Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Creighton and the Big East
Author Message
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 11:22 AM)john01992 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 10:53 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 10:21 AM)john01992 Wrote:  the writing has been on the wall for quite awhile. in this day in age you need the wealth/exposure that football brings to be competitive in basketball.

in the last 20 years only 2 schools have made the ncaa title game without having an FBS team (uconn & butler).

on top we have seen umass/uconn move up and nova tried to move up as well.

the (new) big east is part of a dying breed and the only thing the C7 accomplished in the past 15-20 years with the big east was delaying what will be their inevitable downfall.

I disagree. Assuming you can make up for some of the budget elsewhere they will still be fine. Their athletic budgets are in the 20-30mm ranges even before the FOX deal starts paying them 4 million each. That kind of budget is right behind where the middle tier of the AAC & MWC are WITH football. The C7 will be fine enough financially IMO.

imo i think what it comes down to is the exposure. that is ultimately what drives recruiting & donations and that's will the biggest sting will come from.

schools like gtown/nova will be able to survive. but the rest of the non BB schools are going to get absolutely crushed. and if gtown/nova keep losing their exposure with FS1 they too will fall on hard times.

Take a couple years before writing FS1 off. The exposure will be fine. Year 1 is never a good way to judge it with a startup.
03-24-2014 11:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #22
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 11:41 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:22 AM)john01992 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 10:53 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 10:21 AM)john01992 Wrote:  the writing has been on the wall for quite awhile. in this day in age you need the wealth/exposure that football brings to be competitive in basketball.

in the last 20 years only 2 schools have made the ncaa title game without having an FBS team (uconn & butler).

on top we have seen umass/uconn move up and nova tried to move up as well.

the (new) big east is part of a dying breed and the only thing the C7 accomplished in the past 15-20 years with the big east was delaying what will be their inevitable downfall.

I disagree. Assuming you can make up for some of the budget elsewhere they will still be fine. Their athletic budgets are in the 20-30mm ranges even before the FOX deal starts paying them 4 million each. That kind of budget is right behind where the middle tier of the AAC & MWC are WITH football. The C7 will be fine enough financially IMO.

imo i think what it comes down to is the exposure. that is ultimately what drives recruiting & donations and that's will the biggest sting will come from.

schools like gtown/nova will be able to survive. but the rest of the non BB schools are going to get absolutely crushed. and if gtown/nova keep losing their exposure with FS1 they too will fall on hard times.

Take a couple years before writing FS1 off. The exposure will be fine. Year 1 is never a good way to judge it with a startup.

oh i agree one year is a time frame to judge.

but no matter what FS1 will never be ESPN level anytime soon and on top of that fox has shown an incompetence when it comes to running FS1 and trying to make it successful.
03-24-2014 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,098
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Creighton and the Big East
However, Dayton beat OSU and Syracuse, which with equal empirical rigor "proves" that being a private school with an FCS football team makes you superior in BBall to both public and private schools with FBS teams.

Unless the original argument is an exercise in already having a conclusion in mind and cherry picking events that match the conclusion. In which case the two Dayton wins prove nothing, because they will not be among the cherries that are picked.
03-24-2014 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,327
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1209
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #24
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 11:08 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Bullet what Wedge is referring to is that you are using a one game separator. The other difference is they played less games to get that far in the time frame separated. In the NCAA tournament, outside of champions, the Final Four is typically used as the barometer. And using that barometer, there isn't a drastic difference in how far teams without football teams have fared.

First, I believe Memphis played in the championship game in 2008 and Utah in 1998. Neither played football in a BCS conference at the time. But I agree that using the championship game only is distorting. Over the last 20 years, 37 different schools went to the Final Four. Ten of them were not playing football for a BCS conference at the time.
03-24-2014 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #25
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 11:25 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:08 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Bullet what Wedge is referring to is that you are using a one game separator. The other difference is they played less games to get that far in the time frame separated. In the NCAA tournament, outside of champions, the Final Four is typically used as the barometer. And using that barometer, there isn't a drastic difference in how far teams without football teams have fared.

There is quite a difference post Tarkanian. There have only been 15 non-P5 schools in 23 years since 1991 and only 9 not FBS (I'm counting UConn as FBS all 4 years before you get nit-picky).
UConn-4
Memphis
Cincinnati
Marquette
Villanova
Georgetown
Butler-2
Wichita St.
VCU
UMass
George Mason

That is almost 1/5 of the appearances in that time frame, despite those schools, and their conferences, not making up 1/5 of the schools in the top 60 or 70 in budget. If anything that more or less refutes the case. It's also worth noting that all of the above are not housed in the three non P5 conferences that are more or less intertwined with each others in the AAC, the Big East, and the A10.

Compare that to anything but the current/future ACC and the SEC, and you get favorable comparison to any power conference in terms of title wins and/or Final Fours in that time frame (actually of all conferences, the SEC is probably the most successful in that time frame with 6 titles, and a host of Final Fours from UK, FLA, Ark, LSU, and Miss St).
03-24-2014 12:09 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #26
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:07 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:08 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Bullet what Wedge is referring to is that you are using a one game separator. The other difference is they played less games to get that far in the time frame separated. In the NCAA tournament, outside of champions, the Final Four is typically used as the barometer. And using that barometer, there isn't a drastic difference in how far teams without football teams have fared.

First, I believe Memphis played in the championship game in 2008 and Utah in 1998. Neither played football in a BCS conference at the time. But I agree that using the championship game only is distorting. Over the last 20 years, 37 different schools went to the Final Four. Ten of them were not playing football for a BCS conference at the time.

and of those 10 how many did not belong to an FBS conference???
(This post was last modified: 03-24-2014 12:16 PM by john01992.)
03-24-2014 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #27
RE: Creighton and the Big East
Well you are also changing your argument. My contention was when you said this:

(03-24-2014 10:21 AM)john01992 Wrote:  the writing has been on the wall for quite awhile. in this day in age you need the wealth/exposure that football brings to be competitive in basketball.

in the last 20 years only 2 schools have made the ncaa title game without having an FBS team (uconn & butler).

That is not the case you are NOW trying to make :strithepot:
03-24-2014 12:20 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #28
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:20 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Well you are also changing your argument. My contention was when you said this:

(03-24-2014 10:21 AM)john01992 Wrote:  the writing has been on the wall for quite awhile. in this day in age you need the wealth/exposure that football brings to be competitive in basketball.

in the last 20 years only 2 schools have made the ncaa title game without having an FBS team (uconn & butler).

That is not the case you are NOW trying to make :strithepot:

how am i changing my argument? point still stands. in this day & age your brand/exposure/wealth is tied to football
03-24-2014 12:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #29
RE: Creighton and the Big East
Because now you are saying it is not about having football, and the money football generates, but are now saying it is about the conference you are in and the exposure you are getting from it.
03-24-2014 12:29 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #30
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:25 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:08 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Bullet what Wedge is referring to is that you are using a one game separator. The other difference is they played less games to get that far in the time frame separated. In the NCAA tournament, outside of champions, the Final Four is typically used as the barometer. And using that barometer, there isn't a drastic difference in how far teams without football teams have fared.

There is quite a difference post Tarkanian. There have only been 15 non-P5 schools in 23 years since 1991 and only 9 not FBS (I'm counting UConn as FBS all 4 years before you get nit-picky).
UConn-4
Memphis
Cincinnati
Marquette
Villanova
Georgetown
Butler-2
Wichita St.
VCU
UMass
George Mason

That is almost 1/5 of the appearances in that time frame, despite those schools, and their conferences, not making up 1/5 of the schools in the top 60 or 70 in budget. If anything that more or less refutes the case. It's also worth noting that all of the above are not housed in the three non P5 conferences that are more or less intertwined with each others in the AAC, the Big East, and the A10.

Compare that to anything but the current/future ACC and the SEC, and you get favorable comparison to any power conference in terms of title wins and/or Final Fours in that time frame (actually of all conferences, the SEC is probably the most successful in that time frame with 6 titles, and a host of Final Fours from UK, FLA, Ark, LSU, and Miss St).

88 final four bids since 1991. 15/88 is 17% and that is a figure that includes all 4 of uconns FFs. it is a freaking joke to say the number is "almost 1/5th"
03-24-2014 12:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #31
RE: Creighton and the Big East
perhaps you study math a little better. 17% is almost 1/5, or 20%. A full 20% would have been 17. As I said, "almost" 20%. And that doesn't even count schools like Duke or Indiana who has a football program in name only and makes no money from it. For example.
(This post was last modified: 03-24-2014 12:37 PM by adcorbett.)
03-24-2014 12:35 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:09 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:25 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:08 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Bullet what Wedge is referring to is that you are using a one game separator. The other difference is they played less games to get that far in the time frame separated. In the NCAA tournament, outside of champions, the Final Four is typically used as the barometer. And using that barometer, there isn't a drastic difference in how far teams without football teams have fared.

There is quite a difference post Tarkanian. There have only been 15 non-P5 schools in 23 years since 1991 and only 9 not FBS (I'm counting UConn as FBS all 4 years before you get nit-picky).
UConn-4
Memphis
Cincinnati
Marquette
Villanova
Georgetown
Butler-2
Wichita St.
VCU
UMass
George Mason

That is almost 1/5 of the appearances in that time frame, despite those schools, and their conferences, not making up 1/5 of the schools in the top 60 or 70 in budget. If anything that more or less refutes the case. It's also worth noting that all of the above are not housed in the three non P5 conferences that are more or less intertwined with each others in the AAC, the Big East, and the A10.

Compare that to anything but the current/future ACC and the SEC, and you get favorable comparison to any power conference in terms of title wins and/or Final Fours in that time frame (actually of all conferences, the SEC is probably the most successful in that time frame with 6 titles, and a host of Final Fours from UK, FLA, Ark, LSU, and Miss St).

And it was close to 1/3 before that. And 3 of those 15 were in one fluky year when we had a bunch of low seeds get in the final 4. The budget is exactly the point. It makes more of a difference than it used to. The only thing maybe working the other way is the one and done. The players at say, Creighton or Wichita St., seem more likely to stay longer.

By decade based on current conferences:
60s P5-26, FBS-7, No football or lower division-7
70s P5-26, FBS-4, No football or lower division-10
80s P5-28, FBS-5, No football or lower division-7
90s P5-35, FBS-5 (UNLV and UConn were 4 of 5), No football/lower-0
00s P5-35, FBS-2, No football or lower-3

Its running higher so far this decade, but the long term trend has been clear. The question is whether the non P5 and non-FBS programs can reverse it or if it starts to get even worse.
03-24-2014 12:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #33
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:35 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  perhaps you study math a little better. 17% is almost 1/5, or 20%.

like i said you are stretching just trying to pass off 17% as "close enough" to 20% using a figure which includes ALL the uconn FFs.

and on top of that you are including quette, nova & gtown all of which were members of FBS conferences which also defeats the purpose.

if you have to make so many stretches like that to prove a point......it's pretty clear that your point is wrong.
03-24-2014 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Creighton and the Big East
The ESPN promotion of the label of mid-major IMO has been a negative for those schools. In addition, the MWC, WAC and old CUSA, which were considered major, started to be called mid-major as well, largely because of the BCS.
03-24-2014 12:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #35
RE: Creighton and the Big East
Having a football team is mostly irrelevant to it, other than the fact that the schools with the larger budgets also have football programs. But it's not because they have football. In come cases, the success of football harms the basketball program (how many times has Billy Donovan almost left Florida now?). Of course it should be noted that the inverse is true (harder to be successful at football if your fanbase is more into basketball. Remembering that basketball generally operates on a much smaller budget than football, a school without a football team can more than hold its own with their football equivalents. But that more or less limits it to schools in the Big East (for now) because they are the non-football schools with the biggest budgets. There are a few others around (Gonzaga, WSU, VCU) who have big budgets, but by and large those ten schools have the same basketball budgets and more or less the same basketball exposure opportunities as any P5 school. Some AAC schools also have this advantage, but really need the rest of the league to step up the investment so the league is considered someone balanced top to bottom.

The MWC has no hope for that (top to bottom investments/exposure), even if their best teams have P5 budgets.
03-24-2014 12:44 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #36
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  if you have to make so many stretches like that to prove a point......it's pretty clear that your point is wrong.

And if you have to change your point, it is completely clear you are wrong. I pointed out the very quote I was responding to, the one you said you never changed. Right after you changed it.. again. Seeing as how I said "almost" 1/5, that is not a stretch. Closer to 1/5 than 1/10. Would 1/6th be better? Just doesn't roll off the toungue. However unlike you, I did not have to change my point. You specifically said it was the money of football that makes it. Now you changed it to the exposure of the conference.

Now who is stretching again? 03-phew
03-24-2014 12:46 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #37
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  The ESPN promotion of the label of mid-major IMO has been a negative for those schools. In addition, the MWC, WAC and old CUSA, which were considered major, started to be called mid-major as well, largely because of the BCS.

In fairness, before the BCS actually came to be, when CUSA was formed, the old CUSA was often referred to as mid-major. Sometimes they would refer to the 8 power conferences (the 6 future BCS conferences, CUSA, and A10) when doing power ratings, but we were still often referred to as a mid major league, even if some of the teams were never directly called midmajor.

"Mid-Major" was actually replaced by "Non-BCS" when the BCS came into the picture.
03-24-2014 12:49 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rube Dali Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,018
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 46
I Root For: UST, BSU, Minn
Location: Maplewood, MN
Post: #38
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  The ESPN promotion of the label of mid-major IMO has been a negative for those schools. In addition, the MWC, WAC and old CUSA, which were considered major, started to be called mid-major as well, largely because of the BCS.

This. +1
03-24-2014 02:09 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: #39
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 11:47 AM)john01992 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:41 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 11:22 AM)john01992 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 10:53 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(03-24-2014 10:21 AM)john01992 Wrote:  the writing has been on the wall for quite awhile. in this day in age you need the wealth/exposure that football brings to be competitive in basketball.

in the last 20 years only 2 schools have made the ncaa title game without having an FBS team (uconn & butler).

on top we have seen umass/uconn move up and nova tried to move up as well.

the (new) big east is part of a dying breed and the only thing the C7 accomplished in the past 15-20 years with the big east was delaying what will be their inevitable downfall.

I disagree. Assuming you can make up for some of the budget elsewhere they will still be fine. Their athletic budgets are in the 20-30mm ranges even before the FOX deal starts paying them 4 million each. That kind of budget is right behind where the middle tier of the AAC & MWC are WITH football. The C7 will be fine enough financially IMO.

imo i think what it comes down to is the exposure. that is ultimately what drives recruiting & donations and that's will the biggest sting will come from.

schools like gtown/nova will be able to survive. but the rest of the non BB schools are going to get absolutely crushed. and if gtown/nova keep losing their exposure with FS1 they too will fall on hard times.

Take a couple years before writing FS1 off. The exposure will be fine. Year 1 is never a good way to judge it with a startup.

oh i agree one year is a time frame to judge.

but no matter what FS1 will never be ESPN level anytime soon and on top of that fox has shown an incompetence when it comes to running FS1 and trying to make it successful.

1 year.... give it time. With the PAC and the Big East signed on they will have enough March-relevant teams drawing eyeballs to them over time.
03-24-2014 04:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrazyPaco Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,944
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 275
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Creighton and the Big East
(03-24-2014 12:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  The ESPN promotion of the label of mid-major IMO has been a negative for those schools. In addition, the MWC, WAC and old CUSA, which were considered major, started to be called mid-major as well, largely because of the BCS.

MWC, WAC, and CUSA were never considered major conferences.
03-24-2014 04:27 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.