(09-11-2015 06:22 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 05:33 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Why would ESPN say anything about a FOX League ? Who still watches anyway ?

So Fox will keep overpaying them while only15,000 people watch?

1. Again, the author's got a job to do. Gotta write something.
2. Contract runs for 10 more years, so yeah.

(09-11-2015 06:52 AM)Jet915 Wrote:  Big East TV schedule was just released and there will be 12 games televised on Big Fox and 3 on CBS. Not sure many conferences can say they have that many games on network tv. While moving these games from FS1 to Fox might hurt FS1 ratings, I dont think the Big East will complain....

This was the sort of thing the NEw Big East dreamers were talking about when they wanted to leave ESPN for NBC and be someone's golden-boy conference. (It works better if you have fanbases).

(09-11-2015 07:36 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The BE has only one direction to go in. Down. The AAC can go down sideways or up. My guess is up.

No, the Big EAst could go up, with tournament success to match regular-season metrics and numbers of bids, etc. OR continued lack of success on the biggest stage could drag us down.

(09-11-2015 08:14 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I'm not sure why anyone is surprised that the Big East is still performing well.

Because, to a lot of people, football is everything in college sports. So the idea that a major college sports fanbase can exist based on something other than football is foreign.

(09-11-2015 09:37 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  If the American is just behind the P5 and BE, then why don't they average more NCAA bids than the other G5 conferences? The Atlantic-10 averaged more bids in the NCAA Tournament (A-10 - 4.5 bids, American - 3 bids) than the AAC over the past two years. Last year, the American had fewer bids than the Missouri Valley, the Atlantic-10 and the Mountain West conferences.

Look, no one is denying the history of such programs like UConn, Memphis, Cincinnati or Temple in the AAC - but, if the AAC is such a good basketball conference (and I'll gladly point to the fact that one of its programs won an NCAA Championship in 2014) then why don't they get teams into the NCAA Tournament?

Couldn't I ask if the Big East is such a good basketball conference, then why haven't they had success in the tournament?

You seem awfully anxious to declare the Big East better than the AAC. I'd again recommend not jumping to conclusions based on 2 years.

Saying "The Big East is a Major Conference" has absolutely NO bearing on "The American." it really doesn't. I don't know why people feel the compulsion to make the connection and the comparison but they do.

The Big East is NOT "The American" nor is "The American" the Big East. They are separate animals.

(09-11-2015 10:01 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Saying "The Big East is a Major Conference" has absolutely NO bearing on "The American." it really doesn't. I don't know why people feel the compulsion to make the connection and the comparison but they do.

The Big East is NOT "The American" nor is "The American" the Big East. They are separate animals.

Yea, I agree with this. Every time the "Big East" is mentioned, it ends up being an AAC/Big East pissing match. There are a lot of people on this board that always want to discredit the BE at every opportunity. Yes we got it, no one is watching FS1, Fox overpaid the BE, the BE is a shell of its former self, they are not as good as the AAC, Hoops is irrelevant, Football drives the bus...that about cover it?

(09-11-2015 11:01 AM)ivet Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 10:01 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Saying "The Big East is a Major Conference" has absolutely NO bearing on "The American." it really doesn't. I don't know why people feel the compulsion to make the connection and the comparison but they do.

The Big East is NOT "The American" nor is "The American" the Big East. They are separate animals.

Yea, I agree with this. Every time the "Big East" is mentioned, it ends up being an AAC/Big East pissing match. There are a lot of people on this board that always want to discredit the BE at every opportunity. Yes we got it, no one is watching FS1, Fox overpaid the BE, the BE is a shell of its former self, they are not as good as the AAC, Hoops is irrelevant, Football drives the bus...that about cover it?

It's both ways though. A lot of BE folks want to discredit the AAC at every opportunity.

The fact is, the Big East should be wanting the AAC to do well. The more non P5 teams doing well, the better it is.

Why are we talking about this in Week 2 of the FBS football season? The Big East is completely irrelevant this time of year. Start up the discussion again in mid-January.

(09-11-2015 11:08 AM)YNot Wrote:  Why are we talking about this in Week 2 of the FBS football season? The Big East is completely irrelevant this time of year. Start up the discussion again in mid-January.

Practically every post is football related. Do you write in every post that's not college football related and complain?

Honestly If the BE and AAC were to get Back together, That Conference combined as Big East again would rival just about any other one in Basketball and go much farther in the overall image as a power conference in all other sports. Strength in numbers. But that will never happen.

(09-11-2015 11:08 AM)YNot Wrote:  Why are we talking about this in Week 2 of the FBS football season? The Big East is completely irrelevant this time of year. Start up the discussion again in mid-January.

Someone posted an ESPN article. Living in New York, I can go years without hearing people talk about college football. I only started following it the past few years because of all the realignment stuff.

The American has a few good bbabll programs, but most of the programs have little fan support and clearly fall into the mid-major catagory. Clearly, Memphis, UConn and UC are major programs. However, those 3 drew 51% of the fans that attended AAC games. They drew over 600,000 of the 1.2 million fans which attended AAC games last year. Put it another way, they 8 non-major teams in AAC combined drew less fans that 3 teams that finished 8, 9 and 10 in the Big East (DePaul, Creighton and Marquette). UM-Eastern Shore outdrew Tulane last year. Weber State outdrew USF and Houston combined by 700 fans per game. In fact, D2 Northern State outdrew USF (albeit, by a single fan per game).

BBall is more about programs than conferences. A school like Gonzaga is a considered a major, even though it plays in the WCC. Clearly, Memphis, UConn and UC are major programs. But the rest of schools are firmly in the mid-major category. Except for SMU which about to get the wrath of the NCAA again for cheating, the other schools outside the big 3 in the AAC struggle to get a single top 100 recruit, unless its a kid that has some tie to the school or a kid that nobody wants for personal issues.

While the BE hasn't has much tourney success lately, but they are being paid like a major, they have consistently been rated as one of the top 5 conferences in the country on the court, and the conference's average attendance is in the top five. Plus, the schools in the BE also spend as much or more than the schools in the other 5 major conferences and have held their own recruiting too. But for the cesspool at DePaul, which is taking steps to rebuild the program with the new arena, you have to consider the other 9 programs as solid major basketball schools.

(09-11-2015 11:03 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 11:01 AM)ivet Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 10:01 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Saying "The Big East is a Major Conference" has absolutely NO bearing on "The American." it really doesn't. I don't know why people feel the compulsion to make the connection and the comparison but they do.

The Big East is NOT "The American" nor is "The American" the Big East. They are separate animals.

Yea, I agree with this. Every time the "Big East" is mentioned, it ends up being an AAC/Big East pissing match. There are a lot of people on this board that always want to discredit the BE at every opportunity. Yes we got it, no one is watching FS1, Fox overpaid the BE, the BE is a shell of its former self, they are not as good as the AAC, Hoops is irrelevant, Football drives the bus...that about cover it?

It's both ways though. A lot of BE folks want to discredit the AAC at every opportunity.

The fact is, the Big East should be wanting the AAC to do well. The more non P5 teams doing well, the better it is.

We're coming out of a couple of years of hot-and-heavy realignment news and speculation, a messy courtship/engagement that ended in dashed illusions and a nasty breakup. So yeah, a lot of Big East fans want the AAC to fail and vice versa.

The reality is, if we start winning in the Tournament in line with our RPI and Ken Pom and number of bids etc, we're a major conference.

If we don't keep posting Tournament skins on the wall--Sweet 16s, Final Fours--it's an open question whether the Big East is still a big-time conference, and if you're not a big-time conference that makes recruiting harder, and the RPI and KEn Pom etc go down, and the number of bids follows.

The top half of the AAC is in that situation--UConn is big time, Memphis is big time, LArry Brown is big time, etc. But the conference as a whole is not.

What we don't know about the AAC is do ECU, Tulane, USF etc come up to the level of Temple, Cincinatti, UConn etc or vice versa.

(09-11-2015 11:39 AM)MU88 Wrote:  The American has a few good bbabll programs, but most of the programs have little fan support and clearly fall into the mid-major catagory. Clearly, Memphis, UConn and UC are major programs. However, those 3 drew 51% of the fans that attended AAC games. They drew over 600,000 of the 1.2 million fans which attended AAC games last year. Put it another way, they 8 non-major teams in AAC combined drew less fans that 3 teams that finished 8, 9 and 10 in the Big East (DePaul, Creighton and Marquette). UM-Eastern Shore outdrew Tulane last year. Weber State outdrew USF and Houston combined by 700 fans per game. In fact, D2 Northern State outdrew USF (albeit, by a single fan per game).

BBall is more about programs than conferences. A school like Gonzaga is a considered a major, even though it plays in the WCC. Clearly, Memphis, UConn and UC are major programs. But the rest of schools are firmly in the mid-major category. Except for SMU which about to get the wrath of the NCAA again for cheating, the other schools outside the big 3 in the AAC struggle to get a single top 100 recruit, unless its a kid that has some tie to the school or a kid that nobody wants for personal issues.

While the BE hasn't has much tourney success lately, but they are being paid like a major, they have consistently been rated as one of the top 5 conferences in the country on the court, and the conference's average attendance is in the top five. Plus, the schools in the BE also spend as much or more than the schools in the other 5 major conferences and have held their own recruiting too. But for the cesspool at DePaul, which is taking steps to rebuild the program with the new arena, you have to consider the other 9 programs as solid major basketball schools.

What exactly is your definition of a Major program? To me, Temple would also be counted as a Major program.

The power label is something that is traditionally applied to football. It's football where there's a decided difference in talent, facilities, viewership and so on. It's basketball where Cinderella's thrive and are encouraged, whereas in football the Cinderella is questioned, doubted, and relegated to second class citizen status. How do the FGCU's and Butler's of the basketball world compare to the Boise State's and TCU's (preBig12) of the football world? Basketball is an equalitarian sport, if you ask me. It's football that's elitist. So the term power, doesn't apply here. The article should read the Big East is still a great (or good) conference.

It may be a more fair comparison to do this based on teams that are basketball schools or were invited for basketball. The Big East doesn't have to deal with schools that were invited exclusively because of football or markets.

So you have dedicated basketball schools on par with the Big East model: Memphis, Cincy, UConn, Temple, SMU (not when they were invited however)

Floater schools equivalent to Depaul for the most part recently: USF, Houston, Tulsa

Football/Market schools that are never good: ECU, UCF, Tulane

Maybe there could be some interest in a Big East / AAC challenge weekend like B1G ACC SEC Big 12 do on both networks. AAC has Cincinnati, Memphis, UConn, Temple, SMU, Houston,USF, Tulsa and Tulane all with pretty decent BB heritage to draw a national TV Interest With Villanova, St.Johns, Marquette, Georgetown, Creighton,Providence, Butler Xavier and Seton Hall to fund it.

(09-11-2015 11:45 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  What exactly is your definition of a Major program? To me, Temple would also be counted as a Major program.

I think Temple is slipping. I would have considered them a major a few years ago, especially with Chaney. Now, I am not so sure. Their attendance has dropped below 6000 per game. They spend almost $2 million less on hoops than a school like Gonzaga and $1 million less than schools like Wichita State or Xavier. I don't think that number is going up, given the financial commitment they seemed to have made to the football program. I think they will remain competitive given their location in a basketball hotbed. Are they still a major? To me, they are starting to look more and more like the UABs and Charlotte's of the world, than the Memphis or UConns in their own conference. They haven't made a run in the tourney since 2001 and they are 2-6 since.

(09-11-2015 12:08 PM)MU88 Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 11:45 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  What exactly is your definition of a Major program? To me, Temple would also be counted as a Major program.

I think Temple is slipping. I would have considered them a major a few years ago, especially with Chaney. Now, I am not so sure. Their attendance has dropped below 6000 per game. They spend almost $2 million less on hoops than a school like Gonzaga and $1 million less than schools like Wichita State or Xavier. I don't think that number is going up, given the financial commitment they seemed to have made to the football program. I think they will remain competitive given their location in a basketball hotbed. Are they still a major? To me, they are starting to look more and more like the UABs and Charlotte's of the world, than the Memphis or UConns in their own conference. They haven't made a run in the tourney since 2001 and they are 2-6 since.

I agree with you that it's more about programs than conferences when it comes to Major/Mid Major status. Look at the PAC...outside of Arizona and UCLA, there isn't much quality there.

In response to Temple's slippage, just look at two of the marquee programs of the Big East...Georgetown hasn't made it beyond the Round of 32 since their Final Four appearance in 2007. Villanova hasn't made it beyond the Round of 32 since their Final Four in 2009. Both programs have also had the luxury of being Top 4 seeds in recent years.

(09-11-2015 12:07 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Maybe there could be some interest in a Big East / AAC challenge weekend like B1G ACC SEC Big 12 do on both networks. AAC has Cincinnati, Memphis, UConn, Temple, SMU, Houston,USF, Tulsa and Tulane all with pretty decent BB heritage to draw a national TV Interest With Villanova, St.Johns, Marquette, Georgetown, Creighton,Providence, Butler Xavier and Seton Hall to fund it.

The Big East has a challenge with the Big Ten already and supposedly there is one with the Pac-12 in the works...

(09-11-2015 12:36 PM)Jet915 Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 12:07 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Maybe there could be some interest in a Big East / AAC challenge weekend like B1G ACC SEC Big 12 do on both networks. AAC has Cincinnati, Memphis, UConn, Temple, SMU, Houston,USF, Tulsa and Tulane all with pretty decent BB heritage to draw a national TV Interest With Villanova, St.Johns, Marquette, Georgetown, Creighton,Providence, Butler Xavier and Seton Hall to fund it.

The Big East has a challenge with the Big Ten already and supposedly there is one with the Pac-12 in the works...

How about CUSA?

(09-11-2015 08:38 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 08:36 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 08:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 08:16 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(09-11-2015 06:22 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  So Fox will keep overpaying them while only15,000 people watch?

You are absolutely correct that the TV ratings have been disastrous on FS1, however, the network finally seems to be finding an audience as evidenced by recent MLB and CFB ratings. Last Thursday, Michigan-Utah on FS1 tied TCU-Minnesota on ESPN, setting an all time best CFB rating for FS1. http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...v-ratings/ MLB ratings have been strong, with a recent Yankees-Rangers matchup getting similar ratings on FS1 as ESPN http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2015/07/...cord-july/

No more excuses. Viewers seem to know where the channel is now. This season will be a real measure of how the Big East can do on FS1.

I agree with this. For two years now, as a Big East fan, I've wondered whether the awful FS1 ratings for BE hoops has been because of the obscurity of FS1 or just the lack of appeal of BE hoops. I've been able to use the former as a cover for the latter.

But clearly, sports fans do now "know" where FS1 is, as proven by ratings for the sports you mention. There still is a lag there - i am sure that the ratings for those games would have been even higher if on ESPN - but we should expect that Big East hoops ratings rise significantly this year.

If they don't, it is because of the Big East, not FS1.

To be fair, the appeal of the Michigan-Utah game was a combination of Michigan's national fan following (which neither TCU nor Minnesota have) and non-Michigan fans wanting to see Harbaugh in his first game.

If the casual fan wants to see a specific game/competition, they will find whatever station it is on and tune in, which is why I think the Big East's poor numbers on FS1 are more a result of the product. We shall see this year.

Agreed. Also, playing on the opening night of CFB has historically been good for a little push in the ratings as well. CFB fans are so starved for the game after 8 months they will watch anyone with a pulse.

I also look at it another way: if the Michigan-Utah game was on ESPN instead of FS1, there is absolutely NFW that it draws a lower rating than the North Carolina-South Carolina game that same evening (which is what occurred). To me, that actually showed a limitation of FS1 compared to ESPN - we're talking about the debut of the biggest offseason coaching hire in years featuring a marquee football program playing another P5 school in an opening night game. That Michigan-Utah game was high by FS1 standards, but it would have blown the ratings numbers out of the water if it was on ESPN instead.

FS1 is getting better in drawing viewers (mainly because it has better events than it did 2 years ago), but they basically have a 20-30% reduction in ratings compared to if the exact same game was on ESPN. No one can credibly tell me that the Big East wouldn't be drawing the highest numbers out of any non-P5 league if their games were on ESPN. We've already seen that with ESPN non-conference games that have featured Big East teams. You can't tell me that non-Gonzaga WCC and non-UConn AAC games have more value than the average Big East game for a national audience. The mere placement of a game on ESPN elevates the viewing numbers for that game, whereas no such boost comes from being on FS1.

Case in point: the Pac-12 basketball games on FS1 have generally had lower ratings than the Big East games on FS1, while the ratings for the Pac-12 generally double simply by being on ESPN. That's evidence that the *underlying* media value for Big East basketball is actually as much as or more than Pac-12 basketball (and certainly much more than any of the G5 conferences or WCC). The media people aren't dumb: they know that comparing ESPN ratings to FS1 ratings isn't apples-to-apples.

Once again, FS1 has specific individual events that have drawing power (i.e. World Cup, U.S. Open, MLB playoffs, UFC, etc.), but it doesn't have the multi-platform 24/7 promotional cycle that ESPN has on TV/Internet/radio that elevates the run-of-the-mill college basketball game of the week. So, it has nothing to do with the Big East product at all. I know that a lot of people here seem to want the Big East to not succeed, but it has the most valuable top-to-bottom collection of brand names and markets in college sports outside of the P5 (and that's why it is being paid as such). It's fair to criticize the Big East for completely leaving ESPN in the first place (which I have done plenty of times), but the underlying basketball product, brand value and demographics of the Big East are perfectly fine.