(03-14-2011 03:31 PM)Bull Wrote:  Also, it's a flawed analogy to compare their past FCS attendence in an ancient stadium, to what they might draw against FBS opponents in a brand new waterfront home.

Is it flawed? If they only draw 6,000 now (for FCS champ games, no less) ON CAMPUS in a stadium that holds 12,000 how in the heck are they supposed to attract MORE people to a stadium 30 minutes from campus? Attracting 6,000 now is pretty impressive considering the entire undergraduate population is 6,300. With postgrads, its still only 9,500 students.

Even if they play FBS opponents, I'm not seeing where an additional 12,000 fans are going to come from. Visiting schools, I guess?

Of course, it doesn't matter if they actually fill the stadium or not. As long as they can "report" a 15,000 average for each game, its all good.

(03-14-2011 04:02 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 03:31 PM)Bull Wrote:  Also, it's a flawed analogy to compare their past FCS attendence in an ancient stadium, to what they might draw against FBS opponents in a brand new waterfront home.

Is it flawed? If they only draw 6,000 now (for FCS champ games, no less) ON CAMPUS in a stadium that holds 12,000 how in the heck are they supposed to attract MORE people to a stadium 30 minutes from campus? Attracting 6,000 now is pretty impressive considering the entire undergraduate population is 6,300. With postgrads, its still only 9,500 students.

Even if they play FBS opponents, I'm not seeing where an additional 12,000 fans are going to come from. Visiting schools, I guess?

Of course, it doesn't matter if they actually fill the stadium or not. As long as they can "report" a 15,000 average for each game, its all good.

Good God man it's the fifth most populated city in the United States! Put a good product there in an attractive environment, and you're telling me they cant pull in 25-45K for BCS football? I don't care if it's a football town or not. Remember when Rutgers was winning and they turned the NYC lights red? I just love all these clairvoyant people (again, from certain cities) who just know this won't work. As if no one has ever successfully moved up from FCS before? I'm not slinging mud here, but I have to point out that a team in Orlando didn't even sell out their conf championship game. Point being, attendence is tough all over (especially for schools in 4-sport major cities), and sans TCU there was no other huge football 'get' out there... which makes moving up Nova just fine. For now.

(03-14-2011 04:24 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 04:02 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 03:31 PM)Bull Wrote:  Also, it's a flawed analogy to compare their past FCS attendence in an ancient stadium, to what they might draw against FBS opponents in a brand new waterfront home.

Is it flawed? If they only draw 6,000 now (for FCS champ games, no less) ON CAMPUS in a stadium that holds 12,000 how in the heck are they supposed to attract MORE people to a stadium 30 minutes from campus? Attracting 6,000 now is pretty impressive considering the entire undergraduate population is 6,300. With postgrads, its still only 9,500 students.

Even if they play FBS opponents, I'm not seeing where an additional 12,000 fans are going to come from. Visiting schools, I guess?

Of course, it doesn't matter if they actually fill the stadium or not. As long as they can "report" a 15,000 average for each game, its all good.

Good God man it's the fifth most populated city in the United States! Put a good product there in an attractive environment, and you're telling me they cant pull in 25-45K for BCS football? I don't care if it's a football town or not. Remember when Rutgers was winning and they turned the NYC lights red? I just love all these clairvoyant people (again, from certain cities) who just know this won't work. As if no one has ever successfully moved up from FCS before? I'm not slinging mud here, but I have to point out that a team in Orlando didn't even sell out their conf championship game. Point being, attendence is tough all over (especially for schools in 4-sport major cities), and sans TCU there was no other huge football 'get' out there... which makes moving up Nova just fine. For now.

And I love the clairvoyant people who somehow think that Villanova will be have relatively quick success in the FBS.

But let's assume in the unlikely event that they the ARE an successful quickly. Like you say, put a winning product on the field and people will come. But...wait. Villanova IS a winning program. They won the FCS, right? They've been successful for awhile now. But no one is showing up now. No one in Philly cares now.

Maybe that's not a good example. FCS and FBS is apples to oranges.

Let's take a look at a relatively successful FBS program in Philly: the 2009 Temple Owls football team who went 9-3 and 7-1 in the MAC.
Wanna know what they averaged? 15,600.
Good god man! Its the fifth-most populated city in the US! How could they not pull in 25K-45K for football?!!?

Let's also remember that Temple's student body is 6 times larger than Villanova's at 36,000.

Of course, fans don't travel much in the MAC. That'll be different in the Big East. So this might all be moot and other Big East fans will travel there en masse.

And yes, that WAS mudslinging, but I'll ignore it as its unrelated to the topic.

(03-14-2011 04:40 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 04:24 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 04:02 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 03:31 PM)Bull Wrote:  Also, it's a flawed analogy to compare their past FCS attendence in an ancient stadium, to what they might draw against FBS opponents in a brand new waterfront home.

Is it flawed? If they only draw 6,000 now (for FCS champ games, no less) ON CAMPUS in a stadium that holds 12,000 how in the heck are they supposed to attract MORE people to a stadium 30 minutes from campus? Attracting 6,000 now is pretty impressive considering the entire undergraduate population is 6,300. With postgrads, its still only 9,500 students.

Even if they play FBS opponents, I'm not seeing where an additional 12,000 fans are going to come from. Visiting schools, I guess?

Of course, it doesn't matter if they actually fill the stadium or not. As long as they can "report" a 15,000 average for each game, its all good.

Good God man it's the fifth most populated city in the United States! Put a good product there in an attractive environment, and you're telling me they cant pull in 25-45K for BCS football? I don't care if it's a football town or not. Remember when Rutgers was winning and they turned the NYC lights red? I just love all these clairvoyant people (again, from certain cities) who just know this won't work. As if no one has ever successfully moved up from FCS before? I'm not slinging mud here, but I have to point out that a team in Orlando didn't even sell out their conf championship game. Point being, attendence is tough all over (especially for schools in 4-sport major cities), and sans TCU there was no other huge football 'get' out there... which makes moving up Nova just fine. For now.

And I love the clairvoyant people who somehow think that Villanova will be have relatively quick success in the FBS.

But let's assume in the unlikely event that they the ARE an successful quickly. Like you say, put a winning product on the field and people will come. But...wait. Villanova IS a winning program. They won the FCS, right? They've been successful for awhile now. But no one is showing up now. No one in Philly cares now.

Maybe that's not a good example. FCS and FBS is apples to oranges.

Let's take a look at a relatively successful FBS program in Philly: the 2009 Temple Owls football team who went 9-3 and 7-1 in the MAC.
Wanna know what they averaged? 15,600.
Good god man! Its the fifth-most populated city in the US! How could they not pull in 25K-45K for football?!!?

Let's also remember that Temple's student body is 6 times larger than Villanova's at 36,000.

Of course, fans don't travel much in the MAC. That'll be different in the Big East. So this might all be moot and other Big East fans will travel there en masse.

And yes, that WAS mudslinging, but I'll ignore it as its unrelated to the topic.

No premonitions here, I never said they would be successful. That's the point, no one knows. But based on the (complicated) situation the BE has, it's perfectly reasonable to allow existing member Nova to move up... again, sans any other powerhouse candidate. I've seen all your numbers before. The fact remains, some small schools in large markets can draw well and drum up support, if done correctly. BCS football is an entirely different ticket. It's up to Nova to decide 'how' they are going to move forward. If they put a good product out there, in a good venue, they 'may' draw enough. Fortunately, it's up to the big east and not fanbases. Also, things are tough all over, the economy is horrible. It's not mudslinging to show legitimate examples of that close to home.

(03-14-2011 11:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 12:39 AM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-13-2011 10:54 PM)miko33 Wrote:  If in fact the BE expands to 12 FB playing members with UCF, Houston and ECU/Villanova AND the conference members are forced to play 9, 10 or 11 conference games, then

If this is the best the BE can do, then I'm going to hold out hope that Texas gets a huge case of West Coast Envy and we start up the superconference ride. I'm sorry to those fans who are offended, but what appears like the future of the BE is not hope for Pitt's FB future. I'd rather roll the dice with superconference mania and see what happens (with the hope that Pitt lands Big10 or ACC) than push on for this mess moving forward. I bet I'm not the only BE fans who feels this way.

Except for basketball, Pitt isn't much better than ECU and with all that BcS money. Don't mean to offend you.

Just because you state that both programs are equivalent does not make it fact. I don't care to see the BE take on a project(s) with the hopes that there will be a payoff in the end. TCU has a body of work and on the field accomplishments - like UL when Petrino was coach - to expect an immediate payoff for the conference. ECU, UCF, Houston and Villanova are all projects. Even when you consider UC and it's question marks in FB, at least they had a winning program in a revenue sport. ECU, UCF and Houston do not have a winner in the revenue sports. No network is going to increase the payout on a per team basis with the addition of one of those 3 said schools. Although Villanova is an existing member of the BE and pulls its weight in BB, I don't forsee their football prowess being anything close to competitive in the BE for quite some time. UCONN is at least a state school that can draw on the resources of Conn and the NE region to help build itself. Villanova does not have anything close to what UCONN had in order to help build itself up in FB.

These options are nothing but losing propositions for the BE. The sad part is that the BE is positioned to get a nice bump in the TV contract in the near future due all the hard work put in by the existing members plus the added carrot of adding TCU's home games into the mix, and in the end there will be one to three new members who will be receiving welfare as a result. To add insult to injury, I'll bet a few fans of the "lottery winning schools" will beat their chests and proclaim that their schools helped land this nice chunk of change for the conference...

Please let the superconference discussions begin again so that the more valuable members of the BE can have a fighting chance to land in a better conference.

Gosh man, ECU is not a project. Put AQ in front of our name & we may become the next VT. We have everything you need except a metro area but neither was VT. Plus you only bring a few thousand more fans than us, in fact BYU is the only non-AQ that brings more fans than us.

(03-14-2011 10:41 PM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 11:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 12:39 AM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-13-2011 10:54 PM)miko33 Wrote:  If in fact the BE expands to 12 FB playing members with UCF, Houston and ECU/Villanova AND the conference members are forced to play 9, 10 or 11 conference games, then

If this is the best the BE can do, then I'm going to hold out hope that Texas gets a huge case of West Coast Envy and we start up the superconference ride. I'm sorry to those fans who are offended, but what appears like the future of the BE is not hope for Pitt's FB future. I'd rather roll the dice with superconference mania and see what happens (with the hope that Pitt lands Big10 or ACC) than push on for this mess moving forward. I bet I'm not the only BE fans who feels this way.

Except for basketball, Pitt isn't much better than ECU and with all that BcS money. Don't mean to offend you.

Just because you state that both programs are equivalent does not make it fact. I don't care to see the BE take on a project(s) with the hopes that there will be a payoff in the end. TCU has a body of work and on the field accomplishments - like UL when Petrino was coach - to expect an immediate payoff for the conference. ECU, UCF, Houston and Villanova are all projects. Even when you consider UC and it's question marks in FB, at least they had a winning program in a revenue sport. ECU, UCF and Houston do not have a winner in the revenue sports. No network is going to increase the payout on a per team basis with the addition of one of those 3 said schools. Although Villanova is an existing member of the BE and pulls its weight in BB, I don't forsee their football prowess being anything close to competitive in the BE for quite some time. UCONN is at least a state school that can draw on the resources of Conn and the NE region to help build itself. Villanova does not have anything close to what UCONN had in order to help build itself up in FB.

These options are nothing but losing propositions for the BE. The sad part is that the BE is positioned to get a nice bump in the TV contract in the near future due all the hard work put in by the existing members plus the added carrot of adding TCU's home games into the mix, and in the end there will be one to three new members who will be receiving welfare as a result. To add insult to injury, I'll bet a few fans of the "lottery winning schools" will beat their chests and proclaim that their schools helped land this nice chunk of change for the conference...

Please let the superconference discussions begin again so that the more valuable members of the BE can have a fighting chance to land in a better conference.

Gosh man, ECU is not a project. Put AQ in front of our name & we may become the next VT. We have everything you need except a metro area but neither was VT. Plus you only bring a few thousand more fans than us, in fact BYU is the only non-AQ that brings more fans than us.

Whitey ECU has the potential do great things but they'll need the time for their fan base to expand. After a decent amount of time there could be more of a national demand as opposed to a regional one.

(03-14-2011 10:41 PM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 11:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 12:39 AM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-13-2011 10:54 PM)miko33 Wrote:  If in fact the BE expands to 12 FB playing members with UCF, Houston and ECU/Villanova AND the conference members are forced to play 9, 10 or 11 conference games, then

If this is the best the BE can do, then I'm going to hold out hope that Texas gets a huge case of West Coast Envy and we start up the superconference ride. I'm sorry to those fans who are offended, but what appears like the future of the BE is not hope for Pitt's FB future. I'd rather roll the dice with superconference mania and see what happens (with the hope that Pitt lands Big10 or ACC) than push on for this mess moving forward. I bet I'm not the only BE fans who feels this way.

Except for basketball, Pitt isn't much better than ECU and with all that BcS money. Don't mean to offend you.

Just because you state that both programs are equivalent does not make it fact. I don't care to see the BE take on a project(s) with the hopes that there will be a payoff in the end. TCU has a body of work and on the field accomplishments - like UL when Petrino was coach - to expect an immediate payoff for the conference. ECU, UCF, Houston and Villanova are all projects. Even when you consider UC and it's question marks in FB, at least they had a winning program in a revenue sport. ECU, UCF and Houston do not have a winner in the revenue sports. No network is going to increase the payout on a per team basis with the addition of one of those 3 said schools. Although Villanova is an existing member of the BE and pulls its weight in BB, I don't forsee their football prowess being anything close to competitive in the BE for quite some time. UCONN is at least a state school that can draw on the resources of Conn and the NE region to help build itself. Villanova does not have anything close to what UCONN had in order to help build itself up in FB.

These options are nothing but losing propositions for the BE. The sad part is that the BE is positioned to get a nice bump in the TV contract in the near future due all the hard work put in by the existing members plus the added carrot of adding TCU's home games into the mix, and in the end there will be one to three new members who will be receiving welfare as a result. To add insult to injury, I'll bet a few fans of the "lottery winning schools" will beat their chests and proclaim that their schools helped land this nice chunk of change for the conference...

Please let the superconference discussions begin again so that the more valuable members of the BE can have a fighting chance to land in a better conference.

Gosh man, ECU is not a project. Put AQ in front of our name & we may become the next VT. We have everything you need except a metro area but neither was VT. Plus you only bring a few thousand more fans than us, in fact BYU is the only non-AQ that brings more fans than us.

This is precisely why ECU (or UCF and Houston for that matter) is a project and you even state it yourself in your second sentence. This is what makes some of you CUSA fans unreal. It never gets old to hear the excuse "...if you give us this, we MIGHT turn into (insert name of trendy BCS school)...". TCU was the #2 team in the country last season and they did not have a BCS label. Boise beat VT last season and they do not have a BCS label. In 2003 UL could play with almost any other BCS team and win, and they did not have a BCS label. For the stability of the BE I would like to see a team that can contribute right away. No more projects.

You sound like a manager I work with from another department, He only wants to hire the most skilled employee out there, one that will need zero development and can make an immediate impact (that works for only what the company can afford to pay which is less than he can demand). You search and search and no one lives up to your "ideal" expectations, but that development pipeline keeps growing. The workload keeps growing. To the point where the big boss almost has to step in and figure out why nothing is getting done. Eventually the light goes off and you realize, you can hire someone that has the tools to do the job for less money, but with a little development can be a great addition to the team. Then you can start actually delivering on time lines within budget.

The "ideal" candidate may not show up. If you sit around hoping and praying they apply, you will not reach any goals. You identify who has the skill sets to get the job done, train and develop them and soon they will become a productive member of the team.

(03-15-2011 06:35 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 10:41 PM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 11:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  [quote='whitey' pid='6345504' dateline='1300081183']
[quote='miko33' pid='6345120' dateline='1300074891']
If in fact the BE expands to 12 FB playing members with UCF, Houston and ECU/Villanova AND the conference members are forced to play 9, 10 or 11 conference games, then

If this is the best the BE can do, then I'm going to hold out hope that Texas gets a huge case of West Coast Envy and we start up the superconference ride. I'm sorry to those fans who are offended, but what appears like the future of the BE is not hope for Pitt's FB future. I'd rather roll the dice with superconference mania and see what happens (with the hope that Pitt lands Big10 or ACC) than push on for this mess moving forward. I bet I'm not the only BE fans who feels this way.

Except for basketball, Pitt isn't much better than ECU and with all that BcS money. Don't mean to offend you.

l. For the stability of the BE I would like to see a team that can contribute right away. No more projects.

I should add that this is only relevant if you have goals you are trying to meet with an actual timelines.

If "Someday" or "Future" is your target date, then no action need be taken, but if they (THE BE) have SMART goals then they probably have specific goals they are trying to meet and realistic plans to get there.



(Specific Measurable Attainable Realistic Timely)

[quote='CougarMikeUH' pid='6349844' dateline='1300191398']
You sound like a manager I work with from another department, He only wants to hire the most skilled employee out there, one that will need zero development and can make an immediate impact (that works for only what the company can afford to pay which is less than he can demand). You search and search and no one lives up to your "ideal" expectations, but that development pipeline keeps growing. The workload keeps growing. To the point where the big boss almost has to step in and figure out why nothing is getting done. Eventually the light goes off and you realize, you can hire someone that has the tools to do the job for less money, but with a little development can be a great addition to the team. Then you can start actually delivering on time lines within budget.

The "ideal" candidate may not show up. If you sit around hoping and praying they apply, you will not reach any goals. You identify who has the skill sets to get the job done, train and develop them and soon they will become a productive member of the team.

(03-15-2011 07:16 AM)CougarMikeUH Wrote:  You sound like a manager I work with from another department, He only wants to hire the most skilled employee out there, one that will need zero development and can make an immediate impact (that works for only what the company can afford to pay which is less than he can demand). You search and search and no one lives up to your "ideal" expectations, but that development pipeline keeps growing. The workload keeps growing. To the point where the big boss almost has to step in and figure out why nothing is getting done. Eventually the light goes off and you realize, you can hire someone that has the tools to do the job for less money, but with a little development can be a great addition to the team. Then you can start actually delivering on time lines within budget.

The "ideal" candidate may not show up. If you sit around hoping and praying they apply, you will not reach any goals. You identify who has the skill sets to get the job done, train and develop them and soon they will become a productive member of the team.

(03-15-2011 06:35 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 10:41 PM)whitey Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 11:51 AM)miko33 Wrote:  [quote='whitey' pid='6345504' dateline='1300081183']
[quote='miko33' pid='6345120' dateline='1300074891']
If in fact the BE expands to 12 FB playing members with UCF, Houston and ECU/Villanova AND the conference members are forced to play 9, 10 or 11 conference games, then

If this is the best the BE can do, then I'm going to hold out hope that Texas gets a huge case of West Coast Envy and we start up the superconference ride. I'm sorry to those fans who are offended, but what appears like the future of the BE is not hope for Pitt's FB future. I'd rather roll the dice with superconference mania and see what happens (with the hope that Pitt lands Big10 or ACC) than push on for this mess moving forward. I bet I'm not the only BE fans who feels this way.

Except for basketball, Pitt isn't much better than ECU and with all that BcS money. Don't mean to offend you.

l. For the stability of the BE I would like to see a team that can contribute right away. No more projects.

Great post CougarMike.

(03-15-2011 07:27 AM)CougarMikeUH Wrote:  I should add that this is only relevant if you have goals you are trying to meet with an actual timelines.

If "Someday" or "Future" is your target date, then no action need be taken, but if they (THE BE) have SMART goals then they probably have specific goals they are trying to meet and realistic plans to get there.



(Specific Measurable Attainable Realistic Timely)

[quote='CougarMikeUH' pid='6349844' dateline='1300191398']
You sound like a manager I work with from another department, He only wants to hire the most skilled employee out there, one that will need zero development and can make an immediate impact (that works for only what the company can afford to pay which is less than he can demand). You search and search and no one lives up to your "ideal" expectations, but that development pipeline keeps growing. The workload keeps growing. To the point where the big boss almost has to step in and figure out why nothing is getting done. Eventually the light goes off and you realize, you can hire someone that has the tools to do the job for less money, but with a little development can be a great addition to the team. Then you can start actually delivering on time lines within budget.

The "ideal" candidate may not show up. If you sit around hoping and praying they apply, you will not reach any goals. You identify who has the skill sets to get the job done, train and develop them and soon they will become a productive member of the team.

Solid post regardless of the subject.

(03-14-2011 05:12 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 04:40 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 04:24 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 04:02 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 03:31 PM)Bull Wrote:  Also, it's a flawed analogy to compare their past FCS attendence in an ancient stadium, to what they might draw against FBS opponents in a brand new waterfront home.

Is it flawed? If they only draw 6,000 now (for FCS champ games, no less) ON CAMPUS in a stadium that holds 12,000 how in the heck are they supposed to attract MORE people to a stadium 30 minutes from campus? Attracting 6,000 now is pretty impressive considering the entire undergraduate population is 6,300. With postgrads, its still only 9,500 students.

Even if they play FBS opponents, I'm not seeing where an additional 12,000 fans are going to come from. Visiting schools, I guess?

Of course, it doesn't matter if they actually fill the stadium or not. As long as they can "report" a 15,000 average for each game, its all good.

Good God man it's the fifth most populated city in the United States! Put a good product there in an attractive environment, and you're telling me they cant pull in 25-45K for BCS football? I don't care if it's a football town or not. Remember when Rutgers was winning and they turned the NYC lights red? I just love all these clairvoyant people (again, from certain cities) who just know this won't work. As if no one has ever successfully moved up from FCS before? I'm not slinging mud here, but I have to point out that a team in Orlando didn't even sell out their conf championship game. Point being, attendence is tough all over (especially for schools in 4-sport major cities), and sans TCU there was no other huge football 'get' out there... which makes moving up Nova just fine. For now.

And I love the clairvoyant people who somehow think that Villanova will be have relatively quick success in the FBS.

But let's assume in the unlikely event that they the ARE an successful quickly. Like you say, put a winning product on the field and people will come. But...wait. Villanova IS a winning program. They won the FCS, right? They've been successful for awhile now. But no one is showing up now. No one in Philly cares now.

Maybe that's not a good example. FCS and FBS is apples to oranges.

Let's take a look at a relatively successful FBS program in Philly: the 2009 Temple Owls football team who went 9-3 and 7-1 in the MAC.
Wanna know what they averaged? 15,600.
Good god man! Its the fifth-most populated city in the US! How could they not pull in 25K-45K for football?!!?

Let's also remember that Temple's student body is 6 times larger than Villanova's at 36,000.

Of course, fans don't travel much in the MAC. That'll be different in the Big East. So this might all be moot and other Big East fans will travel there en masse.

And yes, that WAS mudslinging, but I'll ignore it as its unrelated to the topic.

No premonitions here, I never said they would be successful. That's the point, no one knows. But based on the (complicated) situation the BE has, it's perfectly reasonable to allow existing member Nova to move up... again, sans any other powerhouse candidate. I've seen all your numbers before. The fact remains, some small schools in large markets can draw well and drum up support, if done correctly. BCS football is an entirely different ticket. It's up to Nova to decide 'how' they are going to move forward. If they put a good product out there, in a good venue, they 'may' draw enough. Fortunately, it's up to the big east and not fanbases. Also, things are tough all over, the economy is horrible. It's not mudslinging to show legitimate examples of that close to home.

That is where I think you are entirely wrong. The Big East has a major perception problem nationally and the Big East solution is to add a 1-aa program that averages less than 5,000 fans? Yes TCU is joining but any positive the Big East gets from them will be wiped out in two seconds with the Nova announcement.

Now let me address the attendance issues. I will say for sure that Nova will not come close to getting 35,000 fans to a game for a very, very long time. I would be shocked if Nova even approaches 15,000 and I will give you a case study to compare it to.

Florida International University located in Miami averaged 16,545 per their five games last year. That placed them 108th out of 120 schools. Now FIU plays in a newly renovated stadium on campus expanding the stadium up to 23,500 seats. They have 1,500 club seats and 20 suites. The Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach MSA rankes two spots behind the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington MSA, just under 300,000 people less. I would also say FIU is in a much more college football crazed state/area than Villanova. FIU also has over 44,000 students compared to 6,000 for Nova.

Now if FIU is saying they are averaging just around 15,000, that would mean actual attendance is closer to 10,000. If FIU struggles to get 10,000 fans in Miami, Florida, how hard do you think Nova will struggle to get close to those numbers in a smaller stadium, off campus, designed for a different sport in a city that does not support college football.

(03-15-2011 09:24 AM)Sir Galahad Wrote:  That is where I think you are entirely wrong. The Big East has a major perception problem nationally and the Big East solution is to add a 1-aa program that averages less than 5,000 fans? Yes TCU is joining but any positive the Big East gets from them will be wiped out in two seconds with the Nova announcement.

Now let me address the attendance issues. I will say for sure that Nova will not come close to getting 35,000 fans to a game for a very, very long time. I would be shocked if Nova even approaches 15,000 and I will give you a case study to compare it to.

You seem pretty worked up about this. Why do you care?

The Big East is going about their business the way they see fit. Any perception problems have to do with how the teams at the top of the conference perform & have nothing to do with issues related to the bottom of the conference. Frankly the depth of the conference top to bottom is one of its strengths.

Just to stop this crap before it continues to be said, ECU has never been FCS/I-AA.

We were one of the original members of I-A/FBS when the split occurred, when everything was simply Division I.

I guess I would be the only one that would find it funny if the Big East set up a major announcement just to state that they were going with what they have? Have the ADs run through a Big East banner with cheerleaders jumping up and down around them. They can slap high fives and do leg kicks.

(03-15-2011 09:31 AM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(03-15-2011 09:24 AM)Sir Galahad Wrote:  That is where I think you are entirely wrong. The Big East has a major perception problem nationally and the Big East solution is to add a 1-aa program that averages less than 5,000 fans? Yes TCU is joining but any positive the Big East gets from them will be wiped out in two seconds with the Nova announcement.

Now let me address the attendance issues. I will say for sure that Nova will not come close to getting 35,000 fans to a game for a very, very long time. I would be shocked if Nova even approaches 15,000 and I will give you a case study to compare it to.

You seem pretty worked up about this. Why do you care?

The Big East is going about their business the way they see fit. Any perception problems have to do with how the teams at the top of the conference perform & have nothing to do with issues related to the bottom of the conference. Frankly the depth of the conference top to bottom is one of its strengths.

Basketball, yes...but football, obviously not (Big East didn't even have ONE team ranked in the Top 25 Coaches/AP Polls).

Adding TCU in 2012 should help...but the Big East Football Conf will never be confused with the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, etc...

(03-15-2011 09:31 AM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(03-15-2011 09:24 AM)Sir Galahad Wrote:  That is where I think you are entirely wrong. The Big East has a major perception problem nationally and the Big East solution is to add a 1-aa program that averages less than 5,000 fans? Yes TCU is joining but any positive the Big East gets from them will be wiped out in two seconds with the Nova announcement.

Now let me address the attendance issues. I will say for sure that Nova will not come close to getting 35,000 fans to a game for a very, very long time. I would be shocked if Nova even approaches 15,000 and I will give you a case study to compare it to.

You seem pretty worked up about this. Why do you care?

The Big East is going about their business the way they see fit. Any perception problems have to do with how the teams at the top of the conference perform & have nothing to do with issues related to the bottom of the conference. Frankly the depth of the conference top to bottom is one of its strengths.

Another one of these "He's a fan from a wannabe team...he couldn't possibly speak with a fairly objective opinion" piece of crap retorts from you. Take my dog out of the race and IMO, he's still more right than wrong. It appears it is you that can't get past the reality of how people perceive the Big East. Do you really think people that WANT desperately to join the Big East WANT to say the BE brass decision making is iffy??? If Villanova were the best of what is still available, you wouldn't hear half the comments made about Big East leadership. The other half comes from previous blunders.

There are much better choices than Villanova when it comes to expansion. Are they as good as some AQ choice? I'm sure not....but still vastly better than Villanova. I think it's almost as hard for prospective school's fans to watch the decision making here because it's practically their only hope to become AQ. Their criticism is actually in the best interest of the league (whether you believe that or not) just as it would be for any current members. Yes, some of those outsiders stand to benefit, but those same fans pull for teams that would be far and away a better choice than Villanova. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Villanova has the right to move up, now that the Big East's bluff has collapsed. I truly don't believe the Big East thought Villanova would make the jump. What a risk that was to present an offer to them. Now the BE is stuck and fans of the wannabe schools just need to suck it up and get over Villanova. JMO.

You imply that I'm only out for the most desirable school out there. No, that is not the case at all. I am not waiting for nor expecting Notre Dame or PSU to fall into the BE conf lap for football. What I am looking for, "as a hiring manager", is for a candidate to fit the job description that I am looking for. That does not mean that I want a "CEO caliber" candidate for an entry level job - but it does mean that I want the candidate to possess a certain skill set to be hired. A school like UL in 2003 was closer to the talented development project in your analogy. UL was a school that demonstrated competence in football but may very well need additional development and learning experience by playing in a BCS conf. ECU, UCF, Houston and Villanova is nothing like UL in 2004.

(03-15-2011 07:16 AM)CougarMikeUH Wrote:  You sound like a manager I work with from another department, He only wants to hire the most skilled employee out there, one that will need zero development and can make an immediate impact (that works for only what the company can afford to pay which is less than he can demand). You search and search and no one lives up to your "ideal" expectations, but that development pipeline keeps growing. The workload keeps growing. To the point where the big boss almost has to step in and figure out why nothing is getting done. Eventually the light goes off and you realize, you can hire someone that has the tools to do the job for less money, but with a little development can be a great addition to the team. Then you can start actually delivering on time lines within budget.

The "ideal" candidate may not show up. If you sit around hoping and praying they apply, you will not reach any goals. You identify who has the skill sets to get the job done, train and develop them and soon they will become a productive member of the team.

UCF is more like Cincy. They have had recent success (in FB rather than BB), and they've heavily invested in their facilities.

(03-15-2011 09:31 AM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(03-15-2011 09:24 AM)Sir Galahad Wrote:  That is where I think you are entirely wrong. The Big East has a major perception problem nationally and the Big East solution is to add a 1-aa program that averages less than 5,000 fans? Yes TCU is joining but any positive the Big East gets from them will be wiped out in two seconds with the Nova announcement.

Now let me address the attendance issues. I will say for sure that Nova will not come close to getting 35,000 fans to a game for a very, very long time. I would be shocked if Nova even approaches 15,000 and I will give you a case study to compare it to.

You seem pretty worked up about this. Why do you care?

The Big East is going about their business the way they see fit. Any perception problems have to do with how the teams at the top of the conference perform & have nothing to do with issues related to the bottom of the conference. Frankly the depth of the conference top to bottom is one of its strengths.

Huh, that is your response? If you ask anyone on this or rivals boards they will tell you that I don't want UCF part of the current Big East. I would rather wait until the split than be part of a new big east.

That aside, what I posted was actual facts about FIU and compared them to Nova and you responded with "I seem pretty worked up." I should ask you why did you respond to my post?