Would it depend on what the school could offer fan base/TV wise? VCU offers more than Wichita, I would think. Also, VCU could get us into the ACC markets along with ECU and Fla. Schools. We aiready compete with the Big 12 with Tulsa, and Texas schools, however slightly.

(11-13-2013 10:38 PM)nightoftheowls Wrote:  adding these 2 schools would give the league 13 all sports members and 12 football only. now I know you're all saying, we can't have an uneven 13...

An uneven number is perfectly fine. The Big East had 15 BB members last year without issue. It is football, where having an uneven number causes problems, especially if you want a CCG.

(11-13-2013 10:15 PM)owlfan2272 Wrote:  I'd love to add a basketball only, I know why some may be hesitant but 1 add on isn't going to change any dynamic of power and it would help our basketball conference big time if it is the right school

This is correct. The dynamic of the Old BE was 8 BB and 8 FB schools. It was a power sharing arrangement that BB did not want to give up, and FB did not want to break away from.

Adding VCU would have lots of positives for the league, including a balance of 12 non revenue teams with good travel geography. The only issue is, would VCU want to leave? What is in it for them. A while back a VCU poster said it was not worth VCU's while. I don't remember the numbers or the reasons.

The Big East built a nice hybrid league in the past. I have no issues adding 1-3 basketball schools. The schools we are talking about can generate $$$ with NCAA credits and hopefully increase the TV deal when it comes up for negotiation.

(11-13-2013 10:45 PM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  

(11-13-2013 10:15 PM)owlfan2272 Wrote:  I'd love to add a basketball only, I know why some may be hesitant but 1 add on isn't going to change any dynamic of power and it would help our basketball conference big time if it is the right school

This is correct. The dynamic of the Old BE was 8 BB and 8 FB schools. It was a power sharing arrangement that BB did not want to give up, and FB did not want to break away from.

Adding VCU would have lots of positives for the league, including a balance of 12 non revenue teams with good travel geography. The only issue is, would VCU want to leave? What is in it for them. A while back a VCU poster said it was not worth VCU's while. I don't remember the numbers or the reasons.

The Big East isn't finished. They will go to at least 12 over the next year or two. When they do---the A-10 will be gutted. VCU knows thier current home is in trouble. The only question is will VCU be selected or will Georgetown block them. I'm all for adding VCU, UMass (basketball only), and maybe even Wichita.

(11-14-2013 12:07 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Big East isn't finished. They will go to at least 12 over the next year or two. When they do---the A-10 will be gutted. VCU knows thier current home is in trouble. The only question is will VCU be selected or will Georgetown block them. I'm all for adding VCU, UMass (basketball only), and maybe even Wichita.

Then if we have any interest in adding a non-football team, we should strike first.

The basketball only schools in the past were private Catholic universities VCU is a large public university and in a metropolitan area. They fit this conference perfectly they just don't play football. They would be the perfect team to offset Navy. There is a big difference between having one basketball only school and seven basketball only schools.

Think VCU or Wichita would be a good add to the AAC to offset Navy football. Also think the Big East would be stupid to block VCU. Since the private catholic universities control the decisions in the Big East, not sure if VCU fits their "profile."

Twelve football teams are required for an AAC Championship game. Why does the American need 12 basketball schools? Why give the AAC critics more fuel for debate? The outgoing and incoming of teams next year will probably be as much change as the conference can absorb. Doesn't the AAC need stability for the time being?

(11-14-2013 01:03 AM)Xbones Wrote:  Twelve football teams are required for an AAC Championship game. Why does the American need 12 basketball schools? Why give the AAC critics more fuel for debate? The outgoing and incoming of teams next year will probably be as much change as the conference can absorb. Doesn't the AAC need stability for the time being?

How is adding VCU giving the critics something to debate. In fact, where is the downside? Basketball gets better. Football is the same. What's there to be critical of?

(11-14-2013 01:07 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:03 AM)Xbones Wrote:  Twelve football teams are required for an AAC Championship game. Why does the American need 12 basketball schools? Why give the AAC critics more fuel for debate? The outgoing and incoming of teams next year will probably be as much change as the conference can absorb. Doesn't the AAC need stability for the time being?

How is adding VCU giving the critics something to debate.

The ESPN and CBS tweeters and bloggers will think of something. "More shake ups in the AAC, formerly Big East". UCONN and Cincy (i.e.) not happy with new member... Big 12 jump is imminent. Why didn't they add WSU? Haven't they learned their lesson about basketball only schools? School Presidents argue about new member? Presidents meeting in Florida again. My examples aren't very good, but the professional critics are much more resourceful.

(11-13-2013 09:35 PM)ShoreBuc Wrote:  

(11-13-2013 07:16 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  Sorry, ECU. We've been down the road of basketball only schools. It doesn't work.

Nobody knows better than ECU the impact of Basketball only schools on the old Big East and its impact on ECU membership over the years. I know it might help the AAC from a competitive stand point but the sting still lingers for this ECU fan and to the idea of Basketball only schools I would have to vote Hell F$c! No

No, I have no idea what the impact of basketball schools was on ECU. Why don't you educate us?

(11-14-2013 01:20 AM)Xbones Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:07 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:03 AM)Xbones Wrote:  Twelve football teams are required for an AAC Championship game. Why does the American need 12 basketball schools? Why give the AAC critics more fuel for debate? The outgoing and incoming of teams next year will probably be as much change as the conference can absorb. Doesn't the AAC need stability for the time being?

How is adding VCU giving the critics something to debate.

The ESPN and CBS tweeters and bloggers will think of something. "More shake ups in the AAC, formerly Big East". UCONN and Cincy (i.e.) not happy with new member... Big 12 jump is imminent. Why didn't they add WSU? Haven't they learned their lesson about basketball only schools? School Presidents argue about new member? Presidents meeting in Florida again. My examples aren't very good, but the professional critics are much more resourceful.

They will criticize the league no matter what we do. I wouldn't worry about it. The presidents currently have a pretty bad taste in their mouth when it comes to hybrid basketball members. I think its a short sighted mistake, but there is no appetite among AAC presidents for adding basketball only members at this time.

(11-13-2013 10:11 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I feel like the coach will eventually be hired away.

Also, I'm against partial/hybrid memberships. Need to be a full member that has FBS football.

So you're opposed to Navy?

A little late for that position. That ship has sailed - with midshipmen on board.

(11-14-2013 01:03 AM)Xbones Wrote:  Twelve football teams are required for an AAC Championship game. Why does the American need 12 basketball schools? Why give the AAC critics more fuel for debate? The outgoing and incoming of teams next year will probably be as much change as the conference can absorb. Doesn't the AAC need stability for the time being?

The AAC needs a 12th basketball school because too many of the basketball programs in the league stink.

(11-14-2013 01:20 AM)Xbones Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:07 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:03 AM)Xbones Wrote:  Twelve football teams are required for an AAC Championship game. Why does the American need 12 basketball schools? Why give the AAC critics more fuel for debate? The outgoing and incoming of teams next year will probably be as much change as the conference can absorb. Doesn't the AAC need stability for the time being?

How is adding VCU giving the critics something to debate.

The ESPN and CBS tweeters and bloggers will think of something. "More shake ups in the AAC, formerly Big East". UCONN and Cincy (i.e.) not happy with new member... Big 12 jump is imminent. Why didn't they add WSU? Haven't they learned their lesson about basketball only schools? School Presidents argue about new member? Presidents meeting in Florida again. My examples aren't very good, but the professional critics are much more resourceful.

OTOH, maybe the bloggers and tweeters will be talking about what a great move the conference made to compensate for the loss of Louisville basketball by replacing them with another recent Final Four program.

A couple things to the people talking about ECU...

To sit there and act like we are some subpar team who only got in because everyone else got in ahead of us is BS. The criteria for expansion under marinatto was markets. That's what they wanted. Urban schools in big markets. ECU isn't an urban school in a big market... hence why we got picked behind the big market schools. We could make an argument for why we should be picked over schools that got in ahead of us, or why we shouldn't.... it's really all a matter of what they were looking for. Do you consider UL, UConn, WVU to be vastly inferior to Pitt? By that logic Pitt is way better than UL and the ACC had to become desperate to take Louisville.......I think UL, Uconn and WVU would all have been better adds for the record. I also don't hold anything against the guys who got here before us. It is what it is.


VT and WVU wanted the Pirates in the conference. Heck, WVU has even pitched ECU to the B12. I've also heard that the C7 saw ECU as inferior in hoops and perception (which we were in hoops... but a decent football team could've gone a long way to help out the conference), did not want to travel to Greenville to play basketball and stuck their noses up at us. Some of the schools that now play big boy ball wanted the Pirates, and (according to many on this board, may or may not be my opinion) the C7 will fade into irrelevance......

(11-14-2013 02:40 AM)ncbeta Wrote:  A couple things to the people talking about ECU...

To sit there and act like we are some subpar team who only got in because everyone else got in ahead of us is BS. The criteria for expansion under marinatto was markets. That's what they wanted. Urban schools in big markets. ECU isn't an urban school in a big market... hence why we got picked behind the big market schools. We could make an argument for why we should be picked over schools that got in ahead of us, or why we shouldn't.... it's really all a matter of what they were looking for. Do you consider UL, UConn, WVU to be vastly inferior to Pitt? By that logic Pitt is way better than UL and the ACC had to become desperate to take Louisville.......I think UL, Uconn and WVU would all have been better adds for the record. I also don't hold anything against the guys who got here before us. It is what it is.


VT and WVU wanted the Pirates in the conference. Heck, WVU has even pitched ECU to the B12. I've also heard that the C7 saw ECU as inferior in hoops and perception (which we were in hoops... but a decent football team could've gone a long way to help out the conference), did not want to travel to Greenville to play basketball and stuck their noses up at us. Some of the schools that now play big boy ball wanted the Pirates, and (according to many on this board, may or may not be my opinion) the C7 will fade into irrelevance......

Marinatto did not set the agenda. No commissioner does. If the primary criterion under Marinatto was markets, it's because that's the way the membership wanted it. He was not acting as a lone agent. It was the other football schools who endorsed that approach and eschewed ECU in the process.

ECU was in the unfortunate position of being the 5th school in a market of 10 million to be aspiring to BCS status. The market is overcrowded. California has 4 times the population and doesn't have 5 BCS programs. Florida has double the population and doesn't have 5 BCS programs. Texas has 2 1/2 times the population and just added their 5th BCS program. Five such programs in North Carolina has never made any sense. State with similar populations like Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, and Virginia all have one or two programs, not 4 or 5. The fact that there are so many programs competing within the same market probably has a lot to do with why no school in North Carolina has ever carved out a niche for itself as a big time football program that consistently wins on a high level.

Your comparison with UConn and West Virginia completely ignores the fact that both are flagship programs which dominate their states with no other college or pro competition in state. Each of their markets is the entire state.

The entire 2nd half of your post makes little or no sense in light of the first half. If it was all about markets, then it has nothing to do with the C7. It has to do with markets. That paragraph sounds like sour grapes and scapegoating. Your claim that ECU's football program would have helped the conference makes absolutely no sense in light of the evidence. It wouldn't have kept anyone from leaving. Do you really think that ECU's presence would have kept West Virginia from fleeing to the Big 12? And ECU proved to be no help in getting a lucrative TV contract. That contract stinks.

Your parting shot at the C7 only reveals your bitterness. There is absolutely no evidence that the C7 in the new big East will fade from relevance. All signs point in just the opposite direction:

1. They are now funded better than ever with their new TV contract.
2. Their recruiting for 2014 has been better than it has been in years and is currently ranked in the top 2 or 3 of all conferences.
3. After little success in getting teams to the Final Four in the '90's, there has been a resurgence of basketball only schools to the Final Four in the one-and-done era with conditions primed for such schools to continue to succeed at the highest levels of tournament competition.
4. The C7 has only strengthened their position by adding 3 top tier programs. Word is that they will expand further within the next few years. When they do so, they will have their pick of the strongest basketball first programs out there.

Until Navy is firmly in the AAC, we will not add a non-football member.

Navy bails and stays indy, then we go after an all sports school. You add VCU or WSU now and the above happens, we are stuck with 13 and starting to play the numbers game.

(11-13-2013 08:51 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(11-13-2013 08:50 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(11-13-2013 07:10 PM)spreadandshred Wrote:  to offset Navy in basketball. Has that been batted around by the conference executives since then or is mostly fan talk? I'm all for it fyi.

why? Because they beat Virginia??? LOL big whoop. I know they are ranked but so what.

VCU is no "flash in the pan"

Understood but Old Dominion, Charlotte, or UTSA may be a better match in the future. There is no reason to expand at this time.