(05-08-2012 12:43 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  If Boise stays in the MWC, they'll be able to cherry pick any of the CUSA west schools, if that's who they want. Can't see Houston staying in the Big East in that scenario.

Why do you say that? Has anyone learned anything in conference realignment? S**t ALWAYS rolls downhill. Every single time a conference thinks it can jump in front of another league on the pecking order, such conference gets smacked back to the stone age. It happened to the Big 12 when it got raided by the Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC, it happened to the Big East when it got raided by the Big 12 and ACC, and it happened to C-USA and the MWC when they got raided by the Big East, and then it happened to the WAC when it got raided by everyone else. Every single one of those leagues sincerely believed that it could engage in a role reversal with conferences above them at some point (e.g. "If School A leaves Conference X, everyone will ditch Conference X for us and we'll be stronger!"), yet they ALL ended up getting put right into their respective places and even worse situations. That's simply how it goes.

So the Big East could add ECU and call it a day:

Notre Dame
DePaul
Marquette
Providence
St. Johns
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
UConn
Rutgers
Temple
Navy
Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
East Carolina
Central Florida
South Florida
Houston
SMU

(05-08-2012 12:43 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  If Boise stays in the MWC, they'll be able to cherry pick any of the CUSA west schools, if that's who they want. Can't see Houston staying in the Big East in that scenario.

I can't see Houston bailing on the Big East for several reasons:
1. Big East Basketball. Boise St and SDSU might have a valid reason to not come to the Big East without the AQ Bid, but BE basketball will be a major step up in money and prestige than anything the MWC can offer the former CUSA schools.

2.History. Houston has been in a conference with six of the nBE teams and already have some rivalries established I don't think the prospect of Boise and UTEP and ten strangers is going to be some big draw for them.

3. Money. Even if it isn't as much per team as it might have been with Boise State, there is every reason to believe that it will be more than the MWC is going to get. The Big East will still have a huge market size advantage over the MWC.

Boy, there is some backpedaling going on.

I thought ESPN and the TV networks were advising the Big East on who to take to maximize TV revenue.

The ESPN article WTR linked in the OP has this gem:

"To manage the two, it takes diplomacy and delicacy. The Big East went for desperation. Following the lead of Marinatto, a man who previously was in charge of the league's administrative operations and never charged with formulating a vision, the conference went 11th-hour prom-date hunting, taking whoever would say yes instead of who might make the league attractive."


What?????

Pitino heralded Marinatto as "The Comissioner of the Century" for landing Boise State. He was repeating what Jurich told him. Now, people want to ridicule him for making a geographical mess.....

I've always thought that disregarding attendance/fanbase size and geographical proximity in favor of metro TV markets was short-sited; that it may yield high profits in the short term, but not good for long-term viability. However, I had no idea that people could turn so quick!

The last opinion piece linked made the argument that the Big East needs a basketball-first commissioner. This I agree with. They need to stick with what they know best. Memphis and Temple were good additions.

Do you expect any positive write ups from ESPN. War Torn, you haven't been in the Big East long enough to understand that ESPN writers never have a positive thing to say about the conference. The more their writers beat down the conference the less ESPN figures they have to pay us for our tv rights. Get use to all the negatives. The Big East survived after the last raid and there is no reason for it not to survive again.

Here are the reasons why Boise and SDSU backing out rumors won't die.

1. Boise does not have the strength of athletic department leadership it once had.
2. SDSU has a different president from when they accepted.
3. Both Boise and SDSU have stated that they anticipate receiving in excess of $6 million per year for their share of TV. That means the Big East has to increase the football tv rights nearly 500% after turning down a 300% increase based on Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, and TCU being members.
4. Air Force was unable to secure a home for sports other than football they considered to be good enough (ie. they said No to the WAC). Boise State now faces entering a WAC that is comprised of Seattle, Denver, Idaho, New Mexico State, and MAYBE Texas-Arlington. UTA to Sun Belt seems likely, NMSU might yet pop up there, while Idaho seems improbable. The WAC has purportedly reached out to propose a merger with the Summit which doesn't seem likely and is looking at a Great West merger if that fails (NJIT, Chicago State, Texas-Pan Am, and Utah Valley). Boise has to have a home for other sports.
5. The rumor mill continues to speculate that a football/basketball split is coming. I don't personally believe this is imminent and even if it were, UConn, Rutgers, et.al., have to have a conference and Boise serves the same purpose there that it serves in the hyper Big East. I think people are just connecting dots that aren't meant to be connected here.

(05-08-2012 12:17 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  Boise brings a tv draw. They also stand arguably the best chance of getting to the playoff or adding an RPI boost to help another school's push.

You need SOS if all the talk about an RPI system is true and Boise gives you it. Half the standard RPI formula is the opponents winning percentage. Your own w/l record only counts for 25%. Final 25% is opponents opponents win %. Having teams with solid football records on your schedule and on each other's schedules is the best thing you can have.

The new big east is UConn, Rutgers, and except memphis the all time nonaq all star team minus Utah, TCU, and BYU.

I think what Southern Miss has done is a lot more impressive than anyone of the new Big East invites minus Boise State. It's not really relevant to this discussion and I'm not trying to start anything, but SMU has had like two good seasons since the death penalty and UCF hasn't done any better than East Carolina. SDSU was terrible until like... three years ago? All of the new members are great schools and deserve some respect, but they are definitely not the non_AQ all star team.

(05-08-2012 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 11:52 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 11:28 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am friends with a few Boise players. They do not think they are ever playing a down in The Big East. One more deflection or if the TV money not being there is true Boise is staying put and inviting a few friends with them.

Why does it really matter to the Big East whether Boise State plays in the Big East at all? Seriously.

What benefit is Boise State out there in Idaho now that AQ is gone?

Don't get me wrong. I would like to see Boise, et al play there, but it is not something that is now very essential with AQ gone. They can go talk to ECU and Southern Miss instead.

Boise State is a significantly greater national TV draw compared to ECU and USM. In fact, Boise would arguably be the most important football asset for TV purposes for the Big East, so they're critical for the new TV contract. The elimination of AQ status pales in comparison to the TV issue.

Not to mention (assuming Boise is able to maintain its decade-long on-field performance), they will have the best chance of any BE team to make the playoffs, or at least a major bowl, and probably rake in additional big bucks for the BE. This is assuming the BE doesn't get a full cut of the new revenue distribution, and no major bowl tie-in.

(05-08-2012 03:09 PM)RUfan03 Wrote:  Do you expect any positive write ups from ESPN. War Torn, you haven't been in the Big East long enough to understand that ESPN writers never have a positive thing to say about the conference. The more their writers beat down the conference the less ESPN figures they have to pay us for our tv rights. Get use to all the negatives. The Big East survived after the last raid and there is no reason for it not to survive again.

What ESPN writes has no impact on what ESPN will pay. ESPN tends to isolate the writers from the business side and more often than not it is CBS, Yahoo, and others who break the stories on what ESPN is paying to a conference or league because of that insulation.

ESPN quite simply will make their offer based on what programming holes they have to fill, their projections as to audience size, and their projections on what impact it has on their subscriber base and the base of competitors (ie. would not having the product cause people to upgrade subscriptions to NBC Sports, CBSC, or Fox Sports in order to get the content or cause people to go ahead get rid of ESPN products).

My two cents on Big East TV, ESPN isn't going to overbid based on subscribers or potential subscriber increases of competitors. There is a school of thought out there in the TV community that believes ESPN's preference is to see at least a portion of the Big East rights go to a Pac-12 sort of deal where a consortium of cable and satellite companies agree to make games available via an on-demand service in order to prop up cable and satellite companies. ESPN makes more dollars from cable and sat subscribers than they do from their online product and want the cable/sat companies to remain in demand and healthy.

If ESPN bids big it will be because the Big East is willing to make more football games available on weeknights, at least Fridays and Thursdays. SDSU and Boise fans best be prepared for a steady diet of evening kickoffs because the late game slots are the hardest to fill. There are only 26 schools in the Mountain, Pacific, and Hawaiian time zones, the group best suited to host. Twelve are in the Pac-12, 10 are in the MWC, 2 in the MWC, and 2 are leftover WAC with their future up in the air.

(05-08-2012 11:23 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  Well ESPN heard it as well and the MWC I promise you is looking at Texas.

Well they just let Texas State go to the Sun Belt, and they apparently wanted UTSA, who chose CUSA, as did North Texas. So are they planning to promote Sam Houston State or Stephen F. Austin?

(05-08-2012 12:48 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 12:43 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  If Boise stays in the MWC, they'll be able to cherry pick any of the CUSA west schools, if that's who they want. Can't see Houston staying in the Big East in that scenario.

Why do you say that? Has anyone learned anything in conference realignment? S**t ALWAYS rolls downhill. Every single time a conference thinks it can jump in front of another league on the pecking order, such conference gets smacked back to the stone age. It happened to the Big 12 when it got raided by the Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC, it happened to the Big East when it got raided by the Big 12 and ACC, and it happened to C-USA and the MWC when they got raided by the Big East, and then it happened to the WAC when it got raided by everyone else. Every single one of those leagues sincerely believed that it could engage in a role reversal with conferences above them at some point (e.g. "If School A leaves Conference X, everyone will ditch Conference X for us and we'll be stronger!"), yet they ALL ended up getting put right into their respective places and even worse situations. That's simply how it goes.

The only instance I know of where a purported "lower" conference picked off a "higher" conference was in 1991. Charlotte, South Florida, UAB, VCU, and Old Dominion had defected to the Great Midwest, Metro, and Colonial leaving South Alabama, Western Kentucky and Jacksonville along with scheduled to enter Arkansas-Little Rock. The seven member American South considered adding only one or two members. Sun Belt commissioner Jim Lessig, who had just come over from the MAC and former commissioner Vic Bubas contacted the NCAA president and began lobbying for the NCAA to permit a merger of the American South and Sun Belt allowing the merged league to retain NCAA units earned by the two conferences. The NCAA agreed. The two men then contacted Sun Belt commissioner Craig Thompson with the proposal, he got confirmation from the NCAA and the leagues merged and took the Sun Belt name (always thought keeping the name was a mistake).

Schools aren't "heading back" unless the home they are in is not viable or their needs have changed.

Lamar went back to the Southland from the Sun Belt because they were in dire financial straits and simply could not afford to compete.

The Big East fantasy of getting BC back was a prime example of not understanding the basics.

If Boise goes back to the MWC it would be because they just cannot find a viable home for the other sports.

(05-08-2012 03:29 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 11:52 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 11:28 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am friends with a few Boise players. They do not think they are ever playing a down in The Big East. One more deflection or if the TV money not being there is true Boise is staying put and inviting a few friends with them.

Why does it really matter to the Big East whether Boise State plays in the Big East at all? Seriously.

What benefit is Boise State out there in Idaho now that AQ is gone?

Don't get me wrong. I would like to see Boise, et al play there, but it is not something that is now very essential with AQ gone. They can go talk to ECU and Southern Miss instead.

Boise State is a significantly greater national TV draw compared to ECU and USM. In fact, Boise would arguably be the most important football asset for TV purposes for the Big East, so they're critical for the new TV contract. The elimination of AQ status pales in comparison to the TV issue.

Not to mention (assuming Boise is able to maintain its decade-long on-field performance), they will have the best chance of any BE team to make the playoffs, or at least a major bowl, and probably rake in additional big bucks for the BE. This is assuming the BE doesn't get a full cut of the new revenue distribution, and no major bowl tie-in.

Sounds to me like Boise would be much better off being independent in Football, playing eight home games a year and two other big time BCS money games at a neutral site and two other regional road games. If they are the carrot to the whole thing, why share. Why would they want to share a big bowl payout? The big question is what does Boise have to gain from being in the BE? What I am hearing is THEY are the reason the BE will have a good TV contract. Without Boise there is no TV contract.

Keep in mind that there will be financial repercussions for reneging on the deal with the BE. Unless BSU can land a better deal like TCU with the B12, they might be better off waiting for whatever new TV deal the BE can get.

Here are a few links summarizing the BSU-BE agreement:

Boise State Joins The Big East

Detailing Boise State's Move to the Big East

(05-08-2012 04:09 PM)Owls_Law Wrote:  Keep in mind that there will be financial repercussions for reneging on the deal with the BE. Unless BSU can land a better deal like TCU with the B12, they might be better off waiting for whatever new TV deal the BE can get.

Here are a few links summarizing the BSU-BE agreement:

Boise State Joins The Big East

Detailing Boise State's Move to the Big East

Apparently the buyout is $1 million with AQ gone.

The biggest problem they have is they have 18 sports other than football and many are homeless unless the Big West reverses course or the WAC can become viable.

(05-08-2012 04:26 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 04:09 PM)Owls_Law Wrote:  Keep in mind that there will be financial repercussions for reneging on the deal with the BE. Unless BSU can land a better deal like TCU with the B12, they might be better off waiting for whatever new TV deal the BE can get.

Here are a few links summarizing the BSU-BE agreement:

Boise State Joins The Big East

Detailing Boise State's Move to the Big East

Apparently the buyout is $1 million with AQ gone.

The biggest problem they have is they have 18 sports other than football and many are homeless unless the Big West reverses course or the WAC can become viable.

They'd be paying 1m to forgo 7-12m. Foolish.

Better off paying Big West, Summit, Mo Valley, or Big Sky teams travel subsidies like Hawaii did.

Some league will bite. BSU hoops would boost most of their rpis and could help with a slight amount of attention.

(05-08-2012 04:47 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 04:26 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 04:09 PM)Owls_Law Wrote:  Keep in mind that there will be financial repercussions for reneging on the deal with the BE. Unless BSU can land a better deal like TCU with the B12, they might be better off waiting for whatever new TV deal the BE can get.

Here are a few links summarizing the BSU-BE agreement:

Boise State Joins The Big East

Detailing Boise State's Move to the Big East

Apparently the buyout is $1 million with AQ gone.

The biggest problem they have is they have 18 sports other than football and many are homeless unless the Big West reverses course or the WAC can become viable.

They'd be paying 1m to forgo 7-12m. Foolish.

Better off paying Big West, Summit, Mo Valley, or Big Sky teams travel subsidies like Hawaii did.

Some league will bite. BSU hoops would boost most of their rpis and could help with a slight amount of attention.

I don't think will be foregoing $7 mil to $12 mil. Both SDSU and Boise are on the record saying they anticipate getting slightly over $6 million with a floor of $5 million.

Can they get $6 million? That would represent a 500% increase in current rights. If the ESPN offer turns out to be the best money, they are looking at more like $3.6 million.

(05-08-2012 03:59 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 03:29 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 12:43 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 11:52 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-08-2012 11:28 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  I am friends with a few Boise players. They do not think they are ever playing a down in The Big East. One more deflection or if the TV money not being there is true Boise is staying put and inviting a few friends with them.

Why does it really matter to the Big East whether Boise State plays in the Big East at all? Seriously.

What benefit is Boise State out there in Idaho now that AQ is gone?

Don't get me wrong. I would like to see Boise, et al play there, but it is not something that is now very essential with AQ gone. They can go talk to ECU and Southern Miss instead.

Boise State is a significantly greater national TV draw compared to ECU and USM. In fact, Boise would arguably be the most important football asset for TV purposes for the Big East, so they're critical for the new TV contract. The elimination of AQ status pales in comparison to the TV issue.

Not to mention (assuming Boise is able to maintain its decade-long on-field performance), they will have the best chance of any BE team to make the playoffs, or at least a major bowl, and probably rake in additional big bucks for the BE. This is assuming the BE doesn't get a full cut of the new revenue distribution, and no major bowl tie-in.

Sounds to me like Boise would be much better off being independent in Football, playing eight home games a year and two other big time BCS money games at a neutral site and two other regional road games. If they are the carrot to the whole thing, why share. Why would they want to share a big bowl payout? The big question is what does Boise have to gain from being in the BE? What I am hearing is THEY are the reason the BE will have a good TV contract. Without Boise there is no TV contract.

Simple. The nBE TV contract is a bird in the hand for Boise, every year, worth millions more than in the MWC (although the exact amount is TBD this fall). The chances to make the playoffs or major bowls are birds in a bush, year to year.

War Torn is the only anti go to the BE BSU fan I know, other than the players for the rest of their sports. Well if AFA turns down the BE again, I'm sure Fresno will join you guys. I think our fans would rather just be in the MWC since they "get to play" Nevada, UNLV, SJSU, Hawaii and the old WAC. I'm sure they'd just prefer that BSU and SDSU stay and have the "best of both worlds" since they don't get to use the 6 mill.

I would rather conf stay semi regional but since they aren't I'd rather take the BE money and play schools on the other end of the US since it would keep our program out of the red.

War Torn wants to keep his team down. He likes being a big fish in a lil pond. He is afraid Boise will soon be just an average team in the BE. There are those who look to new challenges with excitement, others who like the safety of familiarity.

If boise state doesn't want in the Big East then go back to the Mwc. Its that simple, there are other teams that will fill your spot. I'm not flaming, but if you think you're going to make good Tv money there, you're way off.