(06-21-2010 07:14 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  If the Big East Network may indeed have enough gravity to perhaps pull BC, Maryland or Miami back out of ACC orbit, then I would agree that waiting until the network becomes a known quantity before making any moves on expansion is the prudent thing to do.

As for the people who want to add four wannabes right now, I just think that's crazy. Taking four out of the Big 12 is one thing, but simultaneously picking up four from the club we are talking about is suicide. We need ONE - 1 for an insurance policy to lessen the blow of a potential raid, 1 to balance the schedule, 1 to add a decent sized market and increase our appeal for sponsorships.

I dont think the BEN would draw any of those ACC teams to the Big East, but I also dont think there is enough revenue to add 4 CUSA teams or Temple. As we saw earlier this year when the Big12 almost went under, you never know what changes would happen that might make other teams available.
Certaintly if anyone would have said 3 months ago that the Big12 could almost had dissapeared and that teams like KU,KSU,ISU and Mizzou could be obtained by Big East, most would have said NO WAY and yet it almst was a reality.
I think the BEN is needed to raise trevenues for the league, it will NOT make any of our schools want to stay over Big Ten or SEC, BUT it could make us competitive and in a better spot for the next conference moves. The schools mentioned for addition are NOT going anywhere, so unless they ADD value NOW, there is little reason to add them and take a cut in revenues.
I understad the fans of those schools want to move to a BCS conference, but the reality is no conference will add teams unless there is an increase in revenues. Its money that is leading all these moves.
ECU,Memphis,UCF and Temple , all have some positive points to them and thney must continue to improve themselves in all areas and be ready for any realignment moves. If a Big East team is raided then the league is FORCED to add at that point, until then the addition must guarantee an increase in revenue and thats what the Big East will continue to monitor.
Good luck to all and ALL schools whether they are currently in Big East or not must continue to grow or they could be left behind in next moves.

(06-21-2010 07:14 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  If the Big East Network may indeed have enough gravity to perhaps pull BC, Maryland or Miami back out of ACC orbit, then I would agree that waiting until the network becomes a known quantity before making any moves on expansion is the prudent thing to do.

I'd say the chance of the BEN having that kind of gravity is less than 1%.

(06-20-2010 03:59 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(06-20-2010 03:41 PM)WVUeer Wrote:  Personally I would have more interest in Southern Miss before I'd have interest in Temple. Thats just my opinion.

Thanks for completely going non-sequitur on my post, btw.

What WVUeer said is true for most people. Southern Miss is just way more interesting on the football field then Temple is.

Now if market size and stuff like that carried over to the field then Temple would be more interesting.

But I don't think you can seriously argue that Temple Football is better or more interesting than Southern Miss football.

I didn't wuite read the entire thread, because it turned into the usual pissing match. However, I can tell you definitively why expanding now is not a good option; our contract is not up. IF we want to see an ACC typ eincrease, we need multple bidders. And that will not happen while we still have 3 years left on our ESPN deal, where we really can't seek other suitors. Plus, the current market is not prime for us. Every other major conference has just renegotiated their TV deals, or made moves to enhance them, save for the SEC. That has tied up a lot of short term money ESPN money; trying to renegotiate our contract now would be foolish, even if we add more games by adding a memebr or two.

Next year when the other leagues are settling into their contracts, the ad market is in better shape, and the dust settles from conference realignment, it will be a better time to expand. Plus it will help is it gives Cincinnati time to show they are not done after Kelly left, and for Louisville and Syracuse to have better seasons, regain some momentum, and be a player with regards to the contracts. And since you now only a year or so away from the expiring contract, you can actually have others bid on it, like when Fox drove up the ACC's price. Between Fox, and Comcast, plus Turner (who is now looking ot get into college sports), then you add teams and get a new deal.

Doing it before, just to do it, is not a good option.

(06-21-2010 10:18 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  I didn't wuite read the entire thread, because it turned into the usual pissing match. However, I can tell you definitively why expanding now is not a good option; our contract is not up. IF we want to see an ACC typ eincrease, we need multple bidders. And that will not happen while we still have 3 years left on our ESPN deal, where we really can't seek other suitors. Plus, the current market is not prime for us. Every other major conference has just renegotiated their TV deals, or made moves to enhance them, save for the SEC. That has tied up a lot of short term money ESPN money; trying to renegotiate our contract now would be foolish, even if we add more games by adding a memebr or two.

Next year when the other leagues are settling into their contracts, the ad market is in better shape, and the dust settles from conference realignment, it will be a better time to expand. Plus it will help is it gives Cincinnati time to show they are not done after Kelly left, and for Louisville and Syracuse to have better seasons, regain some momentum, and be a player with regards to the contracts. And since you now only a year or so away from the expiring contract, you can actually have others bid on it, like when Fox drove up the ACC's price. Between Fox, and Comcast, plus Turner (who is now looking ot get into college sports), then you add teams and get a new deal.

Doing it before, just to do it, is not a good option.

This being the case, expanding next offseason would probably be ideal for the Big East unless a team were to be poached. It would mean that the new team (or teams) would start play when the new contract kicks in.

(06-21-2010 10:53 AM)Joe Rod Wrote:  This being the case, expanding next offseason would probably be ideal for the Big East unless a team were to be poached. It would mean that the new team (or teams) would start play when the new contract kicks in.

That's what I was getting at. It also allows for more time to know who the best fits are. And I would imagine the "best fit," will differ based on if they go with the same type of contract, if they do start a network, or if for soem reason the conference splits. So that stuff needs to be decided before you can invite soemone, and since there is no cause to expand right now, why not wait.

(06-20-2010 12:35 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-20-2010 12:09 PM)animus Wrote:  

(06-20-2010 12:06 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Again those here against expansion fail to see the big picture. Two more members, two more quality conference games. This season playing at Central Florida and Memphis at home would certianly make Pittsburgh's schedule more BCS friendly than facing Florida International and New Hampshire. Unfortunately for the Panthers they could go undefeated this fall and have a tough time getting consideration for The BCS Championship because they scheduled those two programs. That's the major problem having 7 conference games a season. It's tough for good teams to get 5 quality OOC opponents per season. The question is....Is a chance at a national championship worth what ever change in revenues would occur adding two programs?
CJ

Awhat.... So you missed the part of the schedule where Pitt plays @ Utah and Notre Dame and at home against Miami. I do agree that at least one of the 2 nobodies should leave the schedule. But then again look at any school from the B10 and its worse than our OOC. Thanks for the stupid slant again.

I still want to know which BE teams are having all of this trouble scheduling quality OOC games?

Might want to read many of the PUBLIC quotes at the last 2 Big East Football Media Days...as MULTIPLE Big East Coaches noted that its a pain in the astro to schedule FIVE non-conf games per year...especially the years when Big East teams have just 3 conf home games (only BCS Conf to deal with that problem of just 3 conf home games...every other year).

The fact that there are only 3 conference home games every other year has been a PUBLIC complaint of BEast football coaches for a very long time...

(06-21-2010 01:28 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The fact that there are only 3 conference home games every other year has been a PUBLIC complaint of BEast football coaches for a very long time...

I know of no one here who is against expansion per se. If Miami wanted to rejoin the Big East, if Florida wanted to join the Big East, if Notre Dame wanted to join for football, heck i'd be the first to roll out the welcome mat for them....

(06-21-2010 01:28 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The fact that there are only 3 conference home games every other year has been a PUBLIC complaint of BEast football coaches for a very long time...

Yeah...have no idea what the Pitt fan miko was thinking...when hebasically said that he was not aware of any "scheduling" problem with Big East Football teams.

(06-21-2010 02:51 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-21-2010 01:28 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The fact that there are only 3 conference home games every other year has been a PUBLIC complaint of BEast football coaches for a very long time...

Yeah...have no idea what the Pitt fan miko was thinking...when hebasically said that he was not aware of any "scheduling" problem with Big East Football teams.

Hey, it's more challenging to schedule OOC games when you have only 3 conference home games a year in order to maintain 6 - 7 home games/year, but it's far from impossible. You can set up all sorts of interesting schedules and still meet your objectives. My interpretation of the scheduling problems was that there are schools that are having difficulties finding opponents to play. ND has it worse than any BE team when it comes to trying to fill out a quality schedule and maintain 7 home games/year, but they can do it.

Just because he isn't aware of it doesn't mean it isn't there...