CSNbbs

Perhaps this is is a DUH! type of statement but I am going to ask it anyway. I just can't help but wonder if all of the Temple to the Big East for all sports thing is some sort of quid pro quo arrangement between Temple, Villanova and the Big East?

What I mean by that statement is if realigment is all about the leagues increasing their respective television footprints, it makes no sense whatsoever to have Temple AND Villanova for all sports as either one would (theoretically at least) "deliver" the Philadelphia/Pennsylvania market and the other one would basically cost the league money as they would bring even less value than they otherwise might - which was already very little, IMHO.

And yet the rumors continue to persist of Temple for all sports AND Villanova upgrading its football program. Hmm...

Anyone who has followed the Big East for any period of time can tell you that Temple folks have long alleged that Villanova has been blocking the Owls from being admitted for all sports for decades. So why are we now apparently seeing a reversal at a time when it would appear to make less sense than ever before?

This is going to shock you but I think it goes back to basketball and protecting the league's interests there.

I think what we might be seeing here is a backroom deal between Temple, Villanova and the Big East whereby Temple alleviates Villanova's greatest obstacle - the lack of a bona fide D1-A caliber playing facility - by waving its exclusivity rights to Lincoln Financial Field in exchange for the Wildcats' unconditional support of adding Temple for all sports. You may see a similar deal with the Wells Fargo Center in South Philly.

I'm not a big conspiracy guy but that is the only way that it makes sense for both major Philadelphia area schools to remain in this conversation. I'm still not sure it's a great idea for everyone else but knowing the mindset of these Big East folks I do believe that is exactly what may be materializing here. What do you guys think? Is that too out there? Alternatively, is it blatantly obvious? I'd like to hear your thoughts. Also, if it is true, do you support it and why?

I have thought about that. I tend to think the Eagles may have a problem with it.....but technically, I don't see why all 3 couldn't use the facility in some capacity.

I wonder if at some levels....the BE management really believes somehow both Nova AND Temple would somehow deliver the Philly market. We know Nova won't....but they are a small private college. Temple won't either but I wonder if they really know that or believe that.

I think travel plays a role.....we hear all these stories about how Seton Hall and others don't want to travel. Well Temple, brings you great value in basketball.....is a short road game for those like Seton Hall, G-Town, St Johns and Providence. They help offset something you lost in Pitt and SU.....but they bring you a football product....and if we upgrade Nova....then Nova should stop blocking Temple.....it is a Win, Win, Win in the eyes of those in Providence.

I could be wrong but that is how I see it. Even if Nova doesn't get access to the Linc.....you could ensure the annual Nova-Temple game was at the Linc regardless of who the home team is.

Wow. That could be.

If I were UConn or Rutgers, I'm not sure I would want to see Nova with upgraded football and access to the Linc, even if it were for only two or three games a season.

Cheers,
Neil

I support it if they get AFA, Navy, and yes, know it is unlikely, boise as football onlies. Houston or SMU as well to justify more westward expansion

I support it for 12 teams, not ten. no way in hell for ten.

I am a Rutgers graduate but have lived in the South Jersey Philadelphia suburbs for my entire life. The primary reason Temple was booted from the BE FB conference was lack of stadium control. They were third on the list at the old Vet after the Eagles and the Phillies. If Temple couldn't get the Vet, then they would play at Franklin Field if Penn wasn't at home. Otherwise, the Owls were SOL without a paddle. Temple have a move a home game against Penn State to the Meadowlands one year and had to play a home game at Pitt because they did not have stadium control.

The old guard FB schools (Pitt, RU, SU and WVU) remembered this and that is why they were hesitant about Villanova upgrading but playing at a venue which the Cats did not control. Villanova needs to play at the Linc but the price will be Temple admitted as an all-sports BE member. The city and the state have more influence in this than the Eagles.

(10-09-2011 10:30 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]If I were UConn or Rutgers, I'm not sure I would want to see Nova with upgraded football and access to the Linc, even if it were for only two or three games a season.

Cheers,
Neil

Well Pernetti's been against Nova upgrading all along and I can't see it changing now. OTOH, I bet Rutgers is the biggest sponsor of Temple to the Big East.

(10-09-2011 10:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote: [ -> ]You may see a similar deal with the Wells Fargo Center in South Philly.

Yeah, that's not remotely the case. Nova doesn't have some exclusivity deal with the WFC. In fact, we're playing Duke there this season. We wouldn't need the WFC. We have a perfectly good 10,200 seat on campus arena.

(10-09-2011 10:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps this is is a DUH! type of statement but I am going to ask it anyway. I just can't help but wonder if all of the Temple to the Big East for all sports thing is some sort of quid pro quo arrangement between Temple, Villanova and the Big East?

What I mean by that statement is if realigment is all about the leagues increasing their respective television footprints, it makes no sense whatsoever to have Temple AND Villanova for all sports as either one would (theoretically at least) "deliver" the Philadelphia/Pennsylvania market and the other one would basically cost the league money as they would bring even less value than they otherwise might - which was already very little, IMHO.

And yet the rumors continue to persist of Temple for all sports AND Villanova upgrading its football program. Hmm...

Anyone who has followed the Big East for any period of time can tell you that Temple folks have long alleged that Villanova has been blocking the Owls from being admitted for all sports for decades. So why are we now apparently seeing a reversal at a time when it would appear to make less sense than ever before?

This is going to shock you but I think it goes back to basketball and protecting the league's interests there.

I think what we might be seeing here is a backroom deal between Temple, Villanova and the Big East whereby Temple alleviates Villanova's greatest obstacle - the lack of a bona fide D1-A caliber playing facility - by waving its exclusivity rights to Lincoln Financial Field in exchange for the Wildcats' unconditional support of adding Temple for all sports. You may see a similar deal with the Wells Fargo Center in South Philly.

I'm not a big conspiracy guy but that is the only way that it makes sense for both major Philadelphia area schools to remain in this conversation. I'm still not sure it's a great idea for everyone else but knowing the mindset of these Big East folks I do believe that is exactly what may be materializing here. What do you guys think? Is that too out there? Alternatively, is it blatantly obvious? I'd like to hear your thoughts. Also, if it is true, do you support it and why?

Doc, I'm new to the whole Villanova upgrading their football program to the BCS and the Big East controversy. I know you've hinted at why Pitt hated this. Can you tell me the reasons why, if Villanova could play at Lincoln financial field that they would be a bad pick up for the Big East or possibly down the road the ACC? If the ACC needed to pick one which is the better grab, should the ACC lose a school to the SEC? I'd prefer to grab Villanova for their basketball in the future, assuming we already had UConn and Rutgers in the fold as well.

If the ACC was going that route, we'd be a significantly better addition, USNWR elitism aside.

(10-09-2011 10:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps this is is a DUH! type of statement but I am going to ask it anyway. I just can't help but wonder if all of the Temple to the Big East for all sports thing is some sort of quid pro quo arrangement between Temple, Villanova and the Big East?

What I mean by that statement is if realigment is all about the leagues increasing their respective television footprints, it makes no sense whatsoever to have Temple AND Villanova for all sports as either one would (theoretically at least) "deliver" the Philadelphia/Pennsylvania market and the other one would basically cost the league money as they would bring even less value than they otherwise might - which was already very little, IMHO.

And yet the rumors continue to persist of Temple for all sports AND Villanova upgrading its football program. Hmm...

Anyone who has followed the Big East for any period of time can tell you that Temple folks have long alleged that Villanova has been blocking the Owls from being admitted for all sports for decades. So why are we now apparently seeing a reversal at a time when it would appear to make less sense than ever before?

This is going to shock you but I think it goes back to basketball and protecting the league's interests there.

I think what we might be seeing here is a backroom deal between Temple, Villanova and the Big East whereby Temple alleviates Villanova's greatest obstacle - the lack of a bona fide D1-A caliber playing facility - by waving its exclusivity rights to Lincoln Financial Field in exchange for the Wildcats' unconditional support of adding Temple for all sports. You may see a similar deal with the Wells Fargo Center in South Philly.

I'm not a big conspiracy guy but that is the only way that it makes sense for both major Philadelphia area schools to remain in this conversation. I'm still not sure it's a great idea for everyone else but knowing the mindset of these Big East folks I do believe that is exactly what may be materializing here. What do you guys think? Is that too out there? Alternatively, is it blatantly obvious? I'd like to hear your thoughts. Also, if it is true, do you support it and why?

Your post makes too much sense. It can't be true. LOL Kidding aside, this is an excellent post. You brought up points I hadn't really considered. I think it is certainly possible that Villanova and Temple could both end up playing Big East football and sharing Lincoln Financial Field for home games.

I think Temple is being considered because the Big East needs schools "now". I don't think they have the luxury anymore of waiting on Villanova to find a site for a new field or upgrade the soccer stadium they were thinking about earlier in the year (at the soonest it's going to take Villanova 5-years to get its program ready to move up). I doubt the Linc can support three schools, and I don't think the Big East wants to let the Philly market get away. Temple makes sense now because a) they've improved since being kicked out, b) they have a lease on an NFL field, and c) they've been in the league before and the Big East knows what it's getting, among other various factors.

All that said, I still can't help but think about all the "stuff", as I'll call it, that Genshaft said a few weeks back about how the Big East has no interest in looking at programs that overlap existing Big East markets and States. Because of TCU's departure that approach has to be thrown out the window, even for Genshaft, and the conference is now on the brink of destruction. It can no longer afford to exclude Temple and UCF from consideration simply because it's running out of options.

I think you might be reaching too far about Villanova and Temple coming to some kind of agreement. I could be wrong, but my take-away from Temple is the Big East is totally desperate for replacements (and I say that with no disrespect to any candidate schools).

(10-10-2011 12:16 AM)MWD1001 Wrote: [ -> ]I think Temple is being considered because the Big East needs schools "now". I don't think they have the luxury anymore of waiting on Villanova to find a site for a new field or upgrade the soccer stadium they were thinking about earlier in the year (at the soonest it's going to take Villanova 5-years to get its program ready to move up). I doubt the Linc can support three schools, and I don't think the Big East wants to let the Philly market get away. Temple makes sense now because a) they've improved since being kicked out, b) they have a lease on an NFL field, and c) they've been in the league before and the Big East knows what it's getting, among other various factors.

All that said, I still can't help but think about all the "stuff", as I'll call it, that Genshaft said a few weeks back about how the Big East has no interest in looking at programs that overlap existing Big East markets and States. Because of TCU's departure that approach has to be thrown out the window, even for Genshaft, and the conference is now on the brink of destruction. It can no longer afford to exclude Temple and UCF from consideration simply because it's running out of options.

I think you've nailed it. The strongest claim to a BCS AQ bid that the Big East has is geography. To run a national championship "tournament" a7 exclude the Boston - Washington corridor makes no sense. The heart of that corridor is the NY-Philly axis. Despite the fact that the ACC now has Boston, Washington, & the "upstate" regions of NY & western PA, a Big East with schools from CT to Philly + West Virginia's flagship university makes the case that they represent too strong a population base to be ignored.

The Big East IS desperate to rebuild & as such, they must have something immediately & can't afford to wait any more for a Villanova that may be ready a few years down the line. Boise State represents the same sort of "desperate" move that wouldn't have even been considered a month ago. The conference needs an instant boost in credibility & in leverage. Regardless of any quid pro quo between Villanova & Temple, I think that this is the primary issue that the conference is dealing with right now.

As for Villanova, my guess is that any thoughts of a football upgrade are on hold if not dead. There's no way that they can make the required investment necessary to upgrade their football program without a guaranteed return on investment. Far too many college football programs lose money to do this thing that casually. If the Big East wants an East Coast FCS upgrade, UMass would be a far better choice at this point for geographic leverage reasons.

(10-10-2011 12:16 AM)MWD1001 Wrote: [ -> ]I think Temple is being considered because the Big East needs schools "now".

+1.

Quote:Genshaft said a few weeks back how the Big East has no interest in looking at programs that overlap existing Big East markets and States. Because of TCU's departure that approach has to be thrown out the window, even for Genshaft, and the conference is now on the brink of destruction. It can no longer afford to exclude Temple and UCF from consideration simply because it's running out of options.

+1

The problem is, all of the remaining 6 football schools are openly lobbying for admission to other conferences. How do you get potential-new members to join when nobody even knows which of the current members will remain? Even Navy -- where generating athletic revenue is not part of the core institutional mission -- doesn't want to step into a blind alley like that. Yet UCF/whoever will?

(10-10-2011 05:29 AM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is, all of the remaining 6 football schools are openly lobbying for admission to other conferences. How do you get potential-new members to join when nobody even knows which of the current members will remain? Even Navy -- where generating athletic revenue is not part of the core institutional mission -- doesn't want to step into a blind alley like that. Yet UCF/whoever will?

+1

At this point nothing would surprise me with these idiots.

I think we are in a desperate situation and need football schools. In addition, we lost two really good bball school when Pitt/Cuse left so Temple, being a good bball school also really gives them an edge I believe. Nova is going to to have suck it up.

(10-09-2011 11:45 PM)JHG722 Wrote: [ -> ]If the ACC was going that route, we'd be a significantly better addition, USNWR elitism aside.

Even taking the academics issue out of the picture, Nova has a better overall athletics program top-to-bottom than Temple. When you add in the academics (which does matter to the ACC), Nova with access to the Linc and about a decade as an FBS school would be the better addition, imho.

But I do concede that Temple is making strides fast and might catch Nova in terms of overall athletics if playing all-sports in the Big East for a decade or so.

Cheers,
Neil

(10-09-2011 11:31 PM)ringmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Doc, I'm new to the whole Villanova upgrading their football program to the BCS and the Big East controversy. I know you've hinted at why Pitt hated this. Can you tell me the reasons why, if Villanova could play at Lincoln financial field that they would be a bad pick up for the Big East or possibly down the road the ACC? If the ACC needed to pick one which is the better grab, should the ACC lose a school to the SEC? I'd prefer to grab Villanova for their basketball in the future, assuming we already had UConn and Rutgers in the fold as well.

Okay, but you asked for it. This is long and a bit complex so grab a cup of coffee:

Pitt had no problem with Villanova per se, but rather what their addition represented as a whole.

The Pitt admins believed that with the media rights landscape having shifted so dramatically in recent years in favor of football over men's basketball, that it was foolish to ignore that reality and that it was obvious that any future expansion had do be done with football as its primary driver, not men's basketball.

Naturally a number of schools disagreed with that view - which was certainly and obviously their right. Those schools' mentality was, "Look, the Northeast is different than every other area in the country and the Big East is first and foremost a men's basketball conference - always has been, always will be." Those people tended to approach expansion with men's basketball as the primary consideration with football as their second priority.

Then the whole Villanova thing comes up and the Wildcats themselves want nothing to do with upgrading. They even rebuff the league's overtures several times before finally agreeing to study it. Their fellow Catholic schools are pushing hard for them to do it to ensure that the league stays together should several key teams leave. In fact at one point the other Catholic schools discuss pooling their resources together to give Villanova some sort of loan to help them get their program off the ground. Also, it is proposed by the league that for the next several years Villanova gets lucrative guarantee games ($500K per game) against the established league schools to further help them get their program up and going.

Then, after studying it for a year or so (and probably for years before that), the Nova people come up with a - for politeness' sake we're going to use the word "plan" - that would entail them playing their home games at an 18,500 seat off campus soccer stadium. That is a stadium that would be about half the size of Duke's tiny Wallace-Wade Stadium - but with the added benefit of being played off campus.

Awesome!

To top it all off, in their presentations to donors - another key group needed to help launch such an expensive undertaking - the Villanova brass was reassuring their fans not to worry about the financial end of this because they never intended to spend more than the bare minimum on football. They were openly talking about how they would use football as a loss leader to protect their men's basketball program. They were calling it the "Duke model."

That is when Pitt, West Virginia and Rutgers got together and FINALLY put their feet down and said no more! I can't speak for the other two but I can tell you that Pitt's mentality was, "We're struggling ourselves here and we simply cannot afford to become some other school's Sugar Daddy. And we DEFINITELY aren't going to bend over backwards to help prop up Villanova's men's basketball program."

What I think stung the Pitt people was how vicious things got behind the scenes with leaked quotes by admins FROM OTHER FOOTBALL SCHOOLS pressuring them to back down by basically pinning the whole Villanova thing on Pitt. Pitt resented that immensely.

So after a real battle over that, the Villanova people FINALLY agreed to go back to the drawing board and came up with a "plan" to play their home games in that same off campus soccer stadium but promised that it would *eventually* (no specific timeline was ever provided) be expanded to a whopping 30,000 seats - which would still leave it as the smallest stadium in any BCS league - but that they would also play some home games at 106 year-old Franklin Field (Penn's home field) and at Citizen's Bank Ballpark (The Phillies' home field).

Astonishingly, their new and improved plan did little to assuage the dissenting schools. They still had no practice facility and their vagabond scheduling strategy was in many ways worse than the original plan - which was a remarkable feat indeed as most people didn't even imagine that to be possible.

As others have correctly pointed out, I'm not sure that anything would have kept Pitt and Syraucse in the Big East once an offer from the ACC came in. However I can tell you with absolute certainty that a lot of Pitt people were rubbed the wrong way by the events of the past year and the actions of many of their former business partners and it made the parting far less bittersweet than it otherwise might have been.

We LOVED being in the Big East. We were proud of everything the league had accomplished and we fiercely defended it against all comers. However it was clear that the league's long range business plan and ours had become divergent and when that happens it is almost always best for the partners to split up and forge their own paths and that is exactly what we're doing now - which is terribly exciting.

(10-10-2011 08:13 AM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-09-2011 11:45 PM)JHG722 Wrote: [ -> ]If the ACC was going that route, we'd be a significantly better addition, USNWR elitism aside.

Even taking the academics issue out of the picture, Nova has a better overall athletics program top-to-bottom than Temple. When you add in the academics (which does matter to the ACC), Nova with access to the Linc and about a decade as an FBS school would be the better addition, imho.

But I do concede that Temple is making strides fast and might catch Nova in terms of overall athletics if playing all-sports in the Big East for a decade or so.

Cheers,
Neil

Problem is the Big East doesn't have the luxury of adding a team in hopes that they'll bring a quality football product in a decade. Yes, I know ECU is struggling right now.