Should the Big East try for an 11/19 set-up with BYU and ECU? This gives BYU access to virtually all the best eastern LDS states and Texas.

In this scenario the league doesn't need to worry about what would be a poor divisional set-up in football while getting two excellent football drawers and another bb draw.

The football scheduling would be an 8-game conference schedule similar to what the Big Ten had after PSU was added and in bb everyone plays each other once.

Thoughts?

Cheers,
Neil

It would work for football. How would you structure basketball?

I dont believe 11/19 is really an option. Its either going to be 9,10 or 12

(06-05-2011 08:25 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I dont believe 11/19 is really an option. Its either going to be 9,10 or 12

Neither do I. But I'm really psyched about the possibility and potential of both BYU and ECU (which may be the two candidates with the least amount of support within the league itself) and no matter how I slice it and dice it, I can't see both getting in and going to 12.

The divisions would be worse than ACC and Big Ten divisions no matter which team is chosen for #12 in this scenario.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-05-2011 05:46 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  It would work for football. How would you structure basketball?

Basketball works with any amount of teams. With 19, each team plays everyone else once 9 home and 9 away and then switch that around the next year.

Cheers,
Neil

So 11/19 works until we find the right 12th team.

You have to have 20 BB teams to set up Pods.

At 19 bb teams, each team will play 1/2 of teams home and 1/2 of teams away for 18 games. Switch home/away the following year. For the tourney, seed each team based on regular season finish and agreed upon tie-breakers.

+1

I'd love that

11 is a bad number for football monetarily, as you can only play 8 conference games. Thus, since conference games are what generate the most TV money, you would actually lose money in most instances going from 10 teams to 11 teams. While I am not a fan of 12 teams, 11 would be even worse.

10 is still the optimal number in our set up. I don't think any team past ten brings enough value to offset the loss of a conference game per team, and there are definitely not two additional teams who brign enough to the table to make going to 12 teams a monetary plus.

(06-09-2011 11:19 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  11 is a bad number for football monetarily, as you can only play 8 conference games. Thus, since conference games are what generate the most TV money, you would actually lose money in most instances going from 10 teams to 11 teams. While I am not a fan of 12 teams, 11 would be even worse.

10 is still the optimal number in our set up. I don't think any team past ten brings enough value to offset the loss of a conference game per team, and there are definitely not two additional teams who brign enough to the table to make going to 12 teams a monetary plus.

Agree that 11 for football is an awkward number, but here is why I think it is an option to at least consider.

It forces an 8-game conference schedule, which I think could actually be better for the Big East providing they can find at least 2 attractive OOC opponents each year. I realize Louisville has had trouble with some of the Big Boys backing out of deals, but from an SU fan's perspective and a Pitt fan's perspective, 4 OOC games is the way to go. I also suspect TCU may want this as well, although I understand some Big 12-2 opponents like Texas Tech have backed out on them, so maybe not.

Since the league has no Kings (in the Kings, Barons, Knights, and Knaves terminology) for college football, I believe trying to increase the number of Barons is the only way the league can partially offset not having any of the Kings.

The Barons currently are WVU, TCU, Pitt, and potentially a revitalized SU and UL. The only other Baron that might be available is BYU. BYU will likely also favor an 8 game conference schedule to get some games out West.

After BYU, of the rest of the "usual" suspects the candidate most likely to reach Baron status the quickest is ECU since they are the closest equivalent to VT (the most recent Baron) out there, imho.

As a result, I was attempting to see how the league can expand to get as many Barons as possible and enticing the one Baron out there to potentially join.

Finally, while TV may value conference games more than OOC games, in the case of the Big East where the teams are not highly valued due to the lack of Kings, getting OOC games against Kings may be much more likely with 4 OOC games than 3. Since in like SU's case, offering to play them at the Meadowlands is the strongest carrot to enticing them to agree to these games.

So, I was thinking 11/19 might be an option to consider to achieve these goals.

Obviously it is more out-of-the-box thinking than the traditional 9, 10, or 12 team football side of the house.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-09-2011 12:13 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  Agree that 11 for football is an awkward number, but here is why I think it is an option to at least consider.

It forces an 8-game conference schedule, which I think could actually be better for the Big East providing they can find at least 2 attractive OOC opponents each year. I realize Louisville has had trouble with some of the Big Boys backing out of deals, but from an SU fan's perspective and a Pitt fan's perspective, 4 OOC games is the way to go. I also suspect TCU may want this as well, although I understand some Big 12-2 opponents like Texas Tech have backed out on them, so maybe not.

Rutgers is definitely another team that would prefer the 8 conference games, because they need 7 home games for financial reasons. Playing 9 conference games makes it difficult.

Now you believe strength in number. It was a difficult concept to accept because you stuck-up with a question of quality.

I don’t believe the BE would let football go pass ten.
They try so hard to keep it at 17 even with ten footballs.

(06-12-2011 06:20 PM)SO#1 Wrote:  Now you believe strength in number. It was a difficult concept to accept because you stuck-up with a question of quality.

I don’t believe the BE would let football go pass ten.
They try so hard to keep it at 17 even with ten footballs.

Not sure who this is aimed at since you fail to quote anyone in this post, I'll assume its me as the original poster.

If you've read my BCS numbers thread, you'd see why BYU is a quality add and why ECU, while not as much quality, at least doesn't hurt the league.

Cheers,
Neil