Berry Tramel - OKC

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

UConn to the Big 12 seems highly implausible.

UConn has been taken to the woodshed.

I'm really interested to see if there is any chance of the Big 12 expanding with the likes of BYU, Cincinnati or USF.

The guy is a hack.

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

I have nothing against Tulsa, but for the life of me I can't understand how they were chosen over USM...

(04-23-2013 12:03 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

I have nothing against Tulsa, but for the life of me I can't understand how they were chosen over USM...

Quick hit argument for Tulsa... top 100 school, revenue near 30 mil, good sized city. USM is not even a top 200 school, revenue near 20 mil. Tulsa is also an institutional fit with SMU and Tulane. I know USM has the historical tradition with the Texas and LA schools, but Tulsa is the better fit at this point. Now, if UCONN, Temple, and Cincinnati abandon ship, I can see USM getting an invite along with Rice (excellent academics help shortcomings in athletics, and the city of Houston is big enough to warrant two teams in a mid-tier conference).

(04-23-2013 12:23 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 12:03 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

I have nothing against Tulsa, but for the life of me I can't understand how they were chosen over USM...

Quick hit argument for Tulsa... top 100 school, revenue near 30 mil, good sized city. USM is not even a top 200 school, revenue near 20 mil. Tulsa is also an institutional fit with SMU and Tulane. I know USM has the historical tradition with the Texas and LA schools, but Tulsa is the better fit at this point. Now, if UCONN, Temple, and Cincinnati abandon ship, I can see USM getting an invite along with Rice (excellent academics help shortcomings in athletics, and the city of Houston is big enough to warrant two teams in a mid-tier conference).

Good argument. I would have taken both.

Here's an item deserving discussion...
I am not sure if the B1G or the SEC even actually contacted any ACC teams, or offered invites, but if they did they must not be as powerful as we all assumed. Seems like a lot of folks on this board assumed the two could just snap their fingers and ACC schools would jump. Only Maryland did though and for lots of reasons... none of which seemed to involve conference stability.

Dollars to donuts that the B1G sent "feelers" to certain ACC schools to see if they'd be interested in investigating the idea. However, such feelers will likely never be made public.

(04-23-2013 01:15 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Dollars to donuts that the B1G sent "feelers" to certain ACC schools to see if they'd be interested in investigating the idea. However, such feelers will likely never be made public.

Most likely it was the other way around.

In either case, with Delany (UNC Grad) and Mary Sue Coleman (President of Michigan, UNC Grad), it's not like anyone had to introduce themselves.

Disagree based on Delaney's comments that the B1G needed to shift to the South.

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

(04-23-2013 02:10 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

Nope. Until you can show me that USM A) lost AQ status b) lost bowl tie-ins and c) lost $$$ in annual television contract the answer is UConn, UC and USF.

(04-23-2013 02:18 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 02:10 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

Nope. Until you can show me that USM A) lost AQ status b) lost bowl tie-ins and c) lost $$$ in annual television contract the answer is UConn, UC and USF.

Fair enough but USM probably WILL lose TV $$$. They've by far been the biggest realignment loser since the original ACC raid. They've lost every rival they had in conference over that time frame and they're stuck in some sick incarnation of the worst of CUSA, the Sunbelt and FCS. That's pretty damn bad if you ask me.

And no offense but UC & USF spent more years in CUSA than they did the Big East. USF was truly gifted a BCS invite if there ever was one. They did NOTHING to earn it. At least Cincy had a CUSA powerhouse hoops program and UConn was an original BE member.

(04-23-2013 02:18 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 02:10 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

Nope. Until you can show me that USM A) lost AQ status b) lost bowl tie-ins and c) lost $$$ in annual television contract the answer is UConn, UC and USF.

UCONN in a landslide. They are the #63 ranked school, $60+ annual revenue, a marketable and known brand, and easily the top basketball program if you put men's and women's together. I'm betting if everyone could use one of those "Men In Black" memory erasers over the last two decades, the Big East would have split with the Catholic schools long ago and made an all around conference of Boston College, UCONN, Syracuse, Rutgers, Pitt, Va. Tech, West Virginia, Louisville and whoever wins the death match between Cincy and Temple. I know part of the madness has been gaining new markets, but you can't tell me that owning the Northeast would not suffice. Of course, I am a proponent of 8 to 10 member conferences, so it is a pipe dream. By the way, Notre Dame is easily still a part time lover with that conference to give you 10 schools in everything but football and a round robin format in football with Notre Dame probably playing everyone at least biannually.

(04-23-2013 02:18 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 02:10 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

Nope. Until you can show me that USM A) lost AQ status b) lost bowl tie-ins and c) lost $$$ in annual television contract the answer is UConn, UC and USF.

Tend to agree with that -- UConn lost more b/c they were in the Big East longer (with its basketball program), and now finds itself separated from Georgetown, Syracuse, (soon-to-be) Louisville, St. John's, etc...

Not sure there are many ECU alums/fans on the planet who will honestly have sympathy for USF. So much for that "TV market" argument.

UC, with its basketball brand, lost a lot as well, and just as they were starting to make a (brand) name for itself on the gridiron, this stuff happens.

(04-23-2013 01:59 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Disagree based on Delaney's comments that the B1G needed to shift to the South.

If Delaney was looking to the south he was fishing in a dry hole I guess...

(04-23-2013 03:02 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 01:59 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Disagree based on Delaney's comments that the B1G needed to shift to the South.

If Delaney was looking to the south he was fishing in a dry hole I guess...

Well, he did make the public comments concerning the population decline in the rust belt (Midwest) and a need for the B1G to pursue other area (the South) for expansion. Something to that effect.

Something I read on another site today reminded me that Vanderbilt (Nashville) was also one of those 15 schools identified by the B1G as a possibility. Kinda wonder if we might not see a GOR by the SEC to make sure Vandy doesn't get poached.

(04-23-2013 12:48 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Here's an item deserving discussion...
I am not sure if the B1G or the SEC even actually contacted any ACC teams, or offered invites, but if they did they must not be as powerful as we all assumed. Seems like a lot of folks on this board assumed the two could just snap their fingers and ACC schools would jump. Only Maryland did though and for lots of reasons... none of which seemed to involve conference stability.

I touched on this in another thread last week, but it seems the BIG/SEC/VA & NC Schools were in a standoff. The NC/VA Board of Regents/government would only allow moves if all four schools involved found equally soft landing spots. The BIG was not going to take Va. Tech or NC State under any circumstances, the SEC was not going to take just Va. Tech or NC State, and no other landing spot was going to be considered a soft enough for the state legislatures.

I still contend that the SEC would have done well to take all four schools plus add Florida State and Clemson, which puts them at 20 schools and locks up the South for the SEC until... well... ever. At that point, the BIG can help themselves to Duke and Ga. Tech, but it would hardly be a Southern invasion. The ACC could still be a viable conference by adding Connecticut and Cincinnati unless the BIG came in for a death kill. A lot of what if's, but I didn't see much of a disadvantage to taking the NC and VA schools, even it it just stopped at 18 schools.