(12-06-2011 04:00 PM)k5james Wrote:  I don't know about Texas and Florida but CA is underrecruited big time.

You're kidding, right?

(12-06-2011 03:58 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:35 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 02:19 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 01:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  I'd like to think that C-USA, it's defectors, the BE, WVU, and the B-XII are all working something out behind the scenes that would insure everyone being able to field a viable conference. Highly doubt it, but one can always hope.

Seems like the ACC is cool with Pitt/SU staying around as long as it takes... If the C-USA trio is able to come in early, then I'm fine with sending off WVU with a fine farewell. Ten teams next year with a nine game conference schedule? Perfect for us, with two slots to fill.

I continue to disagree with this stance. I think the Big East needs to enforce every rule it's got in its arsenal if it hopes to defend itself in the future. Clearly the old exit fee and the 27-month waiting period were not enough to protect us. I'm not sure what would be enough, though I suspect that a Big-12-style 6-10-year agreement might do the trick.

But one thing's for certain: Every requirement that's waived now will only come back and bite us in the rear in the future when somebody else wants out and hangs their hat on the precedent set with WVU. And if the courts nullify the waiting period, that's even worse: That means that no conference is safe from falling apart because no previous agreements will be able to be enforced.

The Big 12 is the one pushing for the Big East's agreements to be nullified, and yet, if WVU wins in court, it might well set the precedent for nullifying their own 6-year agreement, which might quickly spell an end to their conference.

So, no, I don't think the Big East will back down, and I don't think they can or should. Nor do I think the Big 12's interests would be served if the 27-month waiting period proves unenforceable.

They can do this if they wish. The best way to protect themselves from future raids is to assighn tier one TV rights to the conferences. That makes BE members useless to another conference. The Big East members were discussing doing just that prior to the abrupt exit of Pitt and Syracuse. Pretty sure that was why they had to leave at that moment. I expect this issue will be tacked almost immediately upon the arrival of the new members.

Spot on

Spot on? You must want Cincy to be bound and tied to the Big East no matter what? That's silly to me.

(12-06-2011 04:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:00 PM)k5james Wrote:  I don't know about Texas and Florida but CA is underrecruited big time.

You're kidding, right?

No, Boise has made a killing on recruiting the Inland Empire. It's a fast growing area that has been largely ignored by most of the BCS schools that recruit CA. Orange County is another area here that is, with a few exceptions, ignored by BCS schools.

(12-06-2011 04:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:58 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:35 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 02:19 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 01:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  I'd like to think that C-USA, it's defectors, the BE, WVU, and the B-XII are all working something out behind the scenes that would insure everyone being able to field a viable conference. Highly doubt it, but one can always hope.

Seems like the ACC is cool with Pitt/SU staying around as long as it takes... If the C-USA trio is able to come in early, then I'm fine with sending off WVU with a fine farewell. Ten teams next year with a nine game conference schedule? Perfect for us, with two slots to fill.

I continue to disagree with this stance. I think the Big East needs to enforce every rule it's got in its arsenal if it hopes to defend itself in the future. Clearly the old exit fee and the 27-month waiting period were not enough to protect us. I'm not sure what would be enough, though I suspect that a Big-12-style 6-10-year agreement might do the trick.

But one thing's for certain: Every requirement that's waived now will only come back and bite us in the rear in the future when somebody else wants out and hangs their hat on the precedent set with WVU. And if the courts nullify the waiting period, that's even worse: That means that no conference is safe from falling apart because no previous agreements will be able to be enforced.

The Big 12 is the one pushing for the Big East's agreements to be nullified, and yet, if WVU wins in court, it might well set the precedent for nullifying their own 6-year agreement, which might quickly spell an end to their conference.

So, no, I don't think the Big East will back down, and I don't think they can or should. Nor do I think the Big 12's interests would be served if the 27-month waiting period proves unenforceable.

They can do this if they wish. The best way to protect themselves from future raids is to assighn tier one TV rights to the conferences. That makes BE members useless to another conference. The Big East members were discussing doing just that prior to the abrupt exit of Pitt and Syracuse. Pretty sure that was why they had to leave at that moment. I expect this issue will be tacked almost immediately upon the arrival of the new members.

Spot on

Spot on? You must want Cincy to be bound and tied to the Big East no matter what? That's silly to me.

Stability sounds good to me.

(12-06-2011 04:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:58 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:35 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 02:19 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 01:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  I'd like to think that C-USA, it's defectors, the BE, WVU, and the B-XII are all working something out behind the scenes that would insure everyone being able to field a viable conference. Highly doubt it, but one can always hope.

Seems like the ACC is cool with Pitt/SU staying around as long as it takes... If the C-USA trio is able to come in early, then I'm fine with sending off WVU with a fine farewell. Ten teams next year with a nine game conference schedule? Perfect for us, with two slots to fill.

I continue to disagree with this stance. I think the Big East needs to enforce every rule it's got in its arsenal if it hopes to defend itself in the future. Clearly the old exit fee and the 27-month waiting period were not enough to protect us. I'm not sure what would be enough, though I suspect that a Big-12-style 6-10-year agreement might do the trick.

But one thing's for certain: Every requirement that's waived now will only come back and bite us in the rear in the future when somebody else wants out and hangs their hat on the precedent set with WVU. And if the courts nullify the waiting period, that's even worse: That means that no conference is safe from falling apart because no previous agreements will be able to be enforced.

The Big 12 is the one pushing for the Big East's agreements to be nullified, and yet, if WVU wins in court, it might well set the precedent for nullifying their own 6-year agreement, which might quickly spell an end to their conference.

So, no, I don't think the Big East will back down, and I don't think they can or should. Nor do I think the Big 12's interests would be served if the 27-month waiting period proves unenforceable.

They can do this if they wish. The best way to protect themselves from future raids is to assighn tier one TV rights to the conferences. That makes BE members useless to another conference. The Big East members were discussing doing just that prior to the abrupt exit of Pitt and Syracuse. Pretty sure that was why they had to leave at that moment. I expect this issue will be tacked almost immediately upon the arrival of the new members.

Spot on

Spot on? You must want Cincy to be bound and tied to the Big East no matter what? That's silly to me.

Its just how you look at it. No school is forced to sign. They agree to sign. Its no different than being "chained" to a mortgage. Its something you agree to for a set period of time.

New Big East

(12-06-2011 04:14 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:00 PM)k5james Wrote:  I don't know about Texas and Florida but CA is underrecruited big time.

You're kidding, right?

No, Boise has made a killing on recruiting the Inland Empire. It's a fast growing area that has been largely ignored by most of the BCS schools that recruit CA. Orange County is another area here that is, with a few exceptions, ignored by BCS schools.

I'm not a Californian (so you may very well be right), but from the outside looking in, that would be shocking to me. The Pac-12 specifically setup their divisions so all of their members would be able to play in California at least once per year because all of those schools are almost completely dependent upon California recruiting. On Oregon's roster, there's about twice as many players from California as there are from Oregon. It would be insane to me to think that Orange County is underrecruited, too - I have relatives in Irvine, Orange and Newport Beach and that area probably has one of the highest per capita rates of developing pro athletes anywhere. Once again, you may know better than me, but WOW if that's actually true.

I think what he is getting at is that there are more quality kids than scholarships. With all the high schools, plus the California Juco system, it has to be loaded. It doesn't guarantee you a seat at the table, but your know knocking on the door. For most, it's not going to change their current focus, but does give us more options. As a UC fan, they are still going to hit from Mich-Fl and east for the most part.

“I think what John Marinatto just did, he should get a substantial raise for what he just accomplished,” Louisville coach Rick Pitino said. “Getting Boise State. Getting Houston, SMU. I think that is as good of a job for a commissioner with his back against the wall as I’ve seen since I’ve been in athletics. The teams you lost aren’t as good in football as the teams you’re bringing in.”

(12-06-2011 05:31 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  “I think what John Marinatto just did, he should get a substantial raise for what he just accomplished,” Louisville coach Rick Pitino said. “Getting Boise State. Getting Houston, SMU. I think that is as good of a job for a commissioner with his back against the wall as I’ve seen since I’ve been in athletics. The teams you lost aren’t as good in football as the teams you’re bringing in.”

I'm not sure, but if forced to give my opinion, I'd have to say that Rick Pitino supports Louisville being in the Big East.

In a slight tangent about this topic, it's pretty amazing to me to see the career trajectory of McMurphy. The man was fired by the Tampa Tribune in part because of his unprofessional behavior in reporting about Jim Leavitt and USF athletics. A few years later he's transformed himself into a person who is considered beyond reproach when it comes to college sports (and, perhaps not coincidentally, the object of his original vendetta was subsequently fired after McMurphy finally uncovered some actual dirt on him).

By contrast, I once respected Dan Wolken as a reporter, but he's now become so butt hurt about the fact that Memphis isn't on the Big East's radar that he's become obsessed with tearing the conference down.

USFFan

(12-06-2011 05:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I'm not a Californian (so you may very well be right), but from the outside looking in, that would be shocking to me. The Pac-12 specifically setup their divisions so all of their members would be able to play in California at least once per year because all of those schools are almost completely dependent upon California recruiting. On Oregon's roster, there's about twice as many players from California as there are from Oregon. It would be insane to me to think that Orange County is underrecruited, too - I have relatives in Irvine, Orange and Newport Beach and that area probably has one of the highest per capita rates of developing pro athletes anywhere. Once again, you may know better than me, but WOW if that's actually true.

This guy hit what I was trying to say right on the head...

(12-06-2011 05:19 PM)Slypenny Wrote:  I think what he is getting at is that there are more quality kids than scholarships. With all the high schools, plus the California Juco system, it has to be loaded. It doesn't guarantee you a seat at the table, but your know knocking on the door. For most, it's not going to change their current focus, but does give us more options. As a UC fan, they are still going to hit from Mich-Fl and east for the most part.

Even with all 12 Pac teams hitting CA, that's only really 12 BCS schools that really pound the pavement in CA. Compare that to Texas (Big 12/PAC/SEC) and Florida (ACC/SEC/Big East) and you'll see what I'm getting at.

(12-06-2011 05:35 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 05:31 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  “I think what John Marinatto just did, he should get a substantial raise for what he just accomplished,” Louisville coach Rick Pitino said. “Getting Boise State. Getting Houston, SMU. I think that is as good of a job for a commissioner with his back against the wall as I’ve seen since I’ve been in athletics. The teams you lost aren’t as good in football as the teams you’re bringing in.”

I'm not sure, but if forced to give my opinion, I'd have to say that Rick Pitino supports Louisville being in the Big East.

True, RP is obviously pro-BE. That doesn't mean he's right (or even being honest with himself) about Marianatto. GOOD GOD! How do people heap praise upon such poor leadership.

Anyone willing to select Pitino as the next commissioner after he retires?

(12-06-2011 04:46 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:58 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:35 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 02:19 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  I continue to disagree with this stance. I think the Big East needs to enforce every rule it's got in its arsenal if it hopes to defend itself in the future. Clearly the old exit fee and the 27-month waiting period were not enough to protect us. I'm not sure what would be enough, though I suspect that a Big-12-style 6-10-year agreement might do the trick.

But one thing's for certain: Every requirement that's waived now will only come back and bite us in the rear in the future when somebody else wants out and hangs their hat on the precedent set with WVU. And if the courts nullify the waiting period, that's even worse: That means that no conference is safe from falling apart because no previous agreements will be able to be enforced.

The Big 12 is the one pushing for the Big East's agreements to be nullified, and yet, if WVU wins in court, it might well set the precedent for nullifying their own 6-year agreement, which might quickly spell an end to their conference.

So, no, I don't think the Big East will back down, and I don't think they can or should. Nor do I think the Big 12's interests would be served if the 27-month waiting period proves unenforceable.

They can do this if they wish. The best way to protect themselves from future raids is to assighn tier one TV rights to the conferences. That makes BE members useless to another conference. The Big East members were discussing doing just that prior to the abrupt exit of Pitt and Syracuse. Pretty sure that was why they had to leave at that moment. I expect this issue will be tacked almost immediately upon the arrival of the new members.

Spot on

Spot on? You must want Cincy to be bound and tied to the Big East no matter what? That's silly to me.

Its just how you look at it. No school is forced to sign. They agree to sign. Its no different than being "chained" to a mortgage. Its something you agree to for a set period of time.

... but if the conference rules make it nearly impossible to leave, that "set period of time" is ... forever.

(12-06-2011 05:35 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 05:31 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  “I think what John Marinatto just did, he should get a substantial raise for what he just accomplished,” Louisville coach Rick Pitino said. “Getting Boise State. Getting Houston, SMU. I think that is as good of a job for a commissioner with his back against the wall as I’ve seen since I’ve been in athletics. The teams you lost aren’t as good in football as the teams you’re bringing in.”

I'm not sure, but if forced to give my opinion, I'd have to say that Rick Pitino supports Louisville being in the Big East.

You think?

(12-06-2011 05:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:14 PM)k5james Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:09 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:00 PM)k5james Wrote:  I don't know about Texas and Florida but CA is underrecruited big time.

You're kidding, right?

No, Boise has made a killing on recruiting the Inland Empire. It's a fast growing area that has been largely ignored by most of the BCS schools that recruit CA. Orange County is another area here that is, with a few exceptions, ignored by BCS schools.

I'm not a Californian (so you may very well be right), but from the outside looking in, that would be shocking to me. The Pac-12 specifically setup their divisions so all of their members would be able to play in California at least once per year because all of those schools are almost completely dependent upon California recruiting. On Oregon's roster, there's about twice as many players from California as there are from Oregon. It would be insane to me to think that Orange County is underrecruited, too -

It simply beggars belief that California is under-recruited. Why on earth would it be?

(12-06-2011 06:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  It simply beggars belief that California is under-recruited. Why on earth would it be?

Probably has something to do with the lack of BCS schools within a reasonable distance from the state...

(12-06-2011 06:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:46 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:58 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 03:35 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  They can do this if they wish. The best way to protect themselves from future raids is to assighn tier one TV rights to the conferences. That makes BE members useless to another conference. The Big East members were discussing doing just that prior to the abrupt exit of Pitt and Syracuse. Pretty sure that was why they had to leave at that moment. I expect this issue will be tacked almost immediately upon the arrival of the new members.

Spot on

Spot on? You must want Cincy to be bound and tied to the Big East no matter what? That's silly to me.

Its just how you look at it. No school is forced to sign. They agree to sign. Its no different than being "chained" to a mortgage. Its something you agree to for a set period of time.

... but if the conference rules make it nearly impossible to leave, that "set period of time" is ... forever.

For the Big-12, the length of the assignment of rights tracks the most currently signed TV contract. I assume thats typical, but I dont really know. I think this is a relatively new concept. If that is the case, it simply would create "windows" where teams would be available to change conferences.

(12-06-2011 05:59 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Anyone willing to select Pitino as the next commissioner after he retires?

Well, Ricky was originally from Providence