Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
Author Message
EerMeNow Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,747
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 100
I Root For: WVU
Location:
Post: #21
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 03:07 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 03:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 01:51 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 01:45 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 05:22 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  It was Louisville leaving, not Tulane joining. If Aresco & Co had brought in some other FBS school, or delayed bringing in anyone, it wouldn't have made any difference.

Without Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt, Notre Dame and West Virginia, the hybrid wasn't worth it.

I would remove Louisville and West Virginia from this list.

Louisville is and was a basketball power and an asset to a basketball league. West Virginia got I think 6 bids in the last 10 years of the league. They weren't a pillar of the conference, but they contributed more than my Johnnies lately.


They certainly did contribute to the basketball reputation of the conference, but that does not seem to be the factor that dictates these types of decisions.....so I guess I respectfully disagree.

Well, Notre Dame didn't play football in the Big East, so I don't know how "Without Syracuse, Notre Dame and Pitt, the hybrid wasn't worth it" makes sense if you're talking football.


Cultural differences. Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Pitt are private or semi-private institutions with higher admissions requirements than the other two. It doesn't have anything to do with football or basketball.
03-08-2014 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #22
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 03:38 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 03:07 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 03:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 01:51 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 01:45 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  I would remove Louisville and West Virginia from this list.

Louisville is and was a basketball power and an asset to a basketball league. West Virginia got I think 6 bids in the last 10 years of the league. They weren't a pillar of the conference, but they contributed more than my Johnnies lately.


They certainly did contribute to the basketball reputation of the conference, but that does not seem to be the factor that dictates these types of decisions.....so I guess I respectfully disagree.

Well, Notre Dame didn't play football in the Big East, so I don't know how "Without Syracuse, Notre Dame and Pitt, the hybrid wasn't worth it" makes sense if you're talking football.


Cultural differences. Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Pitt are private or semi-private institutions with higher admissions requirements than the other two. It doesn't have anything to do with football or basketball.

OK. But in the case of the Big East, there was a specific culture. UConn was an original member. Rutgers and Temple were Plan A. The culture and history of the league were about basketball.

The record shows that the C-7 only split after Louisville was on the way out, following Syracuse (and Pitt, Notre Dame and West Virginia, and also Rutgers). As long as the "football schools" were a visibly stronger basketball group than the basketball schools, the C-7 stayed.
(This post was last modified: 03-08-2014 03:54 PM by johnbragg.)
03-08-2014 03:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrojanCampaign Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,693
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 170
I Root For: USC, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #23
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
I still laugh at the whole irony of this situation. The C7 split off from the AAC because they wanted to remain a basketball power.

In it's first year of existence half the conference is ranked right now and all five are expected to make the big dance.

Two Big East teams are ranked right now and will get three unless a lot of conference 1 seeds win tourneys.
03-08-2014 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
hoops22 Offline
Banned

Posts: 288
Joined: Nov 2011
I Root For: big east
Location:
Post: #24
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 04:18 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I still laugh at the whole irony of this situation. The C7 split off from the AAC because they wanted to remain a basketball power.

In it's first year of existence half the conference is ranked right now and all five are expected to make the big dance.

Two Big East teams are ranked right now and will get three unless a lot of conference 1 seeds win tourneys.

The irony of the situation? The basketball schools decided to leave after Louisville announced they were going. That means that next year they will be left with UCONN, Cincy, Memphis, SMU, and 7 other schools with an average RPI close to 200. Not to mention UCONN and Cinci are the only two schools the C7 have a history with and care anything about, and both of those schools have made no secret of the fact they're doing everything they possibly can to get out too. Yeah, it's crazy the C7 didn't want to stick around for that situation, and for a lot less money to boot.
03-08-2014 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearcats#1 Offline
Ad nauseam King
*

Posts: 45,310
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 1224
I Root For: Pony94
Location: In your head.
Post: #25
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
I admit I miss being in a conference with Gtown, Marquette, and Nova. The others not so much.
03-08-2014 04:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrojanCampaign Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,693
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 170
I Root For: USC, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #26
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 04:41 PM)hoops22 Wrote:  
(03-08-2014 04:18 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I still laugh at the whole irony of this situation. The C7 split off from the AAC because they wanted to remain a basketball power.

In it's first year of existence half the conference is ranked right now and all five are expected to make the big dance.

Two Big East teams are ranked right now and will get three unless a lot of conference 1 seeds win tourneys.

The irony of the situation? The basketball schools decided to leave after Louisville announced they were going. That means that next year they will be left with UCONN, Cincy, Memphis, SMU, and 7 other schools with an average RPI close to 200. Not to mention UCONN and Cinci are the only two schools the C7 have a history with and care anything about, and both of those schools have made no secret of the fact they're doing everything they possibly can to get out too. Yeah, it's crazy the C7 didn't want to stick around for that situation, and for a lot less money to boot.

Thank you for pointing out the irony of the situation. Which is you made an assumption and were wrong. You don't know what the RPI of these teams will be because CUSA was holding a lot of the programs back.

It's not coincidence that when these programs have left or announced they were leaving CUSA their athletic programs magically got better. I can actually write these four ridiculous sentences.

Tulane went to a bowl game.
SMU has a top 25 mens basketball team.
UCF won a BCS bowl and finished in the top 10.
Tulsa just won a CUSA mens basketball title.
(This post was last modified: 03-08-2014 05:03 PM by TrojanCampaign.)
03-08-2014 04:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,111
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #27
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 03:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  They certainly did contribute to the basketball reputation of the conference, but that does not seem to be the factor that dictates these types of decisions.....so I guess I respectfully disagree.
The fact that the Bball reputation does not drive these type of decisions is a pretty good summary of why the C7 left. There was nothing that the Big East could have done to prevent Louisville from going to theACC if invited, but the decision of which team to invite among those available was in the Big East's hands, and from the C7 perspective absolutely nothing about that decision took any account of their interests.

From that perspective, the reporting ~ not just forum guesswork ~ that the Tulane add was what pushed them over the edge does make a certain amount of sense. Not just that the conference took a hit as a Bball power, but that shoring up the conference's strength as a Bball power was not a priority.

Now, the American may have five bids to three this year, but one of the five is heading out the door, while the New Big East still has two more spots to fill, and the inside track at #11 seems like it'll be dancing as well, this year.

But more important than that to the C7 over the long term is that Bball is the top priority in their conference, and won't have to be surrendered in pursuit of FB status.
03-08-2014 08:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,110
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 499
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #28
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
The New BE will become the a10 over time. The American will remain a power conf. Why lift them up??
03-09-2014 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #29
New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 04:28 AM)goofus Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 09:42 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 09:37 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 07:49 AM)goofus Wrote:  The C7 did not decide to split until Louisville announced they were leaving and Tulane was invited as a replacement. So the final moves that made the C7 bolt will not actually be done until next year.
You make it seem as if the Louisville/Tulane announcements Were "the final moves" that made the C7 bolt, which was (of course) not the case.

correlation =/= causation.

It had less to do with Tulane and more to do with the fact that FOX was desperate for quality hoops content on FS1 and paid them 2-3 times their estimated AAC payout. 4 million was the reason, not the Wave or Pirates.

I see the attempts at revising history are already well under way. Call it what you want, but it was the Tulane addition that finally made the C7 go, do we really still want to be associated with these schools? What do we really have in common? Granted it was a long time coming, but up until Tulane, there was always enough mutual interest there to stay together. FS1 just came along and confirmed what they were already thinking. Its just not worth it to stay together anymore.

Follow the money. 4 million for a league with a pure hoops focus vs 1.5 million for one where stability isn't assured. It isn't hard to figure out.

Louisville or Tulane, c7 were going to leave when the money came in.
03-09-2014 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #30
New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-08-2014 10:38 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 09:42 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 09:37 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 07:49 AM)goofus Wrote:  The C7 did not decide to split until Louisville announced they were leaving and Tulane was invited as a replacement. So the final moves that made the C7 bolt will not actually be done until next year.
You make it seem as if the Louisville/Tulane announcements Were "the final moves" that made the C7 bolt, which was (of course) not the case.

correlation =/= causation.

It had less to do with Tulane and more to do with the fact that FOX was desperate for quality hoops content on FS1 and paid them 2-3 times their estimated AAC payout. 4 million was the reason, not the Wave or Pirates.

Grossly overpaid or not?

C7 got a higher deal than ESPN would offer but "overpaid" implies different things. Fox clearly thought they were worth it but paid more than they would have had they had a couple leagues under contract already.
03-09-2014 02:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,111
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #31
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-09-2014 09:19 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The New BE will become the a10 over time. The American will remain a power conf.
Both of those are possible. However, neither of those are sure things, especially given that the trajectory of The American is to take a step down from this year, while the possibility exists for the New Big East to take a step up.

Quote: Why lift them up??
In order to answer the question, it would have to be clear who it is that is or is not lifting whom up? Hard to nut out motives when the actor and the object of their action is left entirely ambiguous.
03-09-2014 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #32
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-07-2014 09:37 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  
(03-07-2014 07:49 AM)goofus Wrote:  The C7 did not decide to split until Louisville announced they were leaving and Tulane was invited as a replacement. So the final moves that made the C7 bolt will not actually be done until next year.
You make it seem as if the Louisville/Tulane announcements Were "the final moves" that made the C7 bolt, which was (of course) not the case.

correlation =/= causation.

That was one of the straws that broke the camel's back. However, there were many, many more straws that ranged from outside factors (Fox Sports' desire to start a new channel), to internal factors (every add except for possibly Memphis)?

IMHO, the split was more about losing UL than gaining Tulane anyway. I know there were negative comments made about TU by Marq's AD, but how upset could the C7 possibly have been at the prospect of playing games against a great academic institution that just so happens to be located in a major Catholic city.
(This post was last modified: 03-10-2014 12:00 AM by nzmorange.)
03-10-2014 12:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,111
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #33
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-10-2014 12:00 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  IMHO, the split was more about losing UL than gaining Tulane anyway. I know there were negative comments made about TU by Marq's AD, but how upset could the C7 possibly have been at the prospect of playing games against a great academic institution that just so happens to be located in a major Catholic city.
I wouldn't be surprised if that exact spin was put on the move, and any C7 President who bought that spin while foolishly assuming that their AD's had checked off on the move would have arrived back to campus to have their AD's chew their ears off about how Tulane would be a drag in the new alignment.

When talking about what was the straw that broke the camel's back, remember that the move had to be unanimous, so it only has to move one or a few if that is the last one or a few not yet convinced.
03-10-2014 12:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IceJus10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,152
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 90
I Root For: Sports
Location: New York
Post: #34
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
People blame Tulane, because that was the last move before the C-7 announced, however, the Tulane addition was a UNANIMOUS addition and brought the academic/private side the Catholics wanted to counter the bigger lesser public members.

Louisville and TV money drop from that move was the final straw... not the addition of Tulane - they're just the scapegoat, especially when Fox was willing to throw money at them.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2014 09:23 AM by IceJus10.)
03-11-2014 09:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
prp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 463
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Tartans!
Location:
Post: #35
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
I wonder how big a factor Notre Dame was. Could a Big East without Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, WVU and Rutgers have prevented the split if they still had Notre Dame? I think yes. Losing Notre Dame was a bigger single blow to the C7 than any other school except maybe Syracuse.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2014 09:44 AM by prp.)
03-11-2014 09:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,111
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #36
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-11-2014 09:22 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  People blame Tulane, because that was the last move before the C-7 announced, however, the Tulane addition was a UNANIMOUS addition and brought the academic/private side the Catholics wanted to counter the bigger lesser public members.

Unanimous among the Presidents at the Old Big East meeting ... the reporting after that was that the C7 Presidents were suprised by their Athletic Director's reactions to the move, assuming that the Conference Commissioner would have assured that the sports side was OK before bringing it to the Presidents. As SI reported shortly after that:
Quote:Aresco's biggest blunder was moving too fast on adding Tulane, which alienated the Catholic school athletic directors. Aresco went through the league's presidents, who found Tulane an attractive option because it's an elite academic school. The lack of conversations with athletic directors hurt Aresco's credibility and exposed his inexperience with dealing with the complicated political dynamics of conferences. The addition of Tulane helped kickstart the basketball movement, with the irony being that the basketball crowd in the Big East pushed for Aresco's hire.
03-11-2014 12:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,240
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #37
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
it seems so strange Tuesday of tourney week and there's no BET games going on today at all.
03-11-2014 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rich52c Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 848
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Uconn
Location:
Post: #38
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-11-2014 12:45 PM)stever20 Wrote:  it seems so strange Tuesday of tourney week and there's no BET games going on today at all.

Clearly the C7 made a bad move.
Likely the attendance at the BE tournament at MSG will be a fraction of what it was.They likely be pushed out by the B10 and ACC tournaments in alternating years.

The AAC with the C7 would have been a top bb conference.The C7 is a version of the A10.The AAC could have grown its football .Possibly Army would have joined and some MWC teams would be football only members.
03-11-2014 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,299
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 446
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #39
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-07-2014 09:32 AM)Maize Wrote:  Not even a contest...the American will get better ratings, have better matchups and will have more NCAA Teams...07-coffee3

Never underestimate the love the selection committee has for Big East teams with double digit losses.
03-11-2014 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,111
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #40
RE: New Big East vs Old Big East remnants Challenge
(03-11-2014 01:06 PM)Rich52c Wrote:  [quote='stever20' pid='10528080' dateline='1394559921'] Clearly the C7 made a bad move.
Likely the attendance at the BE tournament at MSG will be a fraction of what it was.They likely be pushed out by the B10 and ACC tournaments in alternating years.

If the most seious threat to the New Big East in return for triple the broadcast money per team is that the Big Ten and ACC willboth decide to do what either is highly unlikely to want to do ... play in NYC every second year ... then that is not much risk at all for the extra money.

Its true theyv've got substantially fewer tournament games, going from 13 to 9, but when they make up their mind on expansion, they'll be back to an 11 game tournament.

And with 2 locks and 4 teams on the bubble, the odds are high that even if one or two of their bubble teams stumbling in the tourney, it will be to the benefit of other bubble teams ... including:
(03-11-2014 05:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Never underestimate the love the selection committee has for Big East teams with double digit losses.
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2014 10:53 AM by BruceMcF.)
03-11-2014 10:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.