(01-21-2012 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:57 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:26 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:22 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-20-2012 03:22 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Depend on the membership not the status.

With the current members I suspect that full membership would be taken by most of the MAC schools.

Big East all sports with UConn, Rutgers, UCF, ...

Yes Buffalo, the geography is about the same for us but the fan base for UB students in centers in Western New York, and the NYC metro area.

Make no mistake, getting rid of the AQ status and having the BCS only manage a national championship game, or plus 1, is a very bad thing for the MAC. The MAC would essentially have zero chance of getting a school into a major bowl game (the current BCS bowl games and would have essentially zero chance of getting someone into a top four for a possibly national championship. It would be like 1990 all over again. At least in the Big East there might be a slight chance of getting into the top four or have a better chance of making a much better payout bowl game.

Bottom line, MAC fans should only want one of two things to happen........1) a playoff with an auto bid for every FBS conference or 2) everything stays the same.

Or a playoff to replace the BCS bowls where the other bowls remain as is (or something similar).

If that playoff does not give an auto bid to every FBS conference (like I said above) that would be bad for the MAC because all you would get is the bowls we have with no, or hardly no shot at getting into the playoff. At least today there is the possibility of a BCS bowl game and the money associated with it.

We have almost zero shot of getting into a BCS bowl game. Even Boise State got shunted off to play a mediocre team instead. We'd have the same shot of getting into the playoff, if the number of teams is the same. Anyway, 99 years out of 100 we'd be playing in a lesser bowl.

Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Although everything you state is true, the key to your arguement is "if" they go undefeated...a lot has happened since Marshall and Miami had those great seasons...the way the college landscape is now, it is unlikely for a MAC school to meet the criteria unless the stars align just right...since the MAC (and Sunbelt and now the WAC) are already behind the power curve, if any other school from either MWC or C-USA is on the verge of going undefeated, they will most likely be ahead of a MAC school in the standings...then the next caveat is to actually go undefeated...if the a MAC school schedules tough teams in its nonconference schedule and manages to win out then theres no problem and that might give them the strength of schedule to beat out other non-aqs from other conferences but the risk is a high probability they would not win those games or expend so much in winning those games that they suffer injuries that make them vulnerable to defeat in conference...OR they schedule middle of the road or cream puff teams from the power conferences but the risk is they are not well tested in nonconference and when they face a great in-conference team they get exposed (i.e.Ball State a few seasons back and Houston this year).

The thing about TCU and Boise is they consistently beat tough teams nonconference and then ran the table of their respective conferences; the only team that "got away" with squeezing in was Hawaii (where fates allowed them to hang on, especially in their Boise game) but they also had the benefit of Boise success raising the bar for the entire conference by that point and the highest rank they got was #10...

But it can happen under the current system...and that's why the system will be changed to make it even that much more difficult for a Hawaii-type to get in again...

(01-21-2012 06:25 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Why 12 teams?

A championship game. Overrated for many conferences.

What does our MACC draw?

TV revenue.

12 teams allows for a "Championship Game" which is an extra "big" game in the inventory. Ad rates for a primetime "Championship Game" will get the network with rights to that game a pretty penny.

It's business. It's money.

(01-22-2012 10:09 AM)wleakr Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Although everything you state is true, the key to your arguement is "if" they go undefeated...a lot has happened since Marshall and Miami had those great seasons...the way the college landscape is now, it is unlikely for a MAC school to meet the criteria unless the stars align just right...

Ball State just three years ago should have done it. They blew it by losing in the MACC Game. It happens, but it's also possible for a MAC school to do. The alternative being suggested is not possible for the MAC. Not at all.

I personally feel the stars have to align just right for a school to win the MAC title. Only one of 13 MAC schools can do it in a year. Only 4 of those 13 schools have done it in the last 7 years.

(01-22-2012 11:13 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 10:09 AM)wleakr Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Although everything you state is true, the key to your arguement is "if" they go undefeated...a lot has happened since Marshall and Miami had those great seasons...the way the college landscape is now, it is unlikely for a MAC school to meet the criteria unless the stars align just right...

Ball State just three years ago should have done it. They blew it by losing in the MACC Game. It happens, but it's also possible for a MAC school to do. The alternative being suggested is not possible for the MAC. Not at all.

Not even close. Ball State was behind TCU, Boise and Utah in the BCS poll when they lost. Their schedule was far too weak to get high enough in the polls.

To get to a BCS game you need to win all of your games and hope you are the only non-AQ team to do so. Houston showed that this year, they wet the bed against USM, otherwise they were in.

(01-22-2012 10:17 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 06:25 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Why 12 teams?

A championship game. Overrated for many conferences.

What does our MACC draw?

TV revenue.

12 teams allows for a "Championship Game" which is an extra "big" game in the inventory. Ad rates for a primetime "Championship Game" will get the network with rights to that game a pretty penny.

It's business. It's money.

Also 12 teams and two divisions adds more excitement to the conference race. The MAC at 9-10 teams would likely be an unexciting 2-3 bowl conference like the Sun Belt.

In football having 14 members is even better than 12 because you only have to play the cross divisional opponents once on the road. Once you get to 16 teams then it becomes unweildy and of course the larger you grow it requires more bowl games.

The alliance is looking at moving to 18 teams. If they want every school in a bowl game how many bowl tie-ins is that going to require? Nine bowls? Is the alliance going to be able to pick up that many games?

That is why I prefer the 14/11 hybrid over going to 16 in football. I would love to see JMU in the conference but there just isn't room right now unless somebody leaves.

(01-22-2012 11:13 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 10:09 AM)wleakr Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Although everything you state is true, the key to your arguement is "if" they go undefeated...a lot has happened since Marshall and Miami had those great seasons...the way the college landscape is now, it is unlikely for a MAC school to meet the criteria unless the stars align just right...

Ball State just three years ago should have done it. They blew it by losing in the MACC Game. It happens, but it's also possible for a MAC school to do. The alternative being suggested is not possible for the MAC. Not at all.

I personally feel the stars have to align just right for a school to win the MAC title. Only one of 13 MAC schools can do it in a year. Only 4 of those 13 schools have done it in the last 7 years.

I agree the biggest issue for a school is trying to get through MAC play and a championship game undefeated. That is not at all easy to do.

It has been easier in the MWC and WAC without championship games and only 2 or 3 schools capable of knocking off Boise State or TCU in a given season. They get past those 2 or 3 schools and its an open door to the BCS.

(01-22-2012 01:41 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I agree the biggest issue for a school is trying to get through MAC play and a championship game undefeated. That is not at all easy to do.

It has been easier in the MWC and WAC without championship games and only 2 or 3 schools capable of knocking off Boise State or TCU in a given season. They get past those 2 or 3 schools and its an open door to the BCS.

The bottom of those conferences (particularly the MWC) is always glossed over. When Utah, BYU, TCU were doing their thing WY, NM, UNLV, and even CSU were atrocious, but the strength at the top and the fact that it is a small conference help hide this from the statistics many times. That doesn't take away from what the top programs did; Utah, TCU, and BYU were very good, when they were being very good, but once they passed the test of each other there was limited resistance from "middle" teams so they feasted on the really bad ones that happened to be everyone else.

While the top MAC team(s) may not be as consistent as the top MWC teams as far as being a "BCS buster" type of team most years, the middle is (most of the time) very solid and capable of defeating the top team(s). You can't really say that of (what used to be) the MWC.

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:57 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:26 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:22 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Make no mistake, getting rid of the AQ status and having the BCS only manage a national championship game, or plus 1, is a very bad thing for the MAC. The MAC would essentially have zero chance of getting a school into a major bowl game (the current BCS bowl games and would have essentially zero chance of getting someone into a top four for a possibly national championship. It would be like 1990 all over again. At least in the Big East there might be a slight chance of getting into the top four or have a better chance of making a much better payout bowl game.

Bottom line, MAC fans should only want one of two things to happen........1) a playoff with an auto bid for every FBS conference or 2) everything stays the same.

Or a playoff to replace the BCS bowls where the other bowls remain as is (or something similar).

If that playoff does not give an auto bid to every FBS conference (like I said above) that would be bad for the MAC because all you would get is the bowls we have with no, or hardly no shot at getting into the playoff. At least today there is the possibility of a BCS bowl game and the money associated with it.

We have almost zero shot of getting into a BCS bowl game. Even Boise State got shunted off to play a mediocre team instead. We'd have the same shot of getting into the playoff, if the number of teams is the same. Anyway, 99 years out of 100 we'd be playing in a lesser bowl.

Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Alabama didn't win the SEC or even their division, how did they get into not only a BCS bowl but the NC game?

(01-22-2012 04:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:57 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:26 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  Or a playoff to replace the BCS bowls where the other bowls remain as is (or something similar).

If that playoff does not give an auto bid to every FBS conference (like I said above) that would be bad for the MAC because all you would get is the bowls we have with no, or hardly no shot at getting into the playoff. At least today there is the possibility of a BCS bowl game and the money associated with it.

We have almost zero shot of getting into a BCS bowl game. Even Boise State got shunted off to play a mediocre team instead. We'd have the same shot of getting into the playoff, if the number of teams is the same. Anyway, 99 years out of 100 we'd be playing in a lesser bowl.

Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Alabama didn't win the SEC or even their division, how did they get into not only a BCS bowl but the NC game?

Are you really asking that question?

(01-22-2012 04:38 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 04:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 09:57 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  If that playoff does not give an auto bid to every FBS conference (like I said above) that would be bad for the MAC because all you would get is the bowls we have with no, or hardly no shot at getting into the playoff. At least today there is the possibility of a BCS bowl game and the money associated with it.

We have almost zero shot of getting into a BCS bowl game. Even Boise State got shunted off to play a mediocre team instead. We'd have the same shot of getting into the playoff, if the number of teams is the same. Anyway, 99 years out of 100 we'd be playing in a lesser bowl.

Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Alabama didn't win the SEC or even their division, how did they get into not only a BCS bowl but the NC game?

Are you really asking that question?

I just think they'd find a way to keep the MAC team out of it. The fact is, Ball State did NOT go undefeated. If this, if that. It didn't happen. And any MAC team with a tough enough nonconference schedule is still going to go undefeated maybe once in 50 years.

(01-22-2012 12:00 PM)CMUprof Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 11:13 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 10:09 AM)wleakr Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Although everything you state is true, the key to your arguement is "if" they go undefeated...a lot has happened since Marshall and Miami had those great seasons...the way the college landscape is now, it is unlikely for a MAC school to meet the criteria unless the stars align just right...

Ball State just three years ago should have done it. They blew it by losing in the MACC Game. It happens, but it's also possible for a MAC school to do. The alternative being suggested is not possible for the MAC. Not at all.

Not even close. Ball State was behind TCU, Boise and Utah in the BCS poll when they lost. Their schedule was far too weak to get high enough in the polls.

To get to a BCS game you need to win all of your games and hope you are the only non-AQ team to do so. Houston showed that this year, they wet the bed against USM, otherwise they were in.

Actually that is close and if those teams lost they would be out and Ball State would have gone to a BCS game. Seriously when would you do that outside of the current system? Also notice that if that was next year (or whenever Boise moves) all those teams are now AQ teams which means Ball State would get in ahead of all of them. Due to attrition our chances are going up not down hence why many power conferences want to change the system to one where we are effectively cut out completely.

(01-22-2012 04:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 04:38 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 04:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 10:11 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  We have almost zero shot of getting into a BCS bowl game. Even Boise State got shunted off to play a mediocre team instead. We'd have the same shot of getting into the playoff, if the number of teams is the same. Anyway, 99 years out of 100 we'd be playing in a lesser bowl.

Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Alabama didn't win the SEC or even their division, how did they get into not only a BCS bowl but the NC game?

Are you really asking that question?

I just think they'd find a way to keep the MAC team out of it. The fact is, Ball State did NOT go undefeated. If this, if that. It didn't happen. And any MAC team with a tough enough nonconference schedule is still going to go undefeated maybe once in 50 years.

That's incorrect too, in a sense. Because Marshall went undefeated and was high enough before the current rules for non-AQ schools/conferences, and then a few years later Miami was high enough as well.....even though they did have one loss.

Bottom line is this.......no matter how much of a chance you or I think it is, it is still a chance. With a 4 team playoff there will be no chance. With an 8 team playoff, which has almost no chance of happening, there is only about a 0.000000000000000000001% chance. Much less chance than with the current system and getting in a BCS game.

(01-22-2012 05:54 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 12:00 PM)CMUprof Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 11:13 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 10:09 AM)wleakr Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Although everything you state is true, the key to your arguement is "if" they go undefeated...a lot has happened since Marshall and Miami had those great seasons...the way the college landscape is now, it is unlikely for a MAC school to meet the criteria unless the stars align just right...

Ball State just three years ago should have done it. They blew it by losing in the MACC Game. It happens, but it's also possible for a MAC school to do. The alternative being suggested is not possible for the MAC. Not at all.

Not even close. Ball State was behind TCU, Boise and Utah in the BCS poll when they lost. Their schedule was far too weak to get high enough in the polls.

To get to a BCS game you need to win all of your games and hope you are the only non-AQ team to do so. Houston showed that this year, they wet the bed against USM, otherwise they were in.

Actually that is close and if those teams lost they would be out and Ball State would have gone to a BCS game. Seriously when would you do that outside of the current system? Also notice that if that was next year (or whenever Boise moves) all those teams are now AQ teams which means Ball State would get in ahead of all of them. Due to attrition our chances are going up not down hence why many power conferences want to change the system to one where we are effectively cut out completely.

Not even close means that all 3 non-AQ teams won when Ball State lost the MACC. Had they won they still would have been shut out, losing the MACC wasn't what kept them out of the BCS.

(01-22-2012 07:10 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 04:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 04:38 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-22-2012 04:34 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-21-2012 05:06 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Totally disagree. Boise State got left out because they did not win the MWC, they lost to TCU won won it. Boise State would have been assured of a BCS bowl bid if they would have won the MWC because they were in the top 12 in the BCS.

All a MAC team has to do is finish in the Top 12 of the BCS and win the MAC to get in. Ball State would have been in a few years ago, but lost to Buffalo in the MACC game. Marshall and Miami in the past were high enough in the BCS standings to get in with today's BCS requirements that just weren't in place back in their seasons.

If a MAC school goes undefeated they have a very high chance of finishing in the Top 12 of the BCS standings to get into a BCS bowl game.

Alabama didn't win the SEC or even their division, how did they get into not only a BCS bowl but the NC game?

Are you really asking that question?

I just think they'd find a way to keep the MAC team out of it. The fact is, Ball State did NOT go undefeated. If this, if that. It didn't happen. And any MAC team with a tough enough nonconference schedule is still going to go undefeated maybe once in 50 years.

That's incorrect too, in a sense. Because Marshall went undefeated and was high enough before the current rules for non-AQ schools/conferences, and then a few years later Miami was high enough as well.....even though they did have one loss.

Bottom line is this.......no matter how much of a chance you or I think it is, it is still a chance. With a 4 team playoff there will be no chance. With an 8 team playoff, which has almost no chance of happening, there is only about a 0.000000000000000000001% chance. Much less chance than with the current system and getting in a BCS game.

Didn't one of the BCS teams lose money? They gotta sell a certain large number of tickets plus spend a large amount of money in the city where the bowl is. Would a MAC team sell that many tickets and make a bunch of money? Just thinking out loud. I don't agree with the 4-team playoff, would prefer 8 or 16, just for the good of college football having an actual champion, not so much for the MAC specifically. What I had been suggesting was a playoff with the 12 BCS teams, including bye weeks for the top teams, or something along those lines. So all those teams still have a chance and all the other bowls can continue as usual.

Navy is supposed to be announcing that they're going to the Big East soon.

(01-24-2012 08:47 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  Navy is supposed to be announcing that they're going to the Big East soon.

There is a confrence call scheduled today for 3PM, looks like they will be joining in 2015

(01-24-2012 08:47 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  Navy is supposed to be announcing that they're going to the Big East soon.

...in 2015

I wouldn't be surprised if in a few months Cincinnati and Louisville were announce that they will be joining the B12 for the 2015 season.

(01-24-2012 10:18 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  

(01-24-2012 08:47 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  Navy is supposed to be announcing that they're going to the Big East soon.

...in 2015

I wouldn't be surprised if in a few months Cincinnati and Louisville were announce that they will be joining the B12 for the 2015 season.

Your on the mark HJ, nothing would suprise me, Rutgers and UConn have been included in rumors for months.

(01-24-2012 10:20 AM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(01-24-2012 10:18 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  

(01-24-2012 08:47 AM)uakronkid Wrote:  Navy is supposed to be announcing that they're going to the Big East soon.

...in 2015

I wouldn't be surprised if in a few months Cincinnati and Louisville were announce that they will be joining the B12 for the 2015 season.

Your on the mark HJ, nothing would suprise me, Rutgers and UConn have been included in rumors for months.

It would be interesting to see if Cincinnati, Louisville, Rutgers & UCONN all announce they are leaving the conference BEFORE a new BE TV deal is signed. UCF, Boise St, SD St, Houston, SMU & Navy could get less TV money in 2015 than the do now!