THE NEW BIG EAST*

"North"
Air Force (Navy)
Boise (SDSU)
Central Florida (USF)
Cincinnati (Louisville)
Connecticut (Rutgers)
Houston (SMU)

"South"
Louisville (Cincy)
Navy (AFA)
Rutgers (UConn)
San Diego State (Boise)
South Florida (UCF)
Southern Methodist (Houston)

* Permanent cross-divisional rival in parentheses

Nice, thanks for putting that together. I'm still excited about this FB conference and I think it will do well... provided the BE actually seals the deal VERY SOON.

I think East/West is the only way that makes sense travel wise.

And I still think it should be zipper. I would say mascot based, but I don't think there are enough humanoid type mascots for that.

(11-23-2011 12:19 PM)k5james Wrote:  I think East/West is the only way that makes sense travel wise.

I agree 100%, you can't have SD St. and UCF in the same division.

Surprisingly, I mostly like your idea. I think it is a good one. I would like it even more if it were an all sports conference and not a hodge-podge-mish-mash of some football, some basketball and some both. I'd also like to add two more teams... Memphis and ECU.


Air Force (Navy)
Boise (SDSU)
Central Florida (USF)
Cincinnati (Louisville)
Connecticut (Rutgers)
Houston (SMU)
ECU (Memphis)

Louisville (Cincy)
Navy (AFA)
Rutgers (UConn)
San Diego State (Boise)
South Florida (UCF)
Southern Methodist (Houston)
Memphis (ECU)

(11-23-2011 12:35 PM)army56mike Wrote:  Surprisingly, I mostly like your idea. I think it is a good one. I would like it even more if it were an all sports conference and not a hodge-podge-mish-mash of some football, some basketball and some both. I'd also like to add two more teams... Memphis and ECU.


Air Force (Navy)
Boise (SDSU)
Central Florida (USF)
Cincinnati (Louisville)
Connecticut (Rutgers)
Houston (SMU)
ECU (Temple)

Louisville (Cincy)
Navy (AFA)
Rutgers (UConn)
San Diego State (Boise)
South Florida (UCF)
Southern Methodist (Houston)
Temple (ECU)

Substitute Memphis for TEMPLE.

We still can't take on the perception hit of Memphis Tigers football. Temple should be in this conference.

The East/West divisions would be acceptable as long as Louisville is placed in the west. Card fans have long been clamoring for a yearly game against SDSU (name one who isn't clamoring for it, I dare you), and since San Diego's so nice in the fall, I think it should be a permanent away game for the Cards. I'm sure you all agree.

It's crazy to put UCF in the western division.

To be honest, I still like non-geographic divisions the best. I refuse to believe that travel is the issue for football that some of you say it is. And if it truly is, why are we placing some schools in a division with nothing but huge distances to travel over 3-4 time zones, and all other schools in a division limited to one time zone and with several schools bunched up together.

It also creates a need to create less natural permanent cross-division rivalries. If we use geography, the the divisions are

EAST:
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Navy
Rutgers
UCF
USF

WEST:
Air Force
Boise
Houston
Louisville
SDSU
SMU

Since this would give my alma mater an annual rivalry with my local college, I'm actually fine with this. But here you'd have to give Louisville and Air Force annual cross-divisional rivals, which means, out of fairness, you'd have to do the same for the other 4 schools. SMU has an annual game with Navy already, but an SDSU game against Navy would get a packed house wherever they played + national attention.

Non-geographical divisions do many things:
1. Ensure equality in travel time and costs
2. Give each school annual games against a.) a Florida team, b.) a Texas team, c.) a western team, d.) a northeastern team, e.) a service academy, and f.) an Ohio Valley team
3. Ensure that every team has an equally important cross-divisional rival (Louisville/Cincy, AFA/Navy, USF/UCF, UConn/Rutgers, Houston/SMU, Boise/SDSU)
4. Eliminate the obvious unfairness of placing only 1 eastern time zone school in a division that covers 4 time zones, while the actual eastern division covers only 1 time zone - and it doesn't matter whether this school is UCF (the newbie), UofL (the farthest-west eastern school), or Navy (the one with the conference archrival in the Mountain Time Zone).

Non-geographical divisions don't play favorites and create an equal playing field. If we're going to have a truly national conference, then let's embrace it and not pretend that half of it's geographical and half of it's haphazard.

Well I think it's safe to say we are going geographically because Boise has said many times they would like to see western teams.
So more than probably it will be
East
Rutgers,Uconn,Cincinnati,Louisville,south Florida,central Florida
West
Boise,sdst,air force,navy, smu and Houston

I put navy west because it would give them the annual match up with air force and it keeps them with smu a small private school they would have the longest travel but their conference schedule could look like this
At Boise
SDST at home
At SMU
Houston at home
At Air Force
Louisville home
At UCF
Rutgers at home

That's really not a lot of travel

(11-23-2011 02:21 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  East
Rutgers,Uconn,Cincinnati,Louisville,south Florida,central Florida

West
Boise,sdst,air force,navy, smu and Houston

I put navy west because it would give them the annual match up with air force and it keeps them with smu a small private school they would have the longest travel but their conference schedule could look like this.

QFT. This is what it needs to be.

(11-23-2011 01:19 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  We still can't take on the perception hit of Memphis Tigers football. Temple should be in this conference.

Adding Temple isn't a perception hit for football?

I like Memphis, if only because I'm more familiar with them already. They'd be a great basketball get.

(11-23-2011 11:40 AM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

THE NEW BIG EAST*

"North"
Air Force (Navy)
Boise (SDSU)
Central Florida (USF)
Cincinnati (Louisville)
Connecticut (Rutgers)
Houston (SMU)

"South"
Louisville (Cincy)
Navy (AFA)
Rutgers (UConn)
San Diego State (Boise)
South Florida (UCF)
Southern Methodist (Houston)

* Permanent cross-divisional rival in parentheses

I don't think you are a Louisville fan. But the only way for ECU, Memphis and Temple to sneak into Big East is that BE abandons East-West divisions.

Nice try!

Under my plan, Boise has 2 western teams it plays annually: Air Force & SDSU, plus a Texas team it plays every year (either Houston or SMU and sometimes both).

(11-23-2011 02:31 PM)ArQ Wrote:  I don't think you are a Louisville fan. But the only way for ECU, Memphis and Temple to sneak into Big East is that BE abandons East-West divisions.

Lucky for both of us I don't give a rat's a$s what you think of me. And who is talking about Memphis, ECU, or Temple? Certainly nobody on here with any credibility at this point.

By the way, when asked by a poster on the SDSU boards what the Big East should call their east/west divisions, the best name yet was suggested:

Disney Land and Disney World.

(11-23-2011 02:21 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Well I think it's safe to say we are going geographically because Boise has said many times they would like to see western teams.
So more than probably it will be
East
Rutgers,Uconn,Cincinnati,Louisville,south Florida,central Florida
West
Boise,sdst,air force,navy, smu and Houston

I put navy west because it would give them the annual match up with air force and it keeps them with smu a small private school they would have the longest travel but their conference schedule could look like this
At Boise
SDST at home
At SMU
Houston at home
At Air Force
Louisville home
At UCF
Rutgers at home

That's really not a lot of travel

Ugh, playing two triple option teams every year...

(11-23-2011 02:06 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  To be honest, I still like non-geographic divisions the best. I refuse to believe that travel is the issue for football that some of you say it is. And if it truly is, why are we placing some schools in a division with nothing but huge distances to travel over 3-4 time zones, and all other schools in a division limited to one time zone and with several schools bunched up together.

It also creates a need to create less natural permanent cross-division rivalries. If we use geography, the the divisions are

EAST:
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Navy
Rutgers
UCF
USF

WEST:
Air Force
Boise
Houston
Louisville
SDSU
SMU

Since this would give my alma mater an annual rivalry with my local college, I'm actually fine with this. But here you'd have to give Louisville and Air Force annual cross-divisional rivals, which means, out of fairness, you'd have to do the same for the other 4 schools. SMU has an annual game with Navy already, but an SDSU game against Navy would get a packed house wherever they played + national attention.

Non-geographical divisions do many things:
1. Ensure equality in travel time and costs
2. Give each school annual games against a.) a Florida team, b.) a Texas team, c.) a western team, d.) a northeastern team, e.) a service academy, and f.) an Ohio Valley team
3. Ensure that every team has an equally important cross-divisional rival (Louisville/Cincy, AFA/Navy, USF/UCF, UConn/Rutgers, Houston/SMU, Boise/SDSU)
4. Eliminate the obvious unfairness of placing only 1 eastern time zone school in a division that covers 4 time zones, while the actual eastern division covers only 1 time zone - and it doesn't matter whether this school is UCF (the newbie), UofL (the farthest-west eastern school), or Navy (the one with the conference archrival in the Mountain Time Zone).

Non-geographical divisions don't play favorites and create an equal playing field. If we're going to have a truly national conference, then let's embrace it and not pretend that half of it's geographical and half of it's haphazard.

East/West cross divisional rivals.

East/West
Navy/Air Force
Cincy/UofL
Rutgers/SMU
UConn/Boise
USF/SD St
UCF/Houston

(11-23-2011 03:09 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  By the way, when asked by a poster on the SDSU boards what the Big East should call their east/west divisions, the best name yet was suggested:

Disney Land and Disney World.

HA HA