Associate Big East commissioner Nick Carparelli and ESPN.com's Big East blogger Andrea Adelson will be on Louisville Sports Live tomorrow night.
Feel free to post any questions for our Big East guests, I'll try to ask as many as possible. (I already have a long list).

The show is tomorrow night at 7 on ESPN 680 in Louisville. You can stream live on ESPNLouisville.com.

(07-11-2012 07:40 PM)Villecard Wrote:  Associate Big East commissioner Nick Carparelli and ESPN.com's Big East blogger Andrea Adelson will be on Louisville Sports Live tomorrow night.
Feel free to post any questions for our Big East guests, I'll try to ask as many as possible. (I already have a long list).

The show is tomorrow night at 7 on ESPN 680 in Louisville. You can stream live on ESPNLouisville.com.

The internet is replacing analog radio. I have missed the days of non-digital radio tuners when I could tune in WHAS 840 or WLW 700 800 miles away in Houston. Des Moines and Chicago had 50,000 watt stations also. I believe in New Orleans it was 680 AM. There was one time in the car we were driving on I-10 near Tallahassee and were picking up Buffalo clear as day.

You might ask them what they see as the Big East future regarding Tier 3 networks/internet platforms.

Ask her why all her articles have an anti BIG EAST slant, and why she knows nothing about the schools she covers.

Yep, used to sit down with Dad as a kid and tune in his AM dial radio to the Chicago station, all the way here in WV.

(07-11-2012 08:19 PM)ThunderDent Wrote:  Yep, used to sit down with Dad as a kid and tune in his AM dial radio to the Chicago station, all the way here in WV.

I was driving back from Annapolis one time after a Rutgers @ Navy game and we were picking up stations in Toronto, Chicago, Boston, New York in Baltimore.

Yeah, bullet, the AM waves go a long ways, You never knew what or where you would pick up. I remember going camping/fishing with my kid brother and a friend. I was cold as heck out in Sebastian, and we didn't bring anything warm including sleeping bags. All of a sudden about 1 am We get a guy on the radio who says it was 14 degrees outside, then we really were cold. Turned out he was in New York.

(07-11-2012 07:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  The internet is replacing analog radio. I have missed the days of non-digital radio tuners when I could tune in WHAS 840 or WLW 700 800 miles away in Houston. Des Moines and Chicago had 50,000 watt stations also. I believe in New Orleans it was 680 AM. There was one time in the car we were driving on I-10 near Tallahassee and were picking up Buffalo clear as day.

You might ask them what they see as the Big East future regarding Tier 3 networks/internet platforms.

We still have the 50,000 watt blow torch here in Chicago. 89 WLS (890 AM).

The Des Moines station you're thinking about is WHO 1040 AM.

Ask her if she is going to be out of a job as an ESPN blogger, now that the Big East is no longer a power conference? Or will she be shifted to cover all of the other non-power conferences along with the Big East.

Ask her if she's a reporter or a columnist paid to write opinion pieces?

And if admits she's paid for her opinion, does she think her continual negative opinions on Big East football are going to help or hurt her access to Big East coaches and administrators?

Serious question... Please ask Mr. Caripelli why our interim commish was not sure if we were "allowed" to sign a tie-in agreement with a major bowl. If the bowls don't want us, that's one thing. If, on the other hand, a bowl wants to sign an agreement with us but we can't sign because we aren't "allowed" to do so by the BCS, it seems like we would have a very strong anti-trust claim on our hands. There needs to be MUCH more made of this. The so-called "power conferences" have free reign to sign bowl tie-in contracts, but for some reason we are not sure if we are "allowed". If they are going to protect themselves from anti-trust claims by hiding behind private contracts with the bowls, why doesn't the Big East have the right to do the same? That's what free market competition is. Like I said, if the bowls don't want us, that is another story...but it shouldn't be a double standard. Same goes for the MWC, CUSA, Sunbelt, etc.

(07-11-2012 10:35 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Ask her if she's a reporter or a columnist paid to write opinion pieces?

And if admits she's paid for her opinion, does she think her continual negative opinions on Big East football are going to help or hurt her access to Big East coaches and administrators?

I think every conference hates their refs and their ESPN blogger.

(07-11-2012 11:31 PM)chrisharper80 Wrote:  Serious question... Please ask Mr. Caripelli why our interim commish was not sure if we were "allowed" to sign a tie-in agreement with a major bowl. If the bowls don't want us, that's one thing. If, on the other hand, a bowl wants to sign an agreement with us but we can't sign because we aren't "allowed" to do so by the BCS, it seems like we would have a very strong anti-trust claim on our hands. There needs to be MUCH more made of this. The so-called "power conferences" have free reign to sign bowl tie-in contracts, but for some reason we are not sure if we are "allowed". If they are going to protect themselves from anti-trust claims by hiding behind private contracts with the bowls, why doesn't the Big East have the right to do the same? That's what free market competition is. Like I said, if the bowls don't want us, that is another story...but it shouldn't be a double standard. Same goes for the MWC, CUSA, Sunbelt, etc.

Bill Hancock of the BCS has already addressed this. Three bowls are going to be allowed to sign contracts. The remaining bowls are "access" bowls. Participants in the remaining bowls will flow from the selection committee. The 3 bowls that are not contract bowls will take the 4 semi-finalist and two BCS bowl "at large" teams (they will also serve as back-up bowls for contract bowls when the Rose/Cotton/Orange are semi-final sites).

Basically, the other bowls cant sign contracts because it they did---there would be nowhere to put the semi-finalist and there would be no "access" for non-AQ's. Essentially, in years that Notre Dame qualifies, there will only be 2 "at large" positions available outside of the 4 semi-finalist. Those two "at large" postions can come from any conference (power conference or non-AQ). It is up to the selection committee to choose the most "deserving teams". There is no guaranteed slot for non-AQ and no set criteria that will automatically qualify a non-AQ for an "at large" position. This set up also guarantees that no non-AQ will ever play a power conference champion in a BCS game unless its a semi-final.

(07-12-2012 01:16 AM)attackfrog Wrote:  Bill Hancock of the BCS has already addressed this. Three bowls are going to be allowed to sign contracts. The remaining bowls are "access" bowls. Participants in the remaining bowls will flow from the selection committee. The 3 bowls that are not contract bowls will take the 4 semi-finalist and two BCS bowl "at large" teams (they will also serve as back-up bowls for contract bowls when the Rose/Cotton/Orange are semi-final sites).

Basically, the other bowls cant sign contracts because it they did---there would be nowhere to put the semi-finalist and there would be no "access" for non-AQ's. Essentially, in years that Notre Dame qualifies, there will only be 2 "at large" positions available outside of the 4 semi-finalist. Those two "at large" postions can come from any conference (power conference or non-AQ). It is up to the selection committee to choose the most "deserving teams". There is no guaranteed slot for non-AQ and no set criteria that will automatically qualify a non-AQ for an "at large" position. This set up also guarantees that no non-AQ will ever play a power conference champion in a BCS game unless its a semi-final.

So it's just fine for five leagues and Notre Dame to sign tie-in contracts with bowls...just not the Big East or anyone else. Got it. And what part of that is fair, unrestricted competition? It's laughable that they would set up this inherently restrictive system and try to justify it in the name of "access".

(07-11-2012 10:05 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Ask her if she is going to be out of a job as an ESPN blogger, now that the Big East is no longer a power conference? Or will she be shifted to cover all of the other non-power conferences along with the Big East.

Havnt you heard? They got rid of AQ. Now everyone is equal. Power confereces? There are no power conferences. Now that the evil "AQ" has been banished, every school lives in peace and harmony---equal in the eyes of all.

Its a very Zen moment for college football.....We should probably chant something.

I'd be very interested in what Carparelli had to say about the Big East bowl laternatives if a BCS contract bowl is not an option.

I don't see what everyone is worried about?

I've read on here numerous times that all your conference has to do is win most of it's OOC games and respect will be given!

I don't see how that's not an eventuality given that everybody is going to improve.

What is a laternative?? Must be a frog thing.

To Carparelli
Does the conference feel it is being pushed out? How does the league plan to attack the "Big 5" issue and being left out?
How does the league respond to the ACC's and ESPN's negativity toward the conference?
Does the conference understand that the Big East fans have been upset with the lack of "rebuttal" from the conference and the interm commish over the media downgrading of the conference?
How is the commissioner search going and what sort of commissioner are we going after?
With all the important issues going on at the time, how involved is the interm commish in decision making and if he is not, who is taking the lead in these issues?

To Adelson
Does she feel that the Big East's failure to re-sign immediately with ESPN plays a role in the way ESPN has covered the Big East and effected realignment? (ESPN telling the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse)
Because of current TV contracts does she feel ESPN favors ACC over the Big East?
Does ESPN affect what articles she writes and what the tone of those articles should be.
Should the company apologize for the "Big Least" insult on CFL?
Does ESPN realize that the football quality on the field has increased with the new teams added?

(07-11-2012 09:05 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-11-2012 08:19 PM)ThunderDent Wrote:  Yep, used to sit down with Dad as a kid and tune in his AM dial radio to the Chicago station, all the way here in WV.

I was driving back from Annapolis one time after a Rutgers @ Navy game and we were picking up stations in Toronto, Chicago, Boston, New York in Baltimore.

I remember listening to radio stations from all over the nation late at night. Before we got our first TV, that was about the only entertainment we had that we didn't have to make for ourselves...

Those stations AM signals would bounce off the upper atmosphere and go a long, long way, without all the solar interference...

(07-11-2012 10:35 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Ask her if she's a reporter or a columnist paid to write opinion pieces?

And if admits she's paid for her opinion, does she think her continual negative opinions on Big East football are going to help or hurt her access to Big East coaches and administrators?

Great questions (which is why they won't be asked).