(04-15-2014 10:57 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 10:47 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 10:36 AM)Maize Wrote:  The only way any conference adds anyone is if it increases the TV $$$$

It might not happen but it changes the need for two schools joining instead of one.

And this makes it easier for a P5 to expand.

Makes it easier, yes, but also reduces the motive to do so.

(04-15-2014 09:47 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Pretty much solidifies that the B12 wont be expanding anytime soon

Not necessarily. The article doesn't mention any adjustment to the requirements to have a champ game. They could deregulate the divisional requirement but still require 12 teams.

(04-15-2014 10:36 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 10:32 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Deregulation is a game changer in my view. Goodbye even divisions and hello odd numbered teams in a conference. The ACC could add UConn without adding anyone else now or the American could go after BYU too. The American could possibly add UMass without worry about adding a second school that would be kill the leagues SOS.

Cincinnati doesn't have to play in a western division because there will be no western division.

The only way any conference adds anyone is if it increases the TV $$$$....while I would not have any issue with with Cincinnati or UConn to the ACC-(yes I know this is an AAC Board) just don't see it happening...

Either the ACC and the B1G could look to UConn *only* and the northeast market now. Either of the conferences might decide it's best to beat the other (and preempt the other) on the invite.

(04-15-2014 11:05 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 09:47 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Pretty much solidifies that the B12 wont be expanding anytime soon

Not necessarily. The article doesn't mention any adjustment to the requirements to have a champ game. They could deregulate the divisional requirement but still require 12 teams.

I doubt the Big '12' would have sponsored a deregulation proposal that would still require 12 teams.

(04-15-2014 11:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:05 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 09:47 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Pretty much solidifies that the B12 wont be expanding anytime soon

Not necessarily. The article doesn't mention any adjustment to the requirements to have a champ game. They could deregulate the divisional requirement but still require 12 teams.

I doubt the Big '12' would have sponsored a deregulation proposal that would still require 12 teams.

I thought of that, but it could be a means to an end. If the Big12 did not want to expand bc divisional play created scheduling issues this could remove that barrier.

(04-15-2014 09:51 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why did we need 12 schools again? Can we create a new league and leave Tulsa & Tulane out?

I'd like to keep Tulsa. Bottom line is Tulane was a horrendous addition. However, you can thank UCF leadership for that boneheaded move.

Quote:Central Florida Played A Role In Bringing Tulane Into Big East

Text messages from Central Florida President John Hitt to Big East commissioner Mike Aresco show the school played a role in one of the league's more surprising moves.

Hitt sent a text message to Aresco about Tulane's interest in the Big East, according to records obtained by the Orlando Sentinel.

"Scott Cowen at Tulane wants to talk with me about possibilities for Tulane in the Big East. Scott is a friend. Will listen and then call you. John," Hitt wrote to Aresco on Nov. 18.

http://articles.courant.com/2013-01-29/s...sco-tulane

Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

(04-15-2014 10:49 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 10:47 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 10:36 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 10:32 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Deregulation is a game changer in my view. Goodbye even divisions and hello odd numbered teams in a conference. The ACC could add UConn without adding anyone else now or the American could go after BYU too. The American could possibly add UMass without worry about adding a second school that would be kill the leagues SOS.

Cincinnati doesn't have to play in a western division because there will be no western division.

The only way any conference adds anyone is if it increases the TV $$$$....while I would not have any issue with with Cincinnati or UConn to the ACC-(yes I know this is an AAC Board) just don't see it happening...

It might not happen but it changes the need for two schools joining instead of one.

The American should use this schedule rotation and play nine games:

South:Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane
East: ECU, Navy, USF, UCF
North:Cincinnati, Memphis, Temple, UConn

Play everyone in you pod every season and three teams from the other groups every season. This protects just about every rivalry game and gives everyone a chance for exposure in Texas and Florida.

If the American sticks with eight games, I would do this

North: UConn, Temple, Navy
Southeast: ECU, USF, UCF
Midwest: Memphis, Cincinnati, Tulsa
Southwest: Houston, SMU, Tulane

Play everyone in your pod plus two teams in the other pods each season. Most rivalry games are protected and the rotation allows for a nice mix of opponents every season.

Meh,

ECU is a long ways from those opponents in our division. Would be better suited in the Northeast.

There's no point in having divisions period. Just rotate the entire conference and maybe have one protected rivalry for every season.

(04-15-2014 11:18 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I doubt the Big '12' would have sponsored a deregulation proposal that would still require 12 teams.

I thought of that, but it could be a means to an end. If the Big12 did not want to expand bc divisional play created scheduling issues this could remove that barrier.

Has anyone connected to the Big <XII -- Bowlsby, a university president, AD, coach, anybody at all -- ever said anything to indicate that is the case?

I don't think UConn needs any protected rival. There is nobody in the conference that we'll miss playing if we don't see them for a year or two.

(04-15-2014 11:25 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:18 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I doubt the Big '12' would have sponsored a deregulation proposal that would still require 12 teams.

I thought of that, but it could be a means to an end. If the Big12 did not want to expand bc divisional play created scheduling issues this could remove that barrier.

Has anyone connected to the Big <XII -- Bowlsby, a university president, AD, coach, anybody at all -- ever said anything to indicate that is the case?

I can't quote it, nor would I swear to it, but as I recall there was some mention of UT and OU opposing expansion bc of the potential divisional split.

If you look at the B12 map, the talent is overloaded in OK/TX. If they expand to 12, lets say for WV's sake they come east and add Memphis/Cincy. The OU/UT division is much more difficult than the other. More than that though, OU and UT will always play each other, but they'd prefer to not removed themselves from the title game picture by doing so. An OU/UT Big12 CG is the big ticket. With the division requirement there is no real good way to draw the lines, short of zipper divisions.

Deregulation allows OU and UT can have their red river rivalry and then meet again in the Champ game and there aren't any messy divisions that have to be created.

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

(04-15-2014 11:42 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I don't think UConn needs any protected rival. There is nobody in the conference that we'll miss playing if we don't see them for a year or two.

I think this is true. UCONN football is not going to walk into opponents stadiums and draw heat.

(04-15-2014 11:42 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I don't think UConn needs any protected rival. There is nobody in the conference that we'll miss playing if we don't see them for a year or two.

Agree. Although, I think basketball is a different case. I want 2 games every year against Cincinnati.

Huskies vs Pirates will emerge into a heated rivalry on the gridiron in the coming years

(04-15-2014 11:47 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:42 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I don't think UConn needs any protected rival. There is nobody in the conference that we'll miss playing if we don't see them for a year or two.

Agree. Although, I think basketball is a different case. I want 2 games every year against Cincinnati.

For football, this may be a reason to add UMASS

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

(04-15-2014 11:46 AM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:19 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Sorry Tulane fans. Lets just say.... "I'll believe it when I see it."

You have good football attendance and a history of playing pretty good football consistently. That's important. It's not the whole story. You might look at it before you bash teams that were here BEFORE you were.
Historically for ECU:
Zero NITs
Zero NCAA tournament wins in men's basketball (zero at large appearances).
Zero NCAA tournament wins in women's basketball.
While in C-USA:
Football Top 10s. Tulane 1, ECU 0
CWS appearances. Tulane 2, ECU 0
NCAA appearances. 0-0
NIT appearances: Tulane 3 ECU 0
Women's basketball NCAA appearances: Tulane 10, ECU 1
Not to mention superiority in virtually every minor sport, including a top 10 in women's golf last year.
That might give a clue as to why Tulane was admitted BEFORE ECU was.

Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

(04-15-2014 11:49 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:47 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:42 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I don't think UConn needs any protected rival. There is nobody in the conference that we'll miss playing if we don't see them for a year or two.

Agree. Although, I think basketball is a different case. I want 2 games every year against Cincinnati.

For football, this may be a reason to add UMASS

NO TO UMASS! Just because they're in a media market doesn't make them viable.

Let me break it down like this....

I could move to L.A. Start an arena league football team. The team goes 0-19 for 5 consecutive seasons. No one comes to watch us play, and people on this board would still be arguing that the NFL should expand and bring my team in based on the logic that my team was in a "Top Teir Media Market" and we had really hot cheerleaders (basketball team). Sometimes a steaming pile of crap is just a steaming pile of crap and the media market which it was defecated in doesn't mean that it deserves admittance. Prove something - anything - on the field and then maybe we'll think about it.

(04-15-2014 11:49 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:47 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(04-15-2014 11:42 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I don't think UConn needs any protected rival. There is nobody in the conference that we'll miss playing if we don't see them for a year or two.

Agree. Although, I think basketball is a different case. I want 2 games every year against Cincinnati.

For football, this may be a reason to add UMASS

UMASS really doesn't excite UCONN fans either - just like playing BC now. Years ago maybe, but students now are many years removed from those rivalries. They don't really register anymore.

(04-15-2014 11:56 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Most of that is ancient history and/or is a non-factor when talking about how it actually benefits the league as a whole. Nice golf reference.

I only included things that happened DURING C-USA.
All of ECU's basketball gooseggs are current and ancient.
If ECU had a women's golf top 10, there would have been 3 threads started on it.