(10-25-2014 08:47 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 08:00 PM)knightmite Wrote:  Creating an all Catholic bb conference was stupid. Very little market appeal outside of Catholics. Now if the Pope shows up for all the games that might help a little.

It could actually work but they need to expand into other markets. I am surprised they haven't invited St Louis and Richmond. Two big markets, competitive teams and would drive more interest.

Long term, we all knew that the New Big East probably wasnt a good idea. The old A-10 was a strong conference and their TV contract was never more then about $1 million. Fox 1 is really leaving them hanging out there, which I dont understand.

I would be setting up as many big time games as they can find. I would work on setting up and ACC vs Big East tourney... but instead, I have seen very little promotion. If I am investing $20 million a year, id promote the hell out of it.

The Big East got a challenge going with the B1G, starting in 2015 and ending in 2020.

These are the challenges that I'm aware of (not sure if there are more):

Big East / B1G
ACC / B1G
Big 12 / SEC

IMO Aresco dropped the ball by not setting up the AAC with one of these...

No one cares about Big East BB since UConn and the others left. That's all history.

The only realignment scenario I would spend time thinking about would be adding some combination from: BYU, Army, Boise, Air Force, and Colorado State. I'd like to get to 16 schools.

(10-25-2014 09:19 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  No one cares about Big East BB since UConn and the others left. That's all history.

The only realignment scenario I would spend time thinking about would be adding some combination from: BYU, Army, Air Force, Boise, and Colorado State. I'd like to get to 16 schools.

I was actually really excited about an East/West conference but now were east heavy, so I dont see it ever happening.

(I'll get blasted for this) In time, I can see Umass being a solid add. They have good basketball, great market, complimentary geography to Uconn and I think their coach can get them turned around. Then I would add Army. Army and Navy want to be football only and there is always a level of interest in their games even though they arent good.

Then to Balance out, Id invite Air Force and Colorado St. That would make an interesting 16 team conference and with all Three Academies, i think there would be some interest. CSU and Umass are good bball teams and both are investing in their programs. Long term, i think both can be good.

Boise St I wouldnt go with. They have shown their true colors but backing out on us and then screwing the MWC in contract negotiations...plus they are WAY out in the middle of nowhere and I do wonder if they can continue to maintain their success...well see.

BYU is a pipe dream. They make too much and they will wait to see if they can make it into the B12.

(10-25-2014 08:12 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 07:42 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 07:37 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  The Big East got twice as much money as the AAC, so I don't think they are all that upset we left. With all the NCAA tourney credits they will rack up, they will add another $2+ million. For a basketball only conference to have $6 million income isn't pretty damn good.

Last year credits. We nearly doubled the big east credits.

AAC = 11
Big East = 6

Oh I know we got more credits but they still got $4 million TV contract and we barely got $2. Total income will be higher in the Big East then in the AAC.

I also don't think the Big East will stay at only getting 6 credits. Last year was a down year.

Its really too bad we all couldnt have destroyed CUSA before the AAC was merged. There were a ton of credits that were left behind.

Won't always stay that way. The AAC is being given a chance to prove that it deserves more money. UConn did a lot for us by winning the men's and women's national basketball championships, and UCF by winning a BCS bowl against a P5 opponent.
If we keep delivering those types of results...we will get paid when we renegotiate.

(10-25-2014 07:37 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  The Big East got twice as much money as the AAC, so I don't think they are all that upset we left. With all the NCAA tourney credits they will rack up, they will add another $2+ million. For a basketball only conference to have $6 million income isn't pretty damn good.

All the NCAA credits? Their champ Villanova bowed out in the first weekend. They had an abysmal NCAA tourney.

They earned 5 credits. $250k x 5 = $1.25m / 10 teams = $125k per team, and that's before the BE conference takes a chunk of the $1.25m for expenses. Which they will do.

These teams are probably making less than $100k from the tourney.

(10-25-2014 08:12 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 07:42 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 07:37 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  The Big East got twice as much money as the AAC, so I don't think they are all that upset we left. With all the NCAA tourney credits they will rack up, they will add another $2+ million. For a basketball only conference to have $6 million income isn't pretty damn good.

Last year credits. We nearly doubled the big east credits.

AAC = 11
Big East = 6

Oh I know we got more credits but they still got $4 million TV contract and we barely got $2. Total income will be higher in the Big East then in the AAC.

I also don't think the Big East will stay at only getting 6 credits. Last year was a down year.

Its really too bad we all couldnt have destroyed CUSA before the AAC was merged. There were a ton of credits that were left behind.

I count 5 credits. I just looked at the tourney bracket. Villanova = 2, Creighton = 2, and Providence = 1.

If the BE was down last year, they are worse this year. Only Villanova is ranked.

Don't forget USF is the beneficiary of credits and exit fees from prior years. That will continue for the next 5 years or so.

(10-25-2014 12:43 PM)leapinggazelle Wrote:  Only good thing about being on Fox sports is every single conference game is on there. You know where to look if you want to watch a Big East game. The AAC most of the games are on Espn news and Espn U so the exposure isn't all that great being the 6th conference in the Espn pecking order.

The ratings on Fox though have been abysmal. Some of the games were rated a .1 which translates to 6,000 viewers.

(10-25-2014 12:43 PM)leapinggazelle Wrote:  Only good thing about being on Fox sports is every single conference game is on there. You know where to look if you want to watch a Big East game. The AAC most of the games are on Espn news and Espn U so the exposure isn't all that great being the 6th conference in the Espn pecking order.

False. Some conference games are on CBSSN and others are on FSN(regional networks).

(10-25-2014 02:49 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 09:50 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 08:50 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 08:39 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 08:30 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  In the long run, better exposure on and support from ESPN trumps $2M annually (or about $182K per AAC team), IMO.

Its $2 million more PER TEAM or $20 million annually. Big difference.

True, it does alter the balance. I still believe it is better strategically to be on the side of the Mouse.

$2 million per team for just the TV deal...yes, but....

They had to pay out NCAA credits, buy the Big East name, pay exit fees, etc. They are not getting $2 million extra over the AAC teams (Especially Uconn, USF, and Cincy that got most of the warchest)

If you look at a 5 year analysis with all the lost revenue leaving the old Big East, they had to get $4 million just be close to $2 million per year in the AAC. Now the question is do they even get $4 million in their next TV deal with non-existent ratings. Fox assumed they would produce ratings like they did in the past. No large state schools and a smaller conference means less eye balls watching.

Your point is valid but now take out the travel costs of all the teams not having to come down to Florida... and think how bad it would have been for them if they had to do it twice, plus Texas and other western locations.

Creighton = Omaha
Marquette = Milwaukee
Butler = Indiana
DePaul = Chicago
Xavier = Cincinnati

For the 5 northeast teams, travel to midwestern outposts in Nebraska is actually more difficult than travel to Florida. And costly.

(10-27-2014 08:21 AM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 08:12 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 07:42 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 07:37 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  The Big East got twice as much money as the AAC, so I don't think they are all that upset we left. With all the NCAA tourney credits they will rack up, they will add another $2+ million. For a basketball only conference to have $6 million income isn't pretty damn good.

Last year credits. We nearly doubled the big east credits.

AAC = 11
Big East = 6

Oh I know we got more credits but they still got $4 million TV contract and we barely got $2. Total income will be higher in the Big East then in the AAC.

I also don't think the Big East will stay at only getting 6 credits. Last year was a down year.

Its really too bad we all couldnt have destroyed CUSA before the AAC was merged. There were a ton of credits that were left behind.

I count 5 credits. I just looked at the tourney bracket. Villanova = 2, Creighton = 2, and Providence = 1.

If the BE was down last year, they are worse this year. Only Villanova is ranked.

Don't forget USF is the beneficiary of credits and exit fees from prior years. That will continue for the next 5 years or so.

Xavier had 1 as well.

We still have our credits that we ourselves earned(c7) the previous 5 years- so that would include for instance at least next year Nova's final 4 run.

BE will be worse this year. Only Nova ranked and then the others are down at 5 and 4 votes received in the poll.

The big east did not factor on these major items...

1) tv viewership would drop to non-existent levels
2) they figured the aac would lose additional members....looks like that is a long way forward.
3) didn't imagine the aac would have 5 ranked teams for much of the year.
4) they didn't expect the credits 11 to 6 in the aac's favor in the 1st year. Like someone mentioned, likely almost no revenue shared after expenses.
5) espn doesn't mention them and doesn't have them listed with the major conferences on the basketball show...aac is listed.
6) and the aac is getting some of their credits for 5 years....lol
7) we got paid for the big east name that now has no value.

I agree with your 1-3 big time. I don't think they ever expected #3- didn't see SMU coming at all. And what was amzing was how this happened even with Temple collapsing.

#6 is wrong- the C7 kept their credits. But AAC keeps all the credits from Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt, WVU. That's huge.

(10-25-2014 08:51 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 08:32 AM)J_Coog Wrote:  Where is Hoston?

On the Gulf Cost west of New Orlens.

I did leave a U out.

(10-27-2014 09:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I agree with your 1-3 big time. I don't think they ever expected #3- didn't see SMU coming at all. And what was amzing was how this happened even with Temple collapsing.

#6 is wrong- the C7 kept their credits. But AAC keeps all the credits from Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt, WVU. That's huge.

The C7 teams really didnt have many credits. I think there was a single active credit between St Johns, Depaul, and Providence. Villanova and Gtown both had 12 that were active, but a chunk of them are about to roll off.

This is why I simply could not believe the C7 would split. For the most part, they were the bottom feeders of the BE who were getting rich off of Louisville, Syracuse, WVU, and Pitt.

I'm actually getting tired of the AAC vs. Big East argument.

I really don't mind most of their membership when it comes to being good schools. Marquette and Georgetown would have been valuable AAC pickups from the academic side of things.

I'll never forgive Marquette for publicly attacking Tulane, but the newest iteration of the Big East as a conference is actually a pretty neat idea - regardless of whether it works out or not.

Nova had 5 from 2009, 2 from 2010, 1 each in 2011 and 2013. 3 from 2008 for this year.
Geo had 1 from 2010, 1 from 2011, 2 in 2012, and 1 in 2013. 2 from 2008 for this year.
Marq had 2 from 2009, 1 2010, 3 for 2011 and 2012, and 4 for 2013. 2 from 2008 for this year.
SJ had the 1 from 2011.

So this year the C7 had 12 for Nova, 7 for Geo, 12 for Marquette, and 1 for SJ. So they got 32 credits. That doesn't sound like a lot but it's still for the C7 about 1.15 million per school. That's not a bad ratio at all. The other 3 don't get it because they weren't in the conference.
Next year the BE will have 31 credits. The key will be that 7 come off the board for the following year. Means it'll be 24 plus whatever we get next year.

(10-27-2014 12:37 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm actually getting tired of the AAC vs. Big East argument.

I really don't mind most of their membership when it comes to being good schools. Marquette and Georgetown would have been valuable AAC pickups from the academic side of things.

I'll never forgive Marquette for publicly attacking Tulane, but the newest iteration of the Big East as a conference is actually a pretty neat idea - regardless of whether it works out or not.

totally agree. I like the AAC and think they have a really good conference. i wish we hadn't split quite frankly.

(10-27-2014 09:21 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big east did not factor on these major items...

1) tv viewership would drop to non-existent levels
2) they figured the aac would lose additional members....looks like that is a long way forward.
3) didn't imagine the aac would have 5 ranked teams for much of the year.
4) they didn't expect the credits 11 to 6 in the aac's favor in the 1st year. Like someone mentioned, likely almost no revenue shared after expenses.
5) espn doesn't mention them and doesn't have them listed with the major conferences on the basketball show...aac is listed.
6) and the aac is getting some of their credits for 5 years....lol
7) we got paid for the big east name that now has no value.

1. Let's observe Year Two first.
2. If nothing else, the Big East can claim that they are far more stable than the American. Our entire conference membership considers this league as a happy waiting room until the next round of realignment.
3. That's a good point. SMU will need to sustain their progress after Brown leaves - which may be tough to do.
4. A lot of those are being earned by members that are also the greatest flight risk.
5. The Big East and the American are both major basketball leagues. ESPN is simply promoting their product as superior to Fox's product (Big East).
6. Not really.
7. The name has more value to the C7 than it does to over half of the American.

(10-27-2014 12:56 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(10-27-2014 09:21 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big east did not factor on these major items...

1) tv viewership would drop to non-existent levels
2) they figured the aac would lose additional members....looks like that is a long way forward.
3) didn't imagine the aac would have 5 ranked teams for much of the year.
4) they didn't expect the credits 11 to 6 in the aac's favor in the 1st year. Like someone mentioned, likely almost no revenue shared after expenses.
5) espn doesn't mention them and doesn't have them listed with the major conferences on the basketball show...aac is listed.
6) and the aac is getting some of their credits for 5 years....lol
7) we got paid for the big east name that now has no value.

1. Let's observe Year Two first.
2. If nothing else, the Big East can claim that they are far more stable than the American. Our entire conference membership considers this league as a happy waiting room until the next round of realignment.
3. That's a good point. SMU will need to sustain their progress after Brown leaves - which may be tough to do.
4. A lot of those are being earned by members that are also the greatest flight risk.
5. The Big East and the American are both major basketball leagues. ESPN is simply promoting their product as superior to Fox's product (Big East).
6. Not really.
7. The name has more value to the C7 than it does to over half of the American.

#1 is fair- but given how FS1 is still so new and unproven- it's an uphill battle there...
#2 the question is how long realignment will wait. IT could be 10+ years- which would be the exact same time as the Big East TV deal ending.
#3 The amazing part about it is that you did that w/o Temple. Temple should be back.
#4 while true- there's got to be a space in the inn for there to be a move.
#5 while Big East is a major league realistically- to not be on ESPN is still huge.
#6 just isn't true. C7 kept all of their units.
#7 If the C7 didn't have the Big East name- they would be dead in the water right now. That was a must have for them.

(10-27-2014 12:37 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'll never forgive Marquette for publicly attacking Tulane

There were a lot of curious angles to that.

The Tulane-to-Big-East announcement was made public on November 27, 2012. Two weeks later, on December 11, Marquette A.D. Larry Williams gave an interview to ESPN Radio in Milwaukee, and said:

“I was not pleased that we issued an invitation to Tulane without any diligence to what effect that would have on our basketball product, the draw on our RPI and other such things. I was disappointed that I wasn’t able to participate as a member of the conference in the deliberation that went into adding that. There might be well articulated and very deep reasons why you would do it otherwise. But dog-gone-it, I’m not concerned about that. I’m concerned about making sure that Marquette is in a position that it can take advantage of the great investment it’s made in being successful in basketball."

Notice that he was not necessarily saying that it was a bad idea to invite Tulane, just that the decision should have been structured to allow more of the Big East's stake-holders to have some input before it was publicly announced.

Williams -- who played one year (1991) for the New Orleans Saints and five seasons in the NFL -- had been hired at Marquette barely a year earlier Dec. 5, 2011. One year later -- December 13, 2013 -- exactly a year after his anti-Tulane comments, Marquette announced that Larry Williams was resigning immediately from the position of Athletic Director "to pursue leadership opportunities outside of Marquette". As far as I can tell, no specific reason has ever surfaced to explain why Williams was canned, although the media-consensus appears to be that he had repeated conflicted with Buzz Peterson, the basketball Head Coach (who left for Virginia Tech shortly thereafter). Additionally, Williams does not seem to have accepted any other position in the 10+ months since he resigned at Marquette. At least nothing that has been announced in public.

Finally, Williams' daughter Kristin Williams was working for Tulane Athletics at the time of his interview with ESPN Radio. Her job was in Academic/NCAA Compliance, and she stayed at Tulane from May or June 2012 until August 20, 2013, when she took a similar position with the Mid-America Conference home office in Cleveland, OH. So at the time Williams spoke to ESPN Radio, his daughter had been working at Tulane for about six months. I would sure be interested to know what she told him about Tulane during that time.