I found this quote on the WVU board....the author of the orginal post didn't write anything else...so I'm not sure who James Howell is...but i thought you'd be interested


Jackson

Quote:Remember the rumor that the BE was going to offer membership to ECU? Here's more, courtesy of James Howell:

Quote:
I am hearing rumblings of Big East expansion, perhaps as early as February. What I am hearing is that Army and Navy will be offered football-only affiliate memberships. Under the proposal, each would play two home and two away games against Big East teams. That would still allow 6-7 OOC games for the academies while giving the Big East teams a balanced 4 home, 4 away conference schedule. The Army-Navy game would become a "conference" game, so marketing the conference for TV would be enhanced. The Big East contracted bowls would also have the option of selecting Army or Navy provided overall record was no more than one game worse than available Big East teams.

I would prefer to have Memphis as a full member, which I know is not going to happen. But taking Army-Navy as affiliate members makes more sense to me than ECU for football-only. The question is whether Army and Navy go for the idea, and the Athletic Directors and Presidents go for the idea.

Jackson,

What are the voting rules in the Big East? Do all members, all-sports and basketball-only, vote on expansion? And what counts as a majority?

Quote:I would prefer to have Memphis as a full member, which I know is not going to happen. But taking Army-Navy as affiliate members makes more sense to me than ECU for football-only. The question is whether Army and Navy go for the idea, and the Athletic Directors and Presidents go for the idea.

Jackson,

What are the voting rules in the Big East? Do all members, all-sports and basketball-only, vote on expansion? And what counts as a majority?

-- When adding an all sports member...all 16 school would have the opportunity to vote...but their's not really a chance of that happening because the bball only's want to keep a balanced vote....however....when voting for football only members...only the BE football schools will have a chance to vote...which would be the case here

-- It seems to me that Army/Navy bring more to the table to the TV networks then ECU....the BE would add the army/navy game every year and would have the rights to the ND/Navy game every other year

-- If this would happen to go through....it is very possible that NDs 2008 or 09 schedule will include 5 BE games...that may be usefull if the Irish NBC money ever dries up


Jackson

The last thing you need is another full member to divide basketball money yet another way. Army and navy as affiliate members makes alot of sense.

Jackson1011 Wrote:I found this quote on the WVU board....the author of the orginal post didn't write anything else...so I'm not sure who James Howell is...but i thought you'd be interested


Jackson

Quote:Remember the rumor that the BE was going to offer membership to ECU? Here's more, courtesy of James Howell:

Quote:
I am hearing rumblings of Big East expansion, perhaps as early as February. What I am hearing is that Army and Navy will be offered football-only affiliate memberships. Under the proposal, each would play two home and two away games against Big East teams. That would still allow 6-7 OOC games for the academies while giving the Big East teams a balanced 4 home, 4 away conference schedule. The Army-Navy game would become a "conference" game, so marketing the conference for TV would be enhanced. The Big East contracted bowls would also have the option of selecting Army or Navy provided overall record was no more than one game worse than available Big East teams.

if they are only play 4 BE teams, how does that help with balanced scheduling? I guess you would only play either Navy OR Army in any given year? So one more league game per team... either Army or Navy. Also, that will mean that you don't have to play both and weaken your schedule too much.

Hmmmm... interesting concept. i think i like it. it would be nice to have the pagentry and history of Army/Navy as part of the New Big East.

Looking at it from Army's point of view one wonders whether they would want to take the pounding every year. Of the three service academies they seem the least committed.

Quote:Looking at it from Army's point of view one wonders whether they would want to take the pounding every year. Of the three service academies they seem the least committed.

-- I guess that is the beauty of only playing 5 BE games (counting the one against Navy)....Army can schedule the Duke's and Vandy's of the world for the remaining part of their schedule

-- I would say that Army has improved under Bobby Ross this year...although they only won 2 games they were competitive in several of there losses

Quote:And what counts as a majority?

-- Sorry Wacobearcat...I missed that part of the question...I honestly don't know what is a majority for a vote like this....I would think 5 or 6 yes votes out of 8 would be needed but again I don't know

-- Just off the top of my head I would think Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia and Rutgers would vote yes because playing Army/Navy is part of the football history of those schools....WVU Coach Rod has been very vocal about his desire for Navy to be included into the BE...pretty sure he even wanted Navy over USF

-- I would think Uconn would vote yes because Army is a regional game that the Huskies play anyway...and I can't see them not vote the same way SU and Rutgers do

-- As for Louisville, UC and USF....I have no idea....anyone have any idea as to how these schools would vote if the situation came up


Jackson

One last thing....here is the actual link to the rumor


<a href='http://www.inside99.net/cgi-bin/webbbs_config.pl?read=107343' target='_blank'>http://www.inside99.net/cgi-bin/webbbs_con....pl?read=107343</a>


Jackson

for the sake of argument, would that scenario still hold if there were a split and the BE added an all sports team to take the full membership to 9 teams, with Army and Navy still playing an affiliates role? would that pacify the 12 game schedule requirement? or is the BE looking at having to be a 12 team league in a few years?

Quote:if they are only play 4 BE teams, how does that help with balanced scheduling? I guess you would only play either Navy OR Army in any given year? So one more league game per team... either Army or Navy. Also, that will mean that you don't have to play both and weaken your schedule too much.

I think it mean Army play 4 BE teams and Navy play the other 4 BE teams that is good ideal.

Which mean Army/Navy counted as one team. Now you have 9 teams conference, what an ideal.

the more i think about it, the more i like it...

it makes a great deal of sense.

Army OR Navy each year for each NBE school. So once every 4 years every team will host Army and Navy once.

I think it would work pretty well.

another thing to consider... i think the inclusion of Army and Navy would really help stem the bashing by the media... Army/Navy always get good press coverage, and having them as part of the league I think would help shield some of the anti-NBE bias in the media, because they won't want to bash Army & Navy.

They may not "bash" army or navy but they would probably talk about how they aren't BCS caliber.. etc.
nothing we haven't heard already

Quote:for the sake of argument, would that scenario still hold if there were a split and the BE added an all sports team to take the full membership to 9 teams, with Army and Navy still playing an affiliates role? would that pacify the 12 game schedule requirement? or is the BE looking at having to be a 12 team league in a few years?

-- The only way the BE football schools will go to 12 (unless its mandated byt the BCS) is if ND and PSU are on board...I think that is the only way the dollars would add up...so in other words a 12 team league is not likely

--To me this move is about the short term...the BE needed help with scheduling and a little muscle to help with the TV contract and the bowls yet keep the 16 team dynamic together....Army/Navy were worried about if the could compete with a full conference schedule so this is a nice comprimise....If Army/Navy compete and are happy over a few years time I could see them just become full football members....

-- In my opinion this is no way stops the idea of the split...if the Army/Navy experiment is working out then they can become football only members of the new league...if its not then they simplyt won't be invited

-- Everything the BE conference has done since the ACC raid has been done with one eye on ND....Marqutte/Depaul additions, working on the big apple bowl...now this....and I think this makes a lot of sense even without ND....but it would make for an interesting desecion for the Irish if their is a split....do they stay with the Catholic schools were bball other sports are not as good or do they affliate somehow with the football schools that have better bball/olympic sports and ND's old buddies.....the academies

-- I think this is a great move to help keep the BCS.....keeps our identity as the eastern league and I'm sure Army/Navy have some "friends" in the government who we could call on if our BCS bid is attacked

Jackson

My guess is UC would be in favor of this arrangement. We only had five home games this year, and with the 'Cats playing four away games in the Big East as a first-year member next year, they are again likely to play five at home, six away. It's a whole lot easier to get to six home games with four guaranteed by conference scheduling.

Despite the ignominy of ending Army's 19-game losing streak this year, I think UC would also look favorably upon the experience of playing Army. It's a heckuva place to visit, and they're likely to continue to steadily improve under Bobby Ross.

I like the creative thinking behind this split, partial membership idea. One question: would they both be, by definition, ineligible to win the conference title, assuming one of them went 4-0 at some point?

Jackson1011,

Your analysis is spot on.

Army/Navy for the short-term with an eye on the big prize, Notre Dame. But if both schools are able to compete, then they become a long-term solution as well.

Jackson1011 Wrote:The Big East contracted bowls would also have the option of selecting Army or Navy provided overall record was no more than one game worse than available Big East teams.

I don't like this part of the deal. There will probably be a few seasons where UC is in the mix for the BE's last bowl bid, and to have that taken out by an Army or Navy with an inferior record wouldn't sit well.

Waco, considering Urban blew UND off, do we any longer consider them "the big prize"?

Quote: like the creative thinking behind this split, partial membership idea. One question: would they both be, by definition, ineligible to win the conference title, assuming one of them went 4-0 at some point?

-- Well...if one went 5-0 in conference (remember the Army/Navy game would be a conference game as well) then I guess they would be some kind of co champs...but the way the BE works is the team that is the most highly ranked according to the BCS gets the auto bid....so I don't think you have to worry about them getting a BCS bid


-- As for the other bowls...its sounds like the same deal we have with ND....Army/Navy can't take a BE bowl if they are more then one game worse then the full BE team...so in other words a Army team that is 6-5 can't be choosen for the insight. com bowl if their is a USF team that is 8-3....however if Navy and UC are both 6-5...its up to the bowl as to who it wants


Jackson

Wow, that's logical, too. Thanks for the analysis.

There must be some downside I'm missing on this, but so far I don't see it.

TopCoog Wrote:The last thing you need is another full member to divide basketball money yet another way. Army and navy as affiliate members makes alot of sense.

Sorry, I wasn't going to post in this thread...but I think Memphis would contribute to the basketball money pool. Considering that our basketball program makes enough $$ to pay for itself and several other programs.