(11-04-2011 08:55 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 10:25 PM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  Nevada, SDSU, and other MWC teams will not be joining the Big East. The league will be divided as follows.

BIG EAST ATLANTIC
UConn & Rutgers
Cincy & Louisville
USF & UCF

BIG EAST PACIFIC
Houston & SMU
Navy & Air Force
BYU & Boise State

This offers great rivalry games and manageable travel. Some posters are getting ridiculously carried away.

There is something wrong with putting Navy, whose campus is on the Chesapeake Bay (Atlantic Ocean) shoreline, in the "Pacific" division.

There is also a team from Dallas being in a conference centralized in Providence, but at this point geography (and common sense) has gone out the window.

(11-04-2011 09:55 AM)ArQ Wrote:  Sorry about Memphis time zone. Half of Tennessee is in Central Time Zone and half is in Eastern Time Zone. It tells me that Memphis is more an eastern school than true western schools like Nevada or New Mexico.

Eastern Tennessee is closer to Canada than it is to Memphis. (Not an exaggeration.)

Also, if you are talking about "all-sports", the team is going to need to be as close to the BE footprint as possible. It's one thing to add AF and Boise St to be football only, but it is a logistical and financial nightmare to add SDSU or Nevada as all-sports.

It's one reason why BYU to the BE would be FB only.

And a final point is that, unless you want to harpoon the BE basketball conference back to the middle ages, the BE is going to need to add at least one elite basketball program to the mix.

(11-04-2011 02:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Eastern Tennessee is closer to Canada than it is to Memphis. (Not an exaggeration.)

Which would explain why they sing O Canada instead of the Star-Spangled Banner, why their judges wear wigs, why their realtors talk "aboot hooses" and why they have outdoor washrooms instead of outdoor bathrooms. (Not an exaggeration.)

(11-03-2011 05:17 PM)Fireman451 Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 05:08 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Blog in the Spokane paper about how the conference is discussing adding two more western schools (in addition to Boise, AFA, SMU, and Houston). Sorry, I don't know how to link.

BYU has to be one of those schools. The other one ... Memphis? Nevada? SDSU? Colorado State? I would guess Nevada.

I just mentioned that very issue in another thread.

By "western" I would imagine BYU is one, and possibly SDSU (some rumor they were contacted by BE not too long back).

This would not be good news for Temple, Memphis, ECU, USM, but would make more sense for division purposes.

Problem you have is if Navy is coming on board you will have 6 in west and 7 in the east. You need to go ahead and go to 14.

(11-04-2011 01:21 PM)bearcat PACO Wrote:  

(11-04-2011 08:55 AM)CalallenStang Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 10:25 PM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  Nevada, SDSU, and other MWC teams will not be joining the Big East. The league will be divided as follows.

BIG EAST ATLANTIC
UConn & Rutgers
Cincy & Louisville
USF & UCF

BIG EAST PACIFIC
Houston & SMU
Navy & Air Force
BYU & Boise State

This offers great rivalry games and manageable travel. Some posters are getting ridiculously carried away.

There is something wrong with putting Navy, whose campus is on the Chesapeake Bay (Atlantic Ocean) shoreline, in the "Pacific" division.

There is also a team from Dallas being in a conference centralized in Providence, but at this point geography (and common sense) has gone out the window.

Normal geography and common sense have indeed gone out the window. Nonetheless, there is a good reason for putting Navy in the Pacific Division, as I keep explaining. Navy is used to traveling after decades as an independent, prefers to play a national schedule anyway, and one of the main motivations for joining the Big East is to be together with Air Force.

If you really analyze it, Navy will have a simple schedule anyway. They will alternate home and homes with Air Force every year, host a Texas team and visit a Texas team, host a Mountain team and visit a Mountain team, and then play three Atlantic Division schools. Piece of cake. As for the guy asking for a source, please. Nevada will not be in the Big East.

(11-04-2011 05:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 05:17 PM)Fireman451 Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 05:08 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Blog in the Spokane paper about how the conference is discussing adding two more western schools (in addition to Boise, AFA, SMU, and Houston). Sorry, I don't know how to link.

BYU has to be one of those schools. The other one ... Memphis? Nevada? SDSU? Colorado State? I would guess Nevada.

I just mentioned that very issue in another thread.

By "western" I would imagine BYU is one, and possibly SDSU (some rumor they were contacted by BE not too long back).

This would not be good news for Temple, Memphis, ECU, USM, but would make more sense for division purposes.

Problem you have is if Navy is coming on board you will have 6 in west and 7 in the east. You need to go ahead and go to 14.

Which is why I've suggested a few times on this board already that the Big East should go after Tulsa if they plan on getting to 14. It probably won't happen, but if you want to keep all the Eastern teams together, go after Tulsa!

Nevada, besides being the state university of a growing state, was #11 last year in the final BCS standings. If BYU is added and Boise and UH hold on and remain in the BCS Top 25 (final standings come out before the bowls) this year, then the Big East would be adding eight BCS Top 25 appearances during the '08-'11 evaluation period to go with Cincinnati's two. UH was #26 in '09 or it would be nine. At that point, there's no way the Big East could be denied AQ status.

Additionally, Temple could be added in the East to bring the #4 Philly market for football and help keep basketball one of the two or three best leagues.

Nevada as football-only with Temple as all-sports (assuming BYU joins) makes 14/17. I don't guess anyone wants to show Seton Hall the door? Okay, nasty thing for a newbie to say. lol

(11-03-2011 05:54 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 05:36 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(11-03-2011 05:18 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  So how would the divisions break down? At this rate, Western division schools might as well form their own basketball conference and add a few more non-FB playing schools to round out the numbers.

Just a guess ........

West ***

Boise
AFA
BYU
Nevada (or SDSU, etc.)
SMU
Houston
Louisville

East ***

UConn
Rutgers
Navy
Cincinnati
USF
UCF
Temple (or ECU, etc.)

Cards fans won't like that.

The idea of adding 2 more western schools is to grant Louisville and Villanova's wishes.

Louisville doesn't want to be in West Division.
Villanova doesn't want Temple or any eastern school like ECU in Big East.

Combining this means adding more western schools.

I hate Temple and ECU fans keep lurking here and including themselves in the conversation even the topic is to keep them away. Honestly, ECU or Temple will never be accepted by BE because of low academics. Please just go away and spent the energy on improving yourselves.

East Division:

Louisville
Cincinnati
Rutgers
UConn
USF
UCF
Navy

West Division:
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Air Force
BYU
Two more western schools (SDSU/Nevada/UNLV/Colorado State)

You are kidding about not be accepted into the BE due to low academics s the conferences fals over backwards for Boise State...

The biggest problem with trying to add even more Western schools, besides the geography, is they will not have any place to put their other sports. Air Force and Boise State are having trouble finding homes as it is. A quick yes from BYU would help, since the Falcons would then join the Cougars in the WCC, but that will not happen until officials there know they are in it for the long haul. The MWC schools would be much better off sticking together in their own all-sports conference.

(11-04-2011 10:45 PM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  The biggest problem with trying to add even more Western schools, besides the geography, is they will not have any place to put their other sports. Air Force and Boise State are having trouble finding homes as it is. A quick yes from BYU would help, since the Falcons would then join the Cougars in the WCC, but that will not happen until officials there know they are in it for the long haul. The MWC schools would be much better off sticking together in their own all-sports conference.

That is why Big East needs to form alliance with MVC and WCC. We promise to schedule more games with them in regular season and help them (partially our teams) get multiple NCAA basketball tournament bids. These two conferences can grow from 8/9 up to 12.

(11-04-2011 10:50 PM)ArQ Wrote:  That is why Big East needs to form alliance with MVC and WCC. We promise to schedule more games with them in regular season and help them (partially our teams) get multiple NCAA basketball tournament bids. These two conferences can grow from 8/9 up to 12.

Air Force might want MVC.

Boise would not. no MVC, no Summit. WCC would nice as travel would be easier than most other western leagues, but its not really a fit.

(11-04-2011 11:47 PM)sunthas Wrote:  

(11-04-2011 10:50 PM)ArQ Wrote:  That is why Big East needs to form alliance with MVC and WCC. We promise to schedule more games with them in regular season and help them (partially our teams) get multiple NCAA basketball tournament bids. These two conferences can grow from 8/9 up to 12.

Air Force might want MVC.

Boise would not. no MVC, no Summit. WCC would nice as travel would be easier than most other western leagues, but its not really a fit.

There's always the Big Sky conference. (I know. Probably not a good idea either, but it's a thought, at least.)

(11-04-2011 10:25 PM)Shasta77 Wrote:  Nevada, besides being the state university of a growing state, was #11 last year in the final BCS standings. If BYU is added and Boise and UH hold on and remain in the BCS Top 25 (final standings come out before the bowls) this year, then the Big East would be adding eight BCS Top 25 appearances during the '08-'11 evaluation period to go with Cincinnati's two. UH was #26 in '09 or it would be nine. At that point, there's no way the Big East could be denied AQ status.

Additionally, Temple could be added in the East to bring the #4 Philly market for football and help keep basketball one of the two or three best leagues.

Nevada as football-only with Temple as all-sports (assuming BYU joins) makes 14/17. I don't guess anyone wants to show Seton Hall the door? Okay, nasty thing for a newbie to say. lol

That quote bought a "tear" to my left eyeball...spoken like a true "All Sports" Member of the BIG EAST. Welcome to our dysfunctional family...lol.

I gotta say you learn fast my friend.

ArQ Wrote:
"I hate Temple and ECU fans keep lurking here and including themselves in the conversation even the topic is to keep them away. Honestly, ECU or Temple will never be accepted by BE because of low academics. Please just go away and spent the energy on improving yourselves."

There may be many reasons why someone does not think ECU should be invited to the BE, but to use academics is not one of them.
There are some good discussions on the realignment board regarding overall academic perception, the different measurements, and if they really mean anything as they are primarily perception. However they are the only comparisons out there at a school level.
The following post list the USNWR rankings of most colleges in the AQ conferences.
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=527719
Louisville is listed as 164, Not listed are ECU at 194 and Temple at 139 . So both Louisville and ECU are in the same 150-200 bucket.
College Prowler ranks Temple as a B for Academics, Louisville and ECU as a B-
http://collegeprowler.com/search/
Pprinction Review has ECU on the list of best southeastern schools Temple on the list of best Northeastern schools, and I did not see where Louisville showed up on any list.
http://www.princetonreview.com/rankingsbest.aspx

(11-05-2011 07:42 AM)dcCid Wrote:  ArQ Wrote:
"I hate Temple and ECU fans keep lurking here and including themselves in the conversation even the topic is to keep them away. Honestly, ECU or Temple will never be accepted by BE because of low academics. Please just go away and spent the energy on improving yourselves."

There may be many reasons why someone does not think ECU should be invited to the BE, but to use academics is not one of them.
There are some good discussions on the realignment board regarding overall academic perception, the different measurements, and if they really mean anything as they are primarily perception. However they are the only comparisons out there at a school level.
The following post list the USNWR rankings of most colleges in the AQ conferences.
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=527719
Louisville is listed as 164, Not listed are ECU at 194 and Temple at 139 . So both Louisville and ECU are in the same 150-200 bucket.
College Prowler ranks Temple as a B for Academics, Louisville and ECU as a B-
http://collegeprowler.com/search/
Pprinction Review has ECU on the list of best southeastern schools Temple on the list of best Northeastern schools, and I did not see where Louisville showed up on any list.
http://www.princetonreview.com/rankingsbest.aspx

Thanks for adding some sanity to this thread. To discuss a schools's merits as to what it brings to enhance the conference sports, all well and good. Even ArQ seems to support this with this statement "Boise State is an exception. But how could we reject a top 5 football program in the past 10 years?" The only numbers school presidents care about start with $