opportunites are the same. I would much rather be West Virginia today then Arkansas or South Carolina. Those schools will never have the resouces to compete with Bama, Florida etc year in and year out.

Here we can go to the BCS maybe four or five times a decade. What's not to like? Look at the big picture Bit, we could be the new Penn St of the East with the right vision and coaching staff

Jackson

(07-05-2009 08:01 AM)Jackson1011 Wrote:  

(07-04-2009 11:53 PM)Maize Wrote:  I actually don't want to split right now with the Basketball schools because the BBall schedule is just out of this world. What I do want is the league office to treat football and basketball on equal terms instead of getting on it knees for ND and the basketball schools.

Go to 18 schools-(hell we are already at 16 right now so 2 more will not hurt) and add a Memphis-(Liberty Bowl that comes with it) and another BBall like a UMass or whomever and be done with it.

-- Good to have you back around here Maize...and I think your idea is pretty good..18 and add memphis and Umass...not sure how the Catholic schools would feel about adding a bball only who was not a Catholic institution though?

UMass would not work under those circumstances. I can guarantee you that the Catholic basketball schools would be suspicious of UMass eventually upgrading to FBS and then they would be outnumbered 10-8. They will not let that happen and will push for Catholic school instead.

The obvious Catholic basketball choice is St. Louis because they do not infringe on any current Big East member's territory, have the ability to compete in the league fairly decently, share some history with a number of current programs, and bring another major market into the fold.

(07-05-2009 12:46 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(07-05-2009 11:05 AM)esayem Wrote:  That ten team league would have been great, but Miami would still have a lot of traveling to do. I feel like they would have accepted ACC membership regardless.

Perhaps. VT surely would have. Wonder if the ACC would have taken VT without Miami?

Cheers,
Neil

The ACC didn't want VT period.

Another advantage to adding St Louis is they could be a travel partner for Memphis. The two schools are 4 1/2 hours apart on I-55. The non revenue sports could certainly fly into one and bus to the other.

(07-05-2009 04:23 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Another advantage to adding St Louis is they could be a travel partner for Memphis. The two schools are 4 1/2 hours apart on I-55. The non revenue sports could certainly fly into one and bus to the other.

I think St. Louis should be the 18th member regardless of which football school gets selected as #17, since they can also be paired up with one of Notre Dame or DePaul or Marquette if necessary, but adding Memphis still leaves USF without a partner/rival.

UCF obviously pairs up perfectly with USF, and I suppose ECU could be viewed as their counterpart if needed, but who do they match with if Memphis joins? Notre Dame, which would be without a partner/rival at that point, or one of the Northeast schools?