With recent announcements about realignment in the B1G and SEC. What should the BE do?

A. Nothing, Stay the course
B. Wait and monitor the landscape and see who, (if anyone) may be left behind once the shaking stops (BC,Wake etc)
C. Follow the lead of the SEC and B1G and expand to 16 ASAP
If C should they
1. Look to schools in it's footprint that fit the profile (St Louis, Dayton, Richmond or maybe UMass types)
2. Look for the best programs without regard to footprint and may not be a perfect fit culturally (Gonzaga, VCU, Wichita types)
3. Go national with like minded schools in desirable markets , some of whom , may need time to strengthen their BB programs (Loyola-Marymount, Denver, St. Thomas, San Francisco types)

until media money somehow makes it worthwhile financially either by a) increasing money per school or b) deceasing the money UNLESS it expands, the BE has no incentive to do anything. the B1G and SEC moves still won't affect it. getting OOC games won't depend on the BE size.

i don't think any basketball program is going to be left behind. if somehow a p5 school was left adrift, unless it's a Duke level school i doubt expanding (no i don't think BC would be a cause to expand). again i doubt that happens.

(07-02-2022 05:13 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  With recent announcements about realignment in the B1G and SEC. What should the BE do?

A. Nothing, Stay the course
B. Wait and monitor the landscape and see who, (if anyone) may be left behind once the shaking stops (BC,Wake etc)
C. Follow the lead of the SEC and B1G and expand to 16 ASAP
If C should they
1. Look to schools in it's footprint that fit the profile (St Louis, Dayton, Richmond or maybe UMass types)
2. Look for the best programs without regard to footprint and may not be a perfect fit culturally (Gonzaga, VCU, Wichita types)
3. Go national with like minded schools in desirable markets , some of whom , may need time to strengthen their BB programs (Loyola-Marymount, Denver, St. Thomas, San Francisco types)

I posted this yesterday in a different topic thread:

If we have four massive all-sports leagues of 18 to 24 members each (or roughly the top 76 to 80 all-sports programs in college athletics) — and assuming the four are still members of the NCAA (a major assumption) — each of those four could land between nine and 12 teams in the NCAA Tournament each year.

Now consider this: In this hypothetical, the Big East likely will have lost UConn to the one of the two "lesser," but still quality, future leagues. At 10 members with the loss of UConn, the Big East might average only five selections annually for the NCAA Tournament — compared to the 10 to 12 each the "big boy three/four" will get. Do the math. It will not work well for the Big East, which will start to look irrelevant — particularly if it fails to get members to the Elite Eight/Final Four year in and year out.

At this point, and realizing they must be adaptable, the Big East and Gonzaga will certainly have to at least discuss the possibility of a marriage. Relatedly, the Big East will likely need to add some other members (Saint Louis, Dayton, VCU, UMass ... maybe even Wichita starts to looks attractive, etc.).

If we see four all-sports leagues of 18 to 24 members each, we very well might see a Big East — in an effort to keep pace — increase to 14 members (and perhaps even 16), with Gonzaga one of those. It won't be ideal in some respects for the Big East, but none of this realignment insanity is fully ideal for college sports in general.

To your point, the Big East will need to be extremely flexible, particularly if it wants to expand to 16 schools. The league very well might not have the luxury of being as picky as it would prefer for additions regarding location, cultural fit, Catholic church affiliation and history with the existing 10 BE universities.

Major changes loom in college athletics. The Big East needs to be poised to act accordingly.

Short answer is stand pat.

Generally, I'm inclined to believe that the moves that can be made won't solve the problems that are causing people to consider the moves.

If we're worried about a P3 breakaway leaving us behind, or worried about megabudget B1G and SEC programs crowding us out of the NCAA tournament--then I don't think that adding say Gonzaga, VCU, Saint Louis, Dayton and Wichita really does that much to solve those problems.

If Notre Dame falls into our laps? Sure, give them the same "Mr Right Now" deal we gave UConn.

If we double our money in the next media contract, maybe chartering jets to and from Spokane becomes an option and we bring in Gonzaga.

The Big East is unlike all the other conferences in the world of realignment.

They started a conference from "scratch" in the modern era, they don't have a Northwestern or Vanderbilt who's been around for 100 years and they can't get rid of; or a school that's historically good in football but bad in basketball like Nebraska, Penn State or Georgia.

(Sure, DePaul is always at the bottom, but they're not like Northwestern's stream of not making the NCAA Tournament for 70 years; DePaul was making the NCAA Tournament out of C-USA.... because they HAD the historical football or historically just around schools to beat: Tulane, Southern Miss, East Carolina, etc).

I think the Big East should have started with 12 schools and brought in two schools who were not at their level, but existed in a worthwhile TV market; and having a ratio of 8 really good programs, 2 who are in down rebuilding years, and 2 who are just behind the rest of the league would have meant they could have gotten a lot more NCAA bids.

And I've been saying this from day one. And there's an obscure example we can use here. Let's say you have the 10 best teams in the country in the same conference. Your 8th, 9th and 10th place teams still have too many losses to get NCAA bids. Despite being the 8th best team in the country, they lose 13 to 15 times to teams better than them, so they're ranked like 60th overall.

The obscure example of that very thing was men's water polo, the MPSF. They had USC, Stanford, Cal, Stanford who were usually the top four; and Pacific, Pepperdine, Long Beach St, UC Santa Barbara and UC Irvine would occasionally compete with those Pac-12 schools. Those 9 teams would be ranked 1 through 8 minimum every week in the polls and last place would 9, 10, 11 or 12. One year they went 113-3 vs other schools. The top 3 would make the 8-team NCAA tournament (only 2 at-larges, and I think only 4 times ever someone like Pacific or Pepperdine got one). San Jose State brought back MWP and joined the conference. So the six non-Pac12 members formed a new conference because "We can get an automatic bid for one of us every year."

When the Big East formed, everyone looked at those 10 schools and said "Wow, 8 of those schools are NCAA programs!" but the Big East has never gotten 8 bids, because there's so many evenly matched peers, that 7th place is 7-13 and even if they go 9-1 OOC, they're 16-15 on Selection Sunday and not getting a bid.

Whereas if they had taken two more schools when they started who weren't up to par and gone with divisions, they'd be beating the 6th team in the division all the time, and playing 13 games vs the top 10 of the league instead 18; So the 7th best team in the conference could be 7-9 in league play, 11-1 OOC, and 19-12 on Selection Sunday and get a bid.

When the Big East was formed, everyone left the A-10 for dead as a "one bid league." Because Xavier and Temple had like half the A-10s NCAA bids; But without losing to X and TU three times each, the third place teams (VCU, Dayton) went from 11-5 to 14-2 and the A-10 kept averaging 2.75 bids per year.


There would probably be value in the Big East going to a 16 or 18 team model and trying to carve out a niche from the "P5 bubble" teams. Even though there aren't 5 or 7 teams that "match the Big East's standards" having one third of the league be the bottom would allow for the top 2/3rds to have NCAA resumes; and if the Big East was sending 8 to 12 teams to the dance; a far less change they get left behind.

(07-05-2022 12:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Short answer is stand pat.

Generally, I'm inclined to believe that the moves that can be made won't solve the problems that are causing people to consider the moves.

If we're worried about a P3 breakaway leaving us behind, or worried about megabudget B1G and SEC programs crowding us out of the NCAA tournament--then I don't think that adding say Gonzaga, VCU, Saint Louis, Dayton and Wichita really does that much to solve those problems.

If Notre Dame falls into our laps? Sure, give them the same "Mr Right Now" deal we gave UConn.

If we double our money in the next media contract, maybe chartering jets to and from Spokane becomes an option and we bring in Gonzaga.

The Big East can sit back and see what happens with the Big Ten and SEC. Perhaps no more change looms and the BE will be fine as is, retaining UConn and still getting a very respectable number of programs in the NCAA tourney each year.

But if those two leagues eventually go to, say, 24 members and a third high-profile league is created in the aftermath of the massive realignment, there is no doubt those three leagues will be considerably more high-profile than the Big East (and "better" in terms of sheer number of quality men's hoops programs, amount of TV air time, NCAA tourney bids, simply being in the public spotlight, number of players sent to the NBA, etc.). It will come down to sheer numbers. The "big three" will have the numbers — and the 10-member (in this hypothetical, UConn will be a member of the No. 3 league) Big East will not.

At that point, the Big East might decide that, to compete, it will need to add members that are not as strong "fits" (culturally, geographically, academically, etc.) as would be ideal.

This could prove interesting.

Short Answer: Whatever FOX recommends.

Gonzaga's candidacy to the Big East is very similar to that which was UConn's (continually rumored, plenty of smoke indicating some discussions, and a marriage inevitably making sense but only until the elephant in the room gets addressed - what to do with football versus what to do about travel). Gonzaga's candidacy remains unaffected by recent developments; whether a member of the WCC or BE, they undoubtedly still accept an invite to the PAC. For Fox, does getting Gonzaga's TV rights under the PAC banner or BE banner make more sense (WCC is under ESPN through 2027)? Or perhaps it is determined their addition to either league simply does not make sense.

For A10 candidates (SLU, UD, VCU), they aren't going anywhere. They aren't getting invited by the Power 5 and they aren't accepting an invite to the AAC. They can be invited whenever.

For a reunion with Syracuse, Pittsburgh or Boston College, the dust will not settle until NBC determines its offer to ND (which, in turn, will determine if ND accepts an offer to join the Big Ten). Thr ACC cannot destabilize until ND makes a decision. Even if they say no, there's nothing to stop FOX from pushing the Big Ten to invite UNC (and showing any exit fee can be challenged and/or paid over X years). If UNC leaves (or is granted Duke and Virginia as partners), then FSU and Clemson are out as well.

The unfortunate reality is that, regardless of how many programs are plucked from the ACC, there will still be enough left-behinds to establish an Eastern all-sports league (and one that will surely be willing to invite UConn). Even if UNC, ND, Duke, Virginia, VA Tech, NC State, Georgia Tech, FSU and Clemson all get invited to the Super 2, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Louisville, Miami and Wake Forest can simply backfill with UCF, UConn, West Virginia, Cincinnati, USF and Temple to create an Eastern All-Sports League.

Inevitably, I think UConn (rightly) gets grouped with these schools in an all-sports conference (and quite possibly a league that can work with, not, against the Big East in scheduling and leadership). It will most likely look like what would have happened if a divorce (football vs. non-football) in the Big East occurred in the mid-2000's.

Just my prediction (over the next ten years or so).

(07-09-2022 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-05-2022 12:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Short answer is stand pat.

Generally, I'm inclined to believe that the moves that can be made won't solve the problems that are causing people to consider the moves.

If we're worried about a P3 breakaway leaving us behind, or worried about megabudget B1G and SEC programs crowding us out of the NCAA tournament--then I don't think that adding say Gonzaga, VCU, Saint Louis, Dayton and Wichita really does that much to solve those problems.

If Notre Dame falls into our laps? Sure, give them the same "Mr Right Now" deal we gave UConn.

If we double our money in the next media contract, maybe chartering jets to and from Spokane becomes an option and we bring in Gonzaga.

The Big East can sit back and see what happens with the Big Ten and SEC. Perhaps no more change looms and the BE will be fine as is, retaining UConn and still getting a very respectable number of programs in the NCAA tourney each year.

But if those two leagues eventually go to, say, 24 members and a third high-profile league is created in the aftermath of the massive realignment, there is no doubt those three leagues will be considerably more high-profile than the Big East (and "better" in terms of sheer number of quality men's hoops programs, amount of TV air time, NCAA tourney bids, simply being in the public spotlight, number of players sent to the NBA, etc.). It will come down to sheer numbers. The "big three" will have the numbers — and the 10-member (in this hypothetical, UConn will be a member of the No. 3 league) Big East will not.

Sure, but there's not really anybody available to add that makes any difference. Adding VCU, Dayton, SLU, St Bonaventure, UMass, Wichita State isn't going to secure the Big EAst's future in a situation where the SEC and Big Ten are leading a breakaway and Kansas and Duke are sweating their spots.

Heck, we might want to keep our powder dry and save the spots for (counts fingers) Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, maybe Pitt, maybe Notre Dame if they somehow stay football-indy while being included

(07-11-2022 12:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-09-2022 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-05-2022 12:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Short answer is stand pat.

Generally, I'm inclined to believe that the moves that can be made won't solve the problems that are causing people to consider the moves.

If we're worried about a P3 breakaway leaving us behind, or worried about megabudget B1G and SEC programs crowding us out of the NCAA tournament--then I don't think that adding say Gonzaga, VCU, Saint Louis, Dayton and Wichita really does that much to solve those problems.

If Notre Dame falls into our laps? Sure, give them the same "Mr Right Now" deal we gave UConn.

If we double our money in the next media contract, maybe chartering jets to and from Spokane becomes an option and we bring in Gonzaga.

The Big East can sit back and see what happens with the Big Ten and SEC. Perhaps no more change looms and the BE will be fine as is, retaining UConn and still getting a very respectable number of programs in the NCAA tourney each year.

But if those two leagues eventually go to, say, 24 members and a third high-profile league is created in the aftermath of the massive realignment, there is no doubt those three leagues will be considerably more high-profile than the Big East (and "better" in terms of sheer number of quality men's hoops programs, amount of TV air time, NCAA tourney bids, simply being in the public spotlight, number of players sent to the NBA, etc.). It will come down to sheer numbers. The "big three" will have the numbers — and the 10-member (in this hypothetical, UConn will be a member of the No. 3 league) Big East will not.

Sure, but there's not really anybody available to add that makes any difference. Adding VCU, Dayton, SLU, St Bonaventure, UMass, Wichita State isn't going to secure the Big EAst's future in a situation where the SEC and Big Ten are leading a breakaway and Kansas and Duke are sweating their spots.

Heck, we might want to keep our powder dry and save the spots for (counts fingers) Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, maybe Pitt, maybe Notre Dame if they somehow stay football-indy while being included

It seems the Big East's long-term hope is that 1. it doesn't lose UConn to an all-sports league (no "non-football" replacement other than, perhaps, Gonzaga would bring such cache as the Husky program); and 2. it does not feel compelled to add programs it may prefer to not only in an effort to maintain pace with other high-profile leagues that have, hypothetically, increased to 18 or more members.

GW11's assessment is interesting. We could see a "Big East Football-only" league with which some members also participate in all BE sports and others only in the football entity. So two different leagues governed by different commissioners (kind of live Missouri Valley Football Conference) and operating independent of one another. I'm thinking an NCAA rule change would be needed for such an arrangement.

(07-13-2022 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 12:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-09-2022 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-05-2022 12:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Short answer is stand pat.

Generally, I'm inclined to believe that the moves that can be made won't solve the problems that are causing people to consider the moves.

If we're worried about a P3 breakaway leaving us behind, or worried about megabudget B1G and SEC programs crowding us out of the NCAA tournament--then I don't think that adding say Gonzaga, VCU, Saint Louis, Dayton and Wichita really does that much to solve those problems.

If Notre Dame falls into our laps? Sure, give them the same "Mr Right Now" deal we gave UConn.

If we double our money in the next media contract, maybe chartering jets to and from Spokane becomes an option and we bring in Gonzaga.

The Big East can sit back and see what happens with the Big Ten and SEC. Perhaps no more change looms and the BE will be fine as is, retaining UConn and still getting a very respectable number of programs in the NCAA tourney each year.

But if those two leagues eventually go to, say, 24 members and a third high-profile league is created in the aftermath of the massive realignment, there is no doubt those three leagues will be considerably more high-profile than the Big East (and "better" in terms of sheer number of quality men's hoops programs, amount of TV air time, NCAA tourney bids, simply being in the public spotlight, number of players sent to the NBA, etc.). It will come down to sheer numbers. The "big three" will have the numbers — and the 10-member (in this hypothetical, UConn will be a member of the No. 3 league) Big East will not.

Sure, but there's not really anybody available to add that makes any difference. Adding VCU, Dayton, SLU, St Bonaventure, UMass, Wichita State isn't going to secure the Big EAst's future in a situation where the SEC and Big Ten are leading a breakaway and Kansas and Duke are sweating their spots.

Heck, we might want to keep our powder dry and save the spots for (counts fingers) Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, maybe Pitt, maybe Notre Dame if they somehow stay football-indy while being included

It seems the Big East's long-term hope is that 1. it doesn't lose UConn to an all-sports league (no "non-football" replacement other than, perhaps, Gonzaga would bring such cache as the Husky program); and 2. it does not feel compelled to add programs it may prefer to not only in an effort to maintain pace with other high-profile leagues that have, hypothetically, increased to 18 or more members.

GW11's assessment is interesting. We could see a "Big East Football-only" league with which some members also participate in all BE sports and others only in the football entity. So two different leagues governed by different commissioners (kind of live Missouri Valley Football Conference) and operating independent of one another. I'm thinking an NCAA rule change would be needed for such an arrangement.

Honestly, I think the Big East leadership view UConn's membership as house money. Every year they are within the conference, they provide value to the league. If they are still here ten years from now, twenty years from now = wonderful; if they aren't, the Big East was proven successful without UConn's involvement. The overall success of the league (or reputation) is not tied to UConn.

Bill, what I meant (and I probably described it poorly) was the former Big East Football schools essentially coming together for an all-sports league (likely under the bylaws/banner of the ACC, once all the defections occur):

Big East
Butler
Creighton
DePaul
Georgetown
Marquette
Providence
Seton Hall
St. John's
Villanova
Xavier

ACC (Many programs of the former Big East)
Boston College
Cincinnati
UConn
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Temple
UCF
USF
Wake Forest

Due to geography and shared history - there would likely be many opportunities for collaboration and/or competition in Olympic sports (like basketball). It would get mighty tricky (and history is a great example) if both entities decided to come together under one conference banner. There would, once again, be more infighting about the direction of the league (and football and non-football schools ceasing to work together for the betterment of the league).

To note, I would assume that Notre Dame (Big Ten), North Carolina (Big Ten), Duke (Big Ten), Virginia (Big Ten), Clemson (SEC), Georgia Tech (SEC), Miami (SEC), Florida State (SEC), Virginia Tech (SEC) and North Carolina State (SEC) would be taken by the Super 2 under this scenario

(07-13-2022 04:01 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 12:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-09-2022 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-05-2022 12:22 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Short answer is stand pat.

Generally, I'm inclined to believe that the moves that can be made won't solve the problems that are causing people to consider the moves.

If we're worried about a P3 breakaway leaving us behind, or worried about megabudget B1G and SEC programs crowding us out of the NCAA tournament--then I don't think that adding say Gonzaga, VCU, Saint Louis, Dayton and Wichita really does that much to solve those problems.

If Notre Dame falls into our laps? Sure, give them the same "Mr Right Now" deal we gave UConn.

If we double our money in the next media contract, maybe chartering jets to and from Spokane becomes an option and we bring in Gonzaga.

The Big East can sit back and see what happens with the Big Ten and SEC. Perhaps no more change looms and the BE will be fine as is, retaining UConn and still getting a very respectable number of programs in the NCAA tourney each year.

But if those two leagues eventually go to, say, 24 members and a third high-profile league is created in the aftermath of the massive realignment, there is no doubt those three leagues will be considerably more high-profile than the Big East (and "better" in terms of sheer number of quality men's hoops programs, amount of TV air time, NCAA tourney bids, simply being in the public spotlight, number of players sent to the NBA, etc.). It will come down to sheer numbers. The "big three" will have the numbers — and the 10-member (in this hypothetical, UConn will be a member of the No. 3 league) Big East will not.

Sure, but there's not really anybody available to add that makes any difference. Adding VCU, Dayton, SLU, St Bonaventure, UMass, Wichita State isn't going to secure the Big EAst's future in a situation where the SEC and Big Ten are leading a breakaway and Kansas and Duke are sweating their spots.

Heck, we might want to keep our powder dry and save the spots for (counts fingers) Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, maybe Pitt, maybe Notre Dame if they somehow stay football-indy while being included

It seems the Big East's long-term hope is that 1. it doesn't lose UConn to an all-sports league (no "non-football" replacement other than, perhaps, Gonzaga would bring such cache as the Husky program); and 2. it does not feel compelled to add programs it may prefer to not only in an effort to maintain pace with other high-profile leagues that have, hypothetically, increased to 18 or more members.

GW11's assessment is interesting. We could see a "Big East Football-only" league with which some members also participate in all BE sports and others only in the football entity. So two different leagues governed by different commissioners (kind of live Missouri Valley Football Conference) and operating independent of one another. I'm thinking an NCAA rule change would be needed for such an arrangement.

Honestly, I think the Big East leadership view UConn's membership as house money. Every year they are within the conference, they provide value to the league. If they are still here ten years from now, twenty years from now = wonderful; if they aren't, the Big East was proven successful without UConn's involvement. The overall success of the league (or reputation) is not tied to UConn.

Bill, what I meant (and I probably described it poorly) was the former Big East Football schools essentially coming together for an all-sports league (likely under the bylaws/banner of the ACC, once all the defections occur):

Big East
Butler
Creighton
DePaul
Georgetown
Marquette
Providence
Seton Hall
St. John's
Villanova
Xavier

ACC (Many programs of the former Big East)
Boston College
Cincinnati
UConn
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Temple
UCF
USF
Wake Forest

Due to geography and shared history - there would likely be many opportunities for collaboration and/or competition in Olympic sports (like basketball). It would get mighty tricky (and history is a great example) if both entities decided to come together under one conference banner. There would, once again, be more infighting about the direction of the league (and football and non-football schools ceasing to work together for the betterment of the league).

To note, I would assume that Notre Dame (Big Ten), North Carolina (Big Ten), Duke (Big Ten), Virginia (Big Ten), Clemson (SEC), Georgia Tech (SEC), Miami (SEC), Florida State (SEC), Virginia Tech (SEC) and North Carolina State (SEC) would be taken by the Super 2 under this scenario

Ah. I misunderstood originally. This is clear and is, hypothetically, a reasonably scenario. We could possible add West Virginia to that reconstituted ACC.

I agree with you fully on UConn, GW11. The Big East of today got its start without UC and did fine. And it will be fine without UConn, if it comes to that. Having UConn is strong for the league. But all this might be moot, as there are at least two scenarios I could foresee that would yield UConn staying in the Big East.

For UC and the BE, it might come down to how many noteworthy all-sports leagues remain after the Big Ten and SEC are finished carving up the other three. Will there be a "No. 3" only? Or could there be a "No. 4" or even a "No. 5"? If, for example, there is a "No. 4" league comprising 16 to 20 quality programs and UConn's only option for an all-sports league membership, that might not suffice. A "No 5" almost certainly would not. As such, UC could stay put in the Big East and perhaps at that point drop football to FCS.

I still like the idea of two loosely affiliated Big East conferences once the madness of league shifting finally settles: one that is all sports but football and the other (like the Missouri Valley Football Conference) that is football only. Two commissioners. Non-shared media revenue. With that scenario, all the schools you list above would be in the same league (except for football). That would be a powerful hoops league that could hold its own with the Big Ten and the SEC.

(07-14-2022 08:16 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 04:01 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 12:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-09-2022 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The Big East can sit back and see what happens with the Big Ten and SEC. Perhaps no more change looms and the BE will be fine as is, retaining UConn and still getting a very respectable number of programs in the NCAA tourney each year.

But if those two leagues eventually go to, say, 24 members and a third high-profile league is created in the aftermath of the massive realignment, there is no doubt those three leagues will be considerably more high-profile than the Big East (and "better" in terms of sheer number of quality men's hoops programs, amount of TV air time, NCAA tourney bids, simply being in the public spotlight, number of players sent to the NBA, etc.). It will come down to sheer numbers. The "big three" will have the numbers — and the 10-member (in this hypothetical, UConn will be a member of the No. 3 league) Big East will not.

Sure, but there's not really anybody available to add that makes any difference. Adding VCU, Dayton, SLU, St Bonaventure, UMass, Wichita State isn't going to secure the Big EAst's future in a situation where the SEC and Big Ten are leading a breakaway and Kansas and Duke are sweating their spots.

Heck, we might want to keep our powder dry and save the spots for (counts fingers) Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, maybe Pitt, maybe Notre Dame if they somehow stay football-indy while being included

It seems the Big East's long-term hope is that 1. it doesn't lose UConn to an all-sports league (no "non-football" replacement other than, perhaps, Gonzaga would bring such cache as the Husky program); and 2. it does not feel compelled to add programs it may prefer to not only in an effort to maintain pace with other high-profile leagues that have, hypothetically, increased to 18 or more members.

GW11's assessment is interesting. We could see a "Big East Football-only" league with which some members also participate in all BE sports and others only in the football entity. So two different leagues governed by different commissioners (kind of live Missouri Valley Football Conference) and operating independent of one another. I'm thinking an NCAA rule change would be needed for such an arrangement.

Honestly, I think the Big East leadership view UConn's membership as house money. Every year they are within the conference, they provide value to the league. If they are still here ten years from now, twenty years from now = wonderful; if they aren't, the Big East was proven successful without UConn's involvement. The overall success of the league (or reputation) is not tied to UConn.

Bill, what I meant (and I probably described it poorly) was the former Big East Football schools essentially coming together for an all-sports league (likely under the bylaws/banner of the ACC, once all the defections occur):

Big East
Butler
Creighton
DePaul
Georgetown
Marquette
Providence
Seton Hall
St. John's
Villanova
Xavier

ACC (Many programs of the former Big East)
Boston College
Cincinnati
UConn
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Temple
UCF
USF
Wake Forest

Due to geography and shared history - there would likely be many opportunities for collaboration and/or competition in Olympic sports (like basketball). It would get mighty tricky (and history is a great example) if both entities decided to come together under one conference banner. There would, once again, be more infighting about the direction of the league (and football and non-football schools ceasing to work together for the betterment of the league).

To note, I would assume that Notre Dame (Big Ten), North Carolina (Big Ten), Duke (Big Ten), Virginia (Big Ten), Clemson (SEC), Georgia Tech (SEC), Miami (SEC), Florida State (SEC), Virginia Tech (SEC) and North Carolina State (SEC) would be taken by the Super 2 under this scenario

Ah. I misunderstood originally. This is clear and is, hypothetically, a reasonably scenario. We could possible add West Virginia to that reconstituted ACC.

I agree with you fully on UConn, GW11. The Big East of today got its start without UC and did fine. And it will be fine without UConn, if it comes to that. Having UConn is strong for the league. But all this might be moot, as there are at least two scenarios I could foresee that would yield UConn staying in the Big East.

For UC and the BE, it might come down to how many noteworthy all-sports leagues remain after the Big Ten and SEC are finished carving up the other three. Will there be a "No. 3" only? Or could there be a "No. 4" or even a "No. 5"? If, for example, there is a "No. 4" league comprising 16 to 20 quality programs and UConn's only option for an all-sports league membership, that might not suffice. A "No 5" almost certainly would not. As such, UC could stay put in the Big East and perhaps at that point drop football to FCS.

I still like the idea of two loosely affiliated Big East conferences once the madness of league shifting finally settles: one that is all sports but football and the other (like the Missouri Valley Football Conference) that is football only. Two commissioners. Non-shared media revenue. With that scenario, all the schools you list above would be in the same league (except for football). That would be a powerful hoops league that could hold its own with the Big Ten and the SEC.

Greed ruins all great things. The day the Big East officially added football, it began a collision course with inevitable separation. I think it will take many, many years before we ever see a power conference utilize a hybrid membership again (IMO).

And I stupidly left out WVU; they would 100% be included as well. They'd either be included with Memphis (for 12 teams), or replace USF for a 10-team league. But they would be in regardless.

(07-14-2022 04:10 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(07-14-2022 08:16 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 04:01 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(07-13-2022 01:13 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 12:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Sure, but there's not really anybody available to add that makes any difference. Adding VCU, Dayton, SLU, St Bonaventure, UMass, Wichita State isn't going to secure the Big EAst's future in a situation where the SEC and Big Ten are leading a breakaway and Kansas and Duke are sweating their spots.

Heck, we might want to keep our powder dry and save the spots for (counts fingers) Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, maybe Pitt, maybe Notre Dame if they somehow stay football-indy while being included

It seems the Big East's long-term hope is that 1. it doesn't lose UConn to an all-sports league (no "non-football" replacement other than, perhaps, Gonzaga would bring such cache as the Husky program); and 2. it does not feel compelled to add programs it may prefer to not only in an effort to maintain pace with other high-profile leagues that have, hypothetically, increased to 18 or more members.

GW11's assessment is interesting. We could see a "Big East Football-only" league with which some members also participate in all BE sports and others only in the football entity. So two different leagues governed by different commissioners (kind of live Missouri Valley Football Conference) and operating independent of one another. I'm thinking an NCAA rule change would be needed for such an arrangement.

Honestly, I think the Big East leadership view UConn's membership as house money. Every year they are within the conference, they provide value to the league. If they are still here ten years from now, twenty years from now = wonderful; if they aren't, the Big East was proven successful without UConn's involvement. The overall success of the league (or reputation) is not tied to UConn.

Bill, what I meant (and I probably described it poorly) was the former Big East Football schools essentially coming together for an all-sports league (likely under the bylaws/banner of the ACC, once all the defections occur):

Big East
Butler
Creighton
DePaul
Georgetown
Marquette
Providence
Seton Hall
St. John's
Villanova
Xavier

ACC (Many programs of the former Big East)
Boston College
Cincinnati
UConn
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Temple
UCF
USF
Wake Forest

Due to geography and shared history - there would likely be many opportunities for collaboration and/or competition in Olympic sports (like basketball). It would get mighty tricky (and history is a great example) if both entities decided to come together under one conference banner. There would, once again, be more infighting about the direction of the league (and football and non-football schools ceasing to work together for the betterment of the league).

To note, I would assume that Notre Dame (Big Ten), North Carolina (Big Ten), Duke (Big Ten), Virginia (Big Ten), Clemson (SEC), Georgia Tech (SEC), Miami (SEC), Florida State (SEC), Virginia Tech (SEC) and North Carolina State (SEC) would be taken by the Super 2 under this scenario

Ah. I misunderstood originally. This is clear and is, hypothetically, a reasonably scenario. We could possible add West Virginia to that reconstituted ACC.

I agree with you fully on UConn, GW11. The Big East of today got its start without UC and did fine. And it will be fine without UConn, if it comes to that. Having UConn is strong for the league. But all this might be moot, as there are at least two scenarios I could foresee that would yield UConn staying in the Big East.

For UC and the BE, it might come down to how many noteworthy all-sports leagues remain after the Big Ten and SEC are finished carving up the other three. Will there be a "No. 3" only? Or could there be a "No. 4" or even a "No. 5"? If, for example, there is a "No. 4" league comprising 16 to 20 quality programs and UConn's only option for an all-sports league membership, that might not suffice. A "No 5" almost certainly would not. As such, UC could stay put in the Big East and perhaps at that point drop football to FCS.

I still like the idea of two loosely affiliated Big East conferences once the madness of league shifting finally settles: one that is all sports but football and the other (like the Missouri Valley Football Conference) that is football only. Two commissioners. Non-shared media revenue. With that scenario, all the schools you list above would be in the same league (except for football). That would be a powerful hoops league that could hold its own with the Big Ten and the SEC.

Greed ruins all great things. The day the Big East officially added football, it began a collision course with inevitable separation. I think it will take many, many years before we ever see a power conference utilize a hybrid membership again (IMO).

And I stupidly left out WVU; they would 100% be included as well. They'd either be included with Memphis (for 12 teams), or replace USF for a 10-team league. But they would be in regardless.

The hybrid I envision would be unconventional — and very unlike the hybrids we have seen to date. As such, it could potentially be effective.

But it's unlikely to happen as, if anything, an NCAA rule change would be needed.

I do foresee the 10 football-sponsoring schools you list and West Virginia (and maybe even Memphis) possibly aligned at some point. But there are other hypotheticals that might be more likely.

As you have posted (and I agree), the 10 Big East schools that don't sponsor FBS football have to be relieved, to an extent, as they sit back and reflect on what has unfolded — and await the additional changes that almost certainly will transpire — in high-profile college sports.

The Big East should be talking to any school that would add value to its basketball product, just in case the world as we know it ends:

Syracuse
Kansas
Gonzaga
Duke
Boston College
Notre Dame
West Virginia
Louisville

Until a seismic changes that makes any of these schools available and practical, the BE is in great shape and doesn’t need to do anything.

(The other thing the BE should be considering is ending the DePail experiment. Twenty years is enough time to call it a failure.)

In men's soccer, the BE added Akron as an affiliate, effective 2023.

(06-21-2023 10:59 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  In men's soccer, the BE added Akron as an affiliate, effective 2023.

Akron currently ranked No. 5. Seton Hall also in the top 25.

Seems Akron was a strong addition for Big East soccer.

I would wait and see what Fox or maybe Apple says. No need to add unless it’s needed.

IMO:

The Big East should add Dayton, Gonzaga, and (drumroll) St Marys.
Those are the best institutional fits and they get the conference to 14.
If the Big East invites Gonzaga, it makes no sense to leave out StM (for the same reason the Big Ten added the PNW teams after the LA teams). The Zags have a worthy regional foe? Add them too.
Dayton has a worthy program too. They'd be a good rivalry for Xavier and rivalries sell network advertising.

Personally, I'd add those 3 teams before the new media contract.
The Big East is in a position of power to gobble those teams up at a pro rata.
In the new media landscape, the major conferences are growing in large numbers. The Big East needs to take steps to grow with them. If the BE wants P4 challenge opportunities, it would serve the conference well to offer most of their teams a game.

Grabbing two programs in the Western time zone is also advantageous in a Post-Pac 12 world. (For many reasons I don't need to go into.)

(02-07-2024 12:10 AM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  IMO:

The Big East should add Dayton, Gonzaga, and (drumroll) St Marys.
Those are the best institutional fits and they get the conference to 14.
If the Big East invites Gonzaga, it makes no sense to leave out StM (for the same reason the Big Ten added the PNW teams after the LA teams). The Zags have a worthy regional foe? Add them too.
Dayton has a worthy program too. They'd be a good rivalry for Xavier and rivalries sell network advertising.

Personally, I'd add those 3 teams before the new media contract.
The Big East is in a position of power to gobble those teams up at a pro rata.
In the new media landscape, the major conferences are growing in large numbers. The Big East needs to take steps to grow with them. If the BE wants P4 challenge opportunities, it would serve the conference well to offer most of their teams a game.

Grabbing two programs in the Western time zone is also advantageous in a Post-Pac 12 world. (For many reasons I don't need to go into.)

The Big East's adding Dayton, Gonzaga and St. Mary's would be a positive move in many respects (though there would also be some concerns).

(02-07-2024 10:55 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-07-2024 12:10 AM)Big12HoopsHeaven Wrote:  IMO:

The Big East should add Dayton, Gonzaga, and (drumroll) St Marys.
Those are the best institutional fits and they get the conference to 14.
If the Big East invites Gonzaga, it makes no sense to leave out StM (for the same reason the Big Ten added the PNW teams after the LA teams). The Zags have a worthy regional foe? Add them too.
Dayton has a worthy program too. They'd be a good rivalry for Xavier and rivalries sell network advertising.

Personally, I'd add those 3 teams before the new media contract.
The Big East is in a position of power to gobble those teams up at a pro rata.
In the new media landscape, the major conferences are growing in large numbers. The Big East needs to take steps to grow with them. If the BE wants P4 challenge opportunities, it would serve the conference well to offer most of their teams a game.

Grabbing two programs in the Western time zone is also advantageous in a Post-Pac 12 world. (For many reasons I don't need to go into.)

The Big East's adding Dayton, Gonzaga and St. Mary's would be a positive move in many respects (though there would also be some concerns).

I just don’t see there being enough money to make it happen. If one of the networks really wants any of the WCC teams they’ll find a way to get them into a rebuilt PAC or MWC and still get them “on the cheap.” As much as I would love to add Dayton, I know Xavier would push back on adding them, and since they don’t add a new market I don’t see the networks coughing up money to get the inventory.

I also think the league enjoys a double round robin and is a competitive league. There isn’t currently a reason to add anyone. The only reasons to add anyone would be UConn leaving or the networks forcing the league to add someone. For reasons noted above, I don’t foresee the networks forcing any additions. UConn, despite being connected to realignment rumors galore whenever the realignment wheels start spinning, doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. Maybe a gutted ACC, but most UConn fans would prefer the Big East to a gutted ACC, depending on who leaves. I’m know the move likely gets made if the opportunity presents itself, as it gives football a home. But a move would get a mixed reaction from the fan base. I just don’t see us going anywhere for the time being.