(06-09-2011 09:58 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 09:37 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  Wow, the arrogance and condescention is astounding. Not to mention that you seem to compare AQ conference TV deals versus Non-AQ deals like that is apples to apples. Not evey non-AQ team belongs in a non-AQ conference. Not every AQ team belongs in and AQ conference. But the TV deals are squarly reflective of the difference between non-AQ and AQ. That doesn't necessarily indicate one particular school does not cary some value. You also exaggerate when you say people claim their school will bring in gazillion's of $$$. I don't think one fan here has hinted that would happen. They do however bicker over what their potential is....HUGE difference.

If you think that once you add a team that the bar is there and the Big East will never go below that, then you are either very naive or intentionally trying to yank people's chain.

The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk. And when I say "gazillions" of dollars, if we're looking at $10 million or so per school that ESPN has already offered, then that means that EACH additional BE expansion candidate would effectively have to bring the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA contract just for the BE to break even. In order for the BE to actually make money on expansion (compared to staying put), then there indeed would have to be "gazillions of dollars" involved. So, anyone that is arguing that the BE would make money on football expansion is de facto needing the foregoing to occur.

The AQ label definitely helps, but it's also way too simple to say that slapping an AQ label on a school or conference instantly makes massive differences in dollars, too. The BE itself has seen that compared to the other AQ conferences. Once again, EACH additional BE school has to bring in the value of the ENTIRE value of the C-USA contract for the BE to break even based on what ESPN has offered. No matter how much an AQ label helps, there's no fuzzy math in the world that can spin how the 3 usual suspects from C-USA that we continue to talk about can bring in $30 million ALONE to the BE when those same 3 plus 9 others in C-USA bring in about 1/3rd of that.

So, yes, the bar is definitely high. TCU has a Rose Bowl win, another BCS bowl appearance, and consistently ranked teams going back over a decade (even prior to this current run). They have shown to get to the highest level without the crutch of the "we'd be so much better if we were in an AQ conference" line of argument. TCU and Utah didn't rely on that crap and MADE themselves into AQ-level schools (not just bastions of potential). Assuming that 12 school conferences are really the realistic maximum and that the Big 12 doesn't want to expand anytime soon, that means the Big East has only 1 or 3 open spots at the most FOREVER (and really only 1 spot to give right now). So, if there's 1 spot available in the ENTIRE AQ universe, then it actually would be very prudent for the BE to allow 1 school out of the 50-plus at the non-AQ level to distinguish itself.

Who are you and how do you know factually what the Big East is thinking? You state your view and opinion as absolute fact...when I can see holes all through it. It's funny how you bulldoze your opinions over people as arrogant facts. I don't disagree with alot of your opinions but some of them are about as unfounded as they get, purely speculative and passed off as the bible. Confidence in your opinion is one thing....

(06-09-2011 10:21 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(06-08-2011 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Your first sentence presumes that preserving the basketball side must mean hurting the football side, which is entirely incorrect.

No, what I'm saying is that adding a program whose best plan so far has been to play in an 18.5K seat soccer stadium and whose revised plan appears to be to play a smattering of home games around the greater Philadelphia metropolitan area in a variety of stadia built for sports other than major college football, is going to hurt the football side. Do you know why I feel that way? Because it is the unfettered and blatantly obvious truth to anyone being honest enough with themselves to seek it.

(06-08-2011 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  EVERYONE in the Big East makes more TV money in basketball than football, whether we're talking about Rutgers or Providence.

Yes, I know and that is entirely the problem here. We are trying to protect one model while everyone else has clearly evolved.

Last year, Kansas - a basketball giant if there ever was one - came to within an eyelash of being left out of the conference shuffle and being forced to have to choose between the Big East and the severely weakened Mountain West. If that isn't sobering to the basketball first nuts then I don't know what to tell you.

(06-08-2011 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  What has been completely glossed over is that the addition of TCU was a 100% addition to the football side with an absolute financial loss to the basketball side (as they don't add anything of value to that sport). Isn't that exactly what so many BE football fans have been clamoring for on the message boards?! Anyway, this was acceptable to everyone because what TCU brought to the football side was more than enough to offset what it takes away from the basketball side.

Yeah, you're right; the addition to TCU was pretty much glossed over. That tends to happen with common sense decisions. People see them, accept them, and then move on. Do you know why? Because they make sense. Where controversies begin is when ideas get floated - and then seriously pursued - that make no sense. That's when people start to get pissed - and rightly so.

For example, people in the B1G pretty much glossed over the addition to Nebraska even though it too hurt B1G hoops. Why? Because the world is becoming increasingly about football and hurting Michigan football to help Indiana basketball would be absurd.

(06-08-2011 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The problem now, though, is that none of the usual suspects we keep talking here can really guarantee that they can bring more to the football side to offset what they take from the basketball side, which means that doesn't help the athletic department of anyone, whether it's Seton Hall or West Virginia. Believe me, if there was another TCU out there, then the BE would be all over it.

Do you mean like BYU? We should be all over that program and for all sports. Once you have to get on a plane for hours what is the difference if it flies south to Tampa, southwest to Dallas or west to Salt Lake City?

(06-08-2011 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The problem is that there isn't and the BE is far beyond the position of needing to be the training ground to search for another TCU. If ECU or Houston or UCF can be the next TCU, then let them prove it themselves by actually winning a BCS bowl. They aren't getting invited by the SEC, ACC or Big 12, so the BE can let them develop on their own without any risk.

On this last point we agree entirely. There is absolutely no reason to expand until somebody makes it worth our while to do so. Where I tend to disagree with folks is when they insist that those rules apply to everyone except Villanova.

No sir. They are bound by the same guidelines and principles as everyone else. If they can't even get a basic stadium situation worked out, how on earth does anyone expect them to be anything other than an anchor around the necks of the football league? That is a tough pill to swallow for a league that is already barely treading the BCS waters.

This is all fair enough and reasonable. I would definitely say that the Big East should go after BYU (if they haven't already), as I agree with you that the geography issue is simply out the window at this point. That's a school that can step in today and unambiguously raise the value of the conference. The geography concerns are really on the BYU's side, as they're the ones that have to bear the brunt of the travel distances. If they're willing to do it, then the BE should be all over them.

Lets face it. The BE is going to do all it can to preserve it's basketball 1st mentality and it doesn't matter to them what sport drives the bus. As long as the BB tradition is protected they could care less about football or any other sport.

(06-09-2011 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  This is all fair enough and reasonable. I would definitely say that the Big East should go after BYU (if they haven't already), as I agree with you that the geography issue is simply out the window at this point. That's a school that can step in today and unambiguously raise the value of the conference. The geography concerns are really on the BYU's side, as they're the ones that have to bear the brunt of the travel distances. If they're willing to do it, then the BE should be all over them.

Dr., the judge has spoken will rule in favor of your testimony.

(06-09-2011 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I would definitely say that the Big East should go after BYU (if they haven't already), as I agree with you that the geography issue is simply out the window at this point. That's a school that can step in today and unambiguously raise the value of the conference. The geography concerns are really on the BYU's side, as they're the ones that have to bear the brunt of the travel distances. If they're willing to do it, then the BE should be all over them.

Obviously, Temple is in the MAC for football and the A-10 for everything else. There was a time when Army was in C-USA for football and Patriot (?) for everything else. I wonder if BYU could be in BE for football and the WCC for everything else?

(06-09-2011 10:38 AM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  Lets face it. The BE is going to do all it can to preserve it's basketball 1st mentality and it doesn't matter to them what sport drives the bus. As long as the BB tradition is protected they could care less about football or any other sport.

This is the line of thinking that I disagree with. It's not about "preserving" basketball, but rather, in what situation is it actually worth it to THROW IT AWAY? If Penn State and Notre Dame want to join the BE for FB and they'll only do it with a split, then by all means, the conference NEEDS to split. The FB schools would be idiotic not to in that situation (and I'm a Catholic school alum). That's not what's happening here, though. When there isn't an ND-type involved, there's going to be more of a sliding scale applied. My contention is that it's not clear that any of the usual suspects would actually bring more to the football side than what they would take away from the basketball side, and regardless of whether there's a "BB focus" or "FB focus", it makes little sense for any current BE member to take an overall athletic department pay cut for expansion (as that entirely defeats the purpose) either short-term or long-term. TCU was added QUICKLY, so it's not as if though the BE is going to twiddle its thumbs when it finds a match. Many people in this thread are just in denial that it's not about the BE BB schools holding anything up (because it's easy to comfort yourself by blaming the "evil BB focus" and thinking that no one in the BE cares about FB), but rather that it's the FB side that actually can't agree upon the usual suspects (because if they did, then there would've been more additions like TCU already). It's the people that actually DO care about FB that aren't in agreement about expansion. That's a BIG difference from what the perception seems to be around here.

(06-09-2011 09:58 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 09:37 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  Wow, the arrogance and condescention is astounding. Not to mention that you seem to compare AQ conference TV deals versus Non-AQ deals like that is apples to apples. Not evey non-AQ team belongs in a non-AQ conference. Not every AQ team belongs in and AQ conference. But the TV deals are squarly reflective of the difference between non-AQ and AQ. That doesn't necessarily indicate one particular school does not cary some value. You also exaggerate when you say people claim their school will bring in gazillion's of $$$. I don't think one fan here has hinted that would happen. They do however bicker over what their potential is....HUGE difference.

If you think that once you add a team that the bar is there and the Big East will never go below that, then you are either very naive or intentionally trying to yank people's chain.

The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk. And when I say "gazillions" of dollars, if we're looking at $10 million or so per school that ESPN has already offered, then that means that EACH additional BE expansion candidate would effectively have to bring the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA contract just for the BE to break even. In order for the BE to actually make money on expansion (compared to staying put), then there indeed would have to be "gazillions of dollars" involved. So, anyone that is arguing that the BE would make money on football expansion is de facto needing the foregoing to occur.

The AQ label definitely helps, but it's also way too simple to say that slapping an AQ label on a school or conference instantly makes massive differences in dollars, too. The BE itself has seen that compared to the other AQ conferences. Once again, EACH additional BE school has to bring in the value of the ENTIRE value of the C-USA contract for the BE to break even based on what ESPN has offered. No matter how much an AQ label helps, there's no fuzzy math in the world that can spin how the 3 usual suspects from C-USA that we continue to talk about can bring in $30 million ALONE to the BE when those same 3 plus 9 others in C-USA bring in about 1/3rd of that.

So, yes, the bar is definitely high. TCU has a Rose Bowl win, another BCS bowl appearance, and consistently ranked teams going back over a decade (even prior to this current run). They have shown to get to the highest level without the crutch of the "we'd be so much better if we were in an AQ conference" line of argument. TCU and Utah didn't rely on that crap and MADE themselves into AQ-level schools (not just bastions of potential). Assuming that 12 school conferences are really the realistic maximum and that the Big 12 doesn't want to expand anytime soon, that means the Big East has only 1 or 3 open spots at the most FOREVER (and really only 1 spot to give right now). So, if there's 1 spot available in the ENTIRE AQ universe, then it actually would be very prudent for the BE to allow 1 school out of the 50-plus at the non-AQ level to distinguish itself.

Hahahahah...I love it!!! Finally.....I thought I was the only one who saw the logic behind the whole expansion saga.

(06-09-2011 11:06 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  ...rather that it's the FB side that actually can't agree upon the usual suspects (because if they did, then there would've been more additions like TCU already). It's the people that actually DO care about FB that aren't in agreement about expansion. That's a BIG difference from what the perception seems to be around here.

What you seem to miss here is that it appears most of those football schools do have a choice, even if they can't agree on who it is, that they believe brings said value to the conference. That alone goes against your premise. Big East officials also made it clear that expansion would gain them more money by waiting another year. Again, sounds like they do feel the candidate(s) do add value...it's just a matter of squeezing it for all it's worth...not twiddling their thumbs because they don't see value. Appears there might be one more fan to add to the denial pile. If the Big East is using your flawless model to determine value then wouldn't they all be in agreement right now? Agreed that no candidate is up to the bar or value? It would mean that every school would NOT have a preferred choice. But that doesn't seem to be the case. It appears they have more than one model to determine value and each has come up with a different answer. I guess it's not so cut and dry as some think it is.

(06-09-2011 11:06 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 10:38 AM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  Lets face it. The BE is going to do all it can to preserve it's basketball 1st mentality and it doesn't matter to them what sport drives the bus. As long as the BB tradition is protected they could care less about football or any other sport.

This is the line of thinking that I disagree with. It's not about "preserving" basketball, but rather, in what situation is it actually worth it to THROW IT AWAY? If Penn State and Notre Dame want to join the BE for FB and they'll only do it with a split, then by all means, the conference NEEDS to split. The FB schools would be idiotic not to in that situation (and I'm a Catholic school alum). That's not what's happening here, though. When there isn't an ND-type involved, there's going to be more of a sliding scale applied. My contention is that it's not clear that any of the usual suspects would actually bring more to the football side than what they would take away from the basketball side, and regardless of whether there's a "BB focus" or "FB focus", it makes little sense for any current BE member to take an overall athletic department pay cut for expansion (as that entirely defeats the purpose) either short-term or long-term. TCU was added QUICKLY, so it's not as if though the BE is going to twiddle its thumbs when it finds a match. Many people in this thread are just in denial that it's not about the BE BB schools holding anything up (because it's easy to comfort yourself by blaming the "evil BB focus" and thinking that no one in the BE cares about FB), but rather that it's the FB side that actually can't agree upon the usual suspects (because if they did, then there would've been more additions like TCU already). It's the people that actually DO care about FB that aren't in agreement about expansion. That's a BIG difference from what the perception seems to be around here.

The BE comish said publicly in Jan that they were 'not waiting' for Nova to expand. Yet 6 months later nothing has happened with those usual suspects, nor does anything seem to imminent.

So Frank.....how do you feel then about Nova if the Linc was a possibility??. The was I see it...if Temple pays a 1 mil a year for there 6 home games which expires in 2015....why cant both Temple and Nova play there home games there after 2015? I really doubt the Eagles or anyone for that matter would turn down that extra revenue stream. Both of them could pay the 1 mil facility fee each. The eagles would double their revenue by including Nova. And if Temple said no....where the hell else would they go....are they gonna outbid Nova???.....not if Nova has BCS $$$ behindd them. And before anyone starts chirping that it cant be done.....it can!!!. The meadowlands stadium does it on much grander level with 2 NFL teams. We are talking 2 lower level college football teams here. no reason why it couldnt work. PPL should be expanded so they could play their lower level games there....but when Rutgers/WVU/PSU and the like come thru....those games could be played at the Linc. It could work....no reason why it cant.

(06-09-2011 11:26 AM)NYNittanyMD Wrote:  So Frank.....how do you feel then about Nova if the Linc was a possibility??. The was I see it...if Temple pays a 1 mil a year for there 6 home games which expires in 2015....why cant both Temple and Nova play there home games there after 2015? I really doubt the Eagles or anyone for that matter would turn down that extra revenue stream. Both of them could pay the 1 mil facility fee each. The eagles would double their revenue by including Nova. And if Temple said no....where the hell else would they go....are they gonna outbid Nova???.....not if Nova has BCS $$$ behindd them. And before anyone starts chirping that it cant be done.....it can!!!. The meadowlands stadium does it on much grander level with 2 NFL teams. We are talking 2 lower level college football teams here. no reason why it couldnt work. PPL should be expanded so they could play their lower level games there....but when Rutgers/WVU/PSU and the like come thru....those games could be played at the Linc. It could work....no reason why it cant.

Linc has a grass surface, Meadowlands has field turf. That's the difference. If Lurie could be persuaded to install field turf it would potentially be doable, but I wouldn't count on that happening. The Eagles have made being "green" an important part of their branding strategy. So much so, that they are going ahead with plans to install solar panels at the Linc depsite the fact the value of state tax credits for solar electric production has plunged and the Eagles are likely to lose money on the project. Putting in field turf is anathema to Lurie as far as I can tell.

A couple other things - Temple's lease runs through the 2017 season and at least in their current lease, they have exclusive rights to the stadium for college football, the Army/Navy game excepted. I don't know what will happen with Temple's next lease as far as stadium control is concerned, but it certainly wouldn't be surprising if it is essentially the same as the current lease. Also, the 1999 bill appropriating state funds for Linc construction requires that the Eagles make the stadium available to Temple and they have to do so on the same terms that they rent the facility to the City, host of the Army/Navy game (odd that the City owns the building but has to rent it for the Army/Navy game, but that's the way it works). IOW, they have to lease the facility to Temple, and they do not have the option of pitting the two universities against each other in a bidding war.

If Villanova is going to make the move it will be with PPL as their primary home stadium. They'll have to see if they can schedule a couple of games at larger venues and I assume that they are in fact working on this. IMO, the most likley venues would be Franklin Field or CBP.

"The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk."

And you are saying that Nova does this? If so, you have absolutely ZERO credibility left. But I know, you'll say NOVA get a pass because they are already in the BE and I say BULL CRAP, that whole thing is based on "Potential". They have "Potential" to bring the Philly market and they have "Potential" to actually grow into a D1 program. All based on "Potential"

(06-09-2011 12:19 PM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  "The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk."

And you are saying that Nova does this? If so, you have absolutely ZERO credibility left. But I know, you'll say NOVA get a pass because they are already in the BE and I say BULL CRAP, that whole thing is based on "Potential". They have "Potential" to bring the Philly market and they have "Potential" to actually grow into a D1 program. All based on "Potential"

The key difference is this... if Nova plans on going FBS they either have to take Nova or lose Nova hoops which adds proven value. You can't park your non-fb sports in one FBS league and play in another. So unless Nova went indy... buhbye nova hoops. So their value is brought that way.

(06-09-2011 11:20 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 11:06 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  ...rather that it's the FB side that actually can't agree upon the usual suspects (because if they did, then there would've been more additions like TCU already). It's the people that actually DO care about FB that aren't in agreement about expansion. That's a BIG difference from what the perception seems to be around here.

What you seem to miss here is that it appears most of those football schools do have a choice, even if they can't agree on who it is, that they believe brings said value to the conference. That alone goes against your premise. Big East officials also made it clear that expansion would gain them more money by waiting another year. Again, sounds like they do feel the candidate(s) do add value...it's just a matter of squeezing it for all it's worth...not twiddling their thumbs because they don't see value. Appears there might be one more fan to add to the denial pile. If the Big East is using your flawless model to determine value then wouldn't they all be in agreement right now? Agreed that no candidate is up to the bar or value? It would mean that every school would NOT have a preferred choice. But that doesn't seem to be the case. It appears they have more than one model to determine value and each has come up with a different answer. I guess it's not so cut and dry as some think it is.

I'm not saying it's cut and dry. If that's your impression, then I apologize, because really, my overarching point is exactly the opposite where things are about as clear as mud, and when things are clear as mud, university presidents tend to not act. They want clear choices like TCU. The best way for ECU, UCF, Houston or anyone else to get to the AQ level is to actually make themselves into clear choices.

(06-09-2011 11:26 AM)NYNittanyMD Wrote:  So Frank.....how do you feel then about Nova if the Linc was a possibility??. The was I see it...if Temple pays a 1 mil a year for there 6 home games which expires in 2015....why cant both Temple and Nova play there home games there after 2015? I really doubt the Eagles or anyone for that matter would turn down that extra revenue stream. Both of them could pay the 1 mil facility fee each. The eagles would double their revenue by including Nova. And if Temple said no....where the hell else would they go....are they gonna outbid Nova???.....not if Nova has BCS $$$ behindd them. And before anyone starts chirping that it cant be done.....it can!!!. The meadowlands stadium does it on much grander level with 2 NFL teams. We are talking 2 lower level college football teams here. no reason why it couldnt work. PPL should be expanded so they could play their lower level games there....but when Rutgers/WVU/PSU and the like come thru....those games could be played at the Linc. It could work....no reason why it cant.

It's nice in theory and preferable if possible, but everything that I've seen about the Linc is that you can't bank on Temple not getting preferential treatment since they are both actually within the Philly city limits and a public institution. Whatever the situation is with the Linc, it's likely fairly complicated.

(06-09-2011 01:44 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 12:19 PM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  "The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk."

And you are saying that Nova does this? If so, you have absolutely ZERO credibility left. But I know, you'll say NOVA get a pass because they are already in the BE and I say BULL CRAP, that whole thing is based on "Potential". They have "Potential" to bring the Philly market and they have "Potential" to actually grow into a D1 program. All based on "Potential"

The key difference is this... if Nova plans on going FBS they either have to take Nova or lose Nova hoops which adds proven value. You can't park your non-fb sports in one FBS league and play in another. So unless Nova went indy... buhbye nova hoops. So their value is brought that way.

Correct.

Also and even more simply, Villanova IS a member of the Big East. Repeat that 1000 times. This is NOT an expansion - it's a 30-year member of the conference looking to move up divisions in football. As a result, they're going to get judged by different standards compared to someone that isn't a member of the Big East. I'm not saying that's fair, but that's the situation.

(06-09-2011 01:45 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 11:20 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 11:06 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  ...rather that it's the FB side that actually can't agree upon the usual suspects (because if they did, then there would've been more additions like TCU already). It's the people that actually DO care about FB that aren't in agreement about expansion. That's a BIG difference from what the perception seems to be around here.

What you seem to miss here is that it appears most of those football schools do have a choice, even if they can't agree on who it is, that they believe brings said value to the conference. That alone goes against your premise. Big East officials also made it clear that expansion would gain them more money by waiting another year. Again, sounds like they do feel the candidate(s) do add value...it's just a matter of squeezing it for all it's worth...not twiddling their thumbs because they don't see value. Appears there might be one more fan to add to the denial pile. If the Big East is using your flawless model to determine value then wouldn't they all be in agreement right now? Agreed that no candidate is up to the bar or value? It would mean that every school would NOT have a preferred choice. But that doesn't seem to be the case. It appears they have more than one model to determine value and each has come up with a different answer. I guess it's not so cut and dry as some think it is.

I'm not saying it's cut and dry. If that's your impression, then I apologize, because really, my overarching point is exactly the opposite where things are about as clear as mud, and when things are clear as mud, university presidents tend to not act. They want clear choices like TCU. The best way for ECU, UCF, Houston or anyone else to get to the AQ level is to actually make themselves into clear choices.

I don't disagree with that all (not that it matters). I will say that equating that to - the candidates conclusively don't have value enough to add to the conference - would be unwise.

(06-09-2011 01:54 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 01:44 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 12:19 PM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  "The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk."

And you are saying that Nova does this? If so, you have absolutely ZERO credibility left. But I know, you'll say NOVA get a pass because they are already in the BE and I say BULL CRAP, that whole thing is based on "Potential". They have "Potential" to bring the Philly market and they have "Potential" to actually grow into a D1 program. All based on "Potential"

The key difference is this... if Nova plans on going FBS they either have to take Nova or lose Nova hoops which adds proven value. You can't park your non-fb sports in one FBS league and play in another. So unless Nova went indy... buhbye nova hoops. So their value is brought that way.

Correct.

Also and even more simply, Villanova IS a member of the Big East. Repeat that 1000 times. This is NOT an expansion - it's a 30-year member of the conference looking to move up divisions in football. As a result, they're going to get judged by different standards compared to someone that isn't a member of the Big East. I'm not saying that's fair, but that's the situation.

Villanova is obviously treated differently on the basketball side because of their value and their membership...but if they are not held to the same standards as any candidate on the football side, then the Big East administration is failing in my book. I understand there is an urge to offset or balance what they bring in basketball versus what they bring in football (quite frankly anyone who wants to rationalize a Villanova add would do so to support their cause or denial as it may be) but ultimately this is about improving football in the Big East. The value on the basketball suide is a plus to whatever they bring in football. But they at least need to bring in football what the other current candidates do...or they aren't improving anything at all. I also realize that some of you don't think adding UCF, Houston or ECU is actually improving football either....however it's plain as day that most of the football schools disagree with you or they wouldn't have a preferred choice. Villanova absolutely MUST be held to the same standards in football as any prospective candidate. JMO.

(06-09-2011 02:26 PM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 01:54 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 01:44 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(06-09-2011 12:19 PM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  "The point is that the BE has no use for "potential" in expansion. Maybe UCF, ECU, Houston, or some other school we haven't talked about as much here can fulfill that potential. That's certainly possible, but why, if you're running the BE, would you take anyone before such potential is fulfilled? Let one or more of those schools set themselves apart (the way TCU and Utah have done) and then we can talk."

And you are saying that Nova does this? If so, you have absolutely ZERO credibility left. But I know, you'll say NOVA get a pass because they are already in the BE and I say BULL CRAP, that whole thing is based on "Potential". They have "Potential" to bring the Philly market and they have "Potential" to actually grow into a D1 program. All based on "Potential"

The key difference is this... if Nova plans on going FBS they either have to take Nova or lose Nova hoops which adds proven value. You can't park your non-fb sports in one FBS league and play in another. So unless Nova went indy... buhbye nova hoops. So their value is brought that way.

Correct.

Also and even more simply, Villanova IS a member of the Big East. Repeat that 1000 times. This is NOT an expansion - it's a 30-year member of the conference looking to move up divisions in football. As a result, they're going to get judged by different standards compared to someone that isn't a member of the Big East. I'm not saying that's fair, but that's the situation.

Villanova is obviously treated differently on the basketball side because of their value and their membership...but if they are not held to the same standards as any candidate on the football side, then the Big East administration is failing in my book. I understand there is an urge to offset or balance what they bring in basketball versus what they bring in football (quite frankly anyone who wants to rationalize a Villanova add would do so to support their cause or denial as it may be) but ultimately this is about improving football in the Big East. The value on the basketball suide is a plus to whatever they bring in football. But they at least need to bring in football what the other current candidates do...or they aren't improving anything at all. I also realize that some of you don't think adding UCF, Houston or ECU is actually improving football either....however it's plain as day that most of the football schools disagree with you or they wouldn't have a preferred choice. Villanova absolutely MUST be held to the same standards in football as any prospective candidate. JMO.

The BE doesn't have standards, that's why they admitted TCU. Couldn't resist that one. But seriously, the BE will do what is in the BE's overall interest. If adding Butlick State would give them a bigger TV contract, they'd start licking. This is driven by two things (1) TV and (2) Dollars. Nothing else matters. And to the TV suits and to the BE Presidents Villanova wins in those two categories. Don't know why, but they do. Loyalty, etc. has nothing to do with it. This is all about the money.

(06-08-2011 02:28 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-08-2011 12:18 PM)The Brown Bull Wrote:  It's the 9th conference game that does this.....regardless if it is Nova, UCF or Philadelphia High School. 45 conference games to sell versus 36. That is a 25% increase in inventory

It's not a 25% increase in inventory. It's 9 extra conference games, but the total inventory includes all games played at the home stadiums of the conference's teams, not just conference games. USF's 2011 home games against Ball State, Florida A&M, UTEP, and Miami are just as much a part of the BE's 2011 football TV inventory as their seven BE conference games. The total number of games available to the rights-holders under the conference's TV deals would be pretty much the same whether the conference plays 8 home games or 9.

There might be a difference in value to the TV networks if you are replacing, say, Ball State with a quality conference opponent. TCU at USF has more value for TV than Ball State at USF. But Villanova at USF might have the same value for TV as Ball State at USF.

And if BE teams were to adapt to 9-game conference schedules by dropping their tougher non-conference games, then the TV value of the inventory diminishes -- for example, if the BE's inventory loses Miami at USF and replaces it with Villanova at USF.

For 2011, here is the home OOC schedule for the BE:

Cincy: Austin Peay, Akron, NC St.
UConn: Fordham, Iowa St., Western Mich.
UL: Murray St., FIU, Marshall
Pitt: Buffalo, Maine, Notre Dame, Utah
RU: NC Central, Ohio, Navy
SU: Wake Forest, Rhode Island, Toledo
USF: Ball St., Florida A&M, Miami Fla
WVU: Marshall, Norfolk St., Bowling Green

6 BCS AQ, 11 mid majors, 8 FCS

At 8 members, the BE needs to schedule 2 BCS AQ opponents OOC to maintain scheduling parity with other BCS AQ conferences. They have done this, but more games are on the road than at home, leaving a shortage of quality games in the BE TV inventory - i.e. 6 home games against BCS AQ schools.

Of the 11 games against mid majors, only three are against "quality" mid major conferences (2 games vs. Marshall, 1 vs. Navy). The other 7 are against MAC schools and 1 is against an SBC school.

Treating Toledo and Ohio as quality opponents, the BE TV package this year is really 28 conference games plus 11 reasonable OOC games = 39 games = 5 +/- game equivalents per school to sell.

Bottom line, a 9th conference game against Nova would be better than at least 2/3's of the current home OOC schedule of the Big East. Each school would only have to schedule one home game against another BCS AQ school or a quality mid major (MWC or CUSA) each year for a 55 game+ TV package = 5.5 game equivalents per school to sell, a 10% increase per school.