Basketball schools killed the BE because they had as many votes as the FB schools. Adding​ one BB school does not threaten to change the balance of power in the conference. Really this move only benefits the good schools like us who need more opportunities for quality wins. This is an absolute no brainer

Um... what killed the Big East is that West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville got offers to be in better conferences. The C7 schools only left after the rest was set in motion. It's kind of silly to blame it all on the non-football members.

(03-23-2017 11:15 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Um... what killed the Big East is that West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville got offers to be in better conferences. The C7 schools only left after the rest was set in motion. It's kind of silly to blame it all on the non-football members.

The non-football schools absolutely contributed to the demise of the Big East. They had a voting block looking to protect their narrow self-interests. They held the football schools hostage with their votes; waiting and hoping for their peer Villanova to upgrade its football to IA and compete as a full member. Dragging their collective feet in those critical years meant missing out on several attractive expansion candidates and a much better TV deal with ESPN.

But adding one quality basketball school won't create the kind of voting block that destroyed the Big East.

(03-24-2017 08:22 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 11:15 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Um... what killed the Big East is that West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville got offers to be in better conferences. The C7 schools only left after the rest was set in motion. It's kind of silly to blame it all on the non-football members.

The non-football schools absolutely contributed to the demise of the Big East. They had a voting block looking to protect their narrow self-interests. They held the football schools hostage with their votes; waiting and hoping for their peer Villanova to upgrade its football to IA and compete as a full member. Dragging their collective feet in those critical years meant missing out on several attractive expansion candidates and a much better TV deal with ESPN.

But adding one quality basketball school won't create the kind of voting block that destroyed the Big East.

Even if the conference falls apart that isn't a bad thing. The American needs to make moves the makes it the best conference for moment. In my view that includes adding VCU, Dayton, and Wichita State. Then exploring football expansion with the usual suspects.

I actually support weaker football additions in UMass and Army if the final version of the conference looked like this.

Basketball

North: UConn, UMass, Dayton, Cincinnati, Temple
West: Wichita State, Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Tulane
South: Memphis, VCU, ECU, UCF, USF

Football

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

This would give the American three strong basketball additions and the Army-Navy game under contract. Geographic gaps are filled which helps with attendance. UC also would be playing in northeastern centric divisions in both sports which does its best to replicate the Big East experience for UC. Football is about having a couple of really good teams at the top that can compete for the access bowl game while basketball is about adding quality depth to increase the number of tournament bids each year. In my structure regional rivalry games are the backbone of the league divisions. I think this type of league could earn a decent TV contract and compete for the access bowl most seasons in football while earning 4 to 7 tournament bids in basketball.

(03-24-2017 08:39 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 08:22 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 11:15 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Um... what killed the Big East is that West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville got offers to be in better conferences. The C7 schools only left after the rest was set in motion. It's kind of silly to blame it all on the non-football members.

The non-football schools absolutely contributed to the demise of the Big East. They had a voting block looking to protect their narrow self-interests. They held the football schools hostage with their votes; waiting and hoping for their peer Villanova to upgrade its football to IA and compete as a full member. Dragging their collective feet in those critical years meant missing out on several attractive expansion candidates and a much better TV deal with ESPN.

But adding one quality basketball school won't create the kind of voting block that destroyed the Big East.

Even if the conference falls apart that isn't a bad thing. The American needs to make moves the makes it the best conference for moment. In my view that includes adding VCU, Dayton, and Wichita State. Then exploring football expansion with the usual suspects.

I actually support weaker football additions in UMass and Army if the final version of the conference looked like this.

Basketball

North: UConn, UMass, Dayton, Cincinnati, Temple
West: Wichita State, Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Tulane
South: Memphis, VCU, ECU, UCF, USF

Football

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

This would give the American three strong basketball additions and the Army-Navy game under contract. Geographic gaps are filled which helps with attendance. UC also would be playing in northeastern centric divisions in both sports which does its best to replicate the Big East experience for UC. Football is about having a couple of really good teams at the top that can compete for the access bowl game while basketball is about adding quality depth to increase the number of tournament bids each year. In my structure regional rivalry games are the backbone of the league divisions. I think this type of league could earn a decent TV contract and compete for the access bowl most seasons in football while earning 4 to 7 tournament bids in basketball.

Yes to Army, hell no to UMass. If we are going to add another in the east I'd rather take Marshall or Southern Miss*. At least those people care about football.


* I'd rather not take either, but if this is our lot in life we might as well sit back and enjoy being raped.

(03-24-2017 08:46 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 08:39 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 08:22 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 11:15 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Um... what killed the Big East is that West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville got offers to be in better conferences. The C7 schools only left after the rest was set in motion. It's kind of silly to blame it all on the non-football members.

The non-football schools absolutely contributed to the demise of the Big East. They had a voting block looking to protect their narrow self-interests. They held the football schools hostage with their votes; waiting and hoping for their peer Villanova to upgrade its football to IA and compete as a full member. Dragging their collective feet in those critical years meant missing out on several attractive expansion candidates and a much better TV deal with ESPN.

But adding one quality basketball school won't create the kind of voting block that destroyed the Big East.

Even if the conference falls apart that isn't a bad thing. The American needs to make moves the makes it the best conference for moment. In my view that includes adding VCU, Dayton, and Wichita State. Then exploring football expansion with the usual suspects.

I actually support weaker football additions in UMass and Army if the final version of the conference looked like this.

Basketball

North: UConn, UMass, Dayton, Cincinnati, Temple
West: Wichita State, Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Tulane
South: Memphis, VCU, ECU, UCF, USF

Football

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

This would give the American three strong basketball additions and the Army-Navy game under contract. Geographic gaps are filled which helps with attendance. UC also would be playing in northeastern centric divisions in both sports which does its best to replicate the Big East experience for UC. Football is about having a couple of really good teams at the top that can compete for the access bowl game while basketball is about adding quality depth to increase the number of tournament bids each year. In my structure regional rivalry games are the backbone of the league divisions. I think this type of league could earn a decent TV contract and compete for the access bowl most seasons in football while earning 4 to 7 tournament bids in basketball.

Yes to Army, hell no to UMass. If we are going to add another in the east I'd rather take Marshall or Southern Miss*. At least those people care about football.


* I'd rather not take either, but if this is our lot in life we might as well sit back and enjoy being raped.

UMass is my gift to UConn. Gives them an regional opponent that makes life easier for olympic sports and an easy road game for football fans to travel to. At some point the conference needs to give each schools a regional partner in football or basketball.

Cincinnati-Dayton
ECU-VCU-Temple-Navy
UConn-UMass-Army
Wichita State-Tulsa
Houston-SMU
Tulane-Memphis
USF-UCF

The conference would then have entire group of schools west in Wichita State, Memphis, Tulane, Houston, Tulsa, and SMU. Another group on the east coast in UConn, UMass, Temple, ECU and VCU. Two in Ohio and in Florida within an hour of so from each other. I imagine there would be some cost saving on travel as well with setup.

I like the look of this conference with Wichita State in all sports except football. I feel like this conference is on the brink of being in the RPI game with that group and an emerging UCF. Need Memphis/Temple to get back to being tournament type, bubble type or just off the bubble type teams. Need Tulsa to compete now and then for a bid. Need Tulane, USF, and ECU to be top 150 type teams (I think Dunleavy will get Tulane there).

(03-24-2017 09:10 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 08:46 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 08:39 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 08:22 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-23-2017 11:15 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Um... what killed the Big East is that West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville got offers to be in better conferences. The C7 schools only left after the rest was set in motion. It's kind of silly to blame it all on the non-football members.

The non-football schools absolutely contributed to the demise of the Big East. They had a voting block looking to protect their narrow self-interests. They held the football schools hostage with their votes; waiting and hoping for their peer Villanova to upgrade its football to IA and compete as a full member. Dragging their collective feet in those critical years meant missing out on several attractive expansion candidates and a much better TV deal with ESPN.

But adding one quality basketball school won't create the kind of voting block that destroyed the Big East.

Even if the conference falls apart that isn't a bad thing. The American needs to make moves the makes it the best conference for moment. In my view that includes adding VCU, Dayton, and Wichita State. Then exploring football expansion with the usual suspects.

I actually support weaker football additions in UMass and Army if the final version of the conference looked like this.

Basketball

North: UConn, UMass, Dayton, Cincinnati, Temple
West: Wichita State, Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Tulane
South: Memphis, VCU, ECU, UCF, USF

Football

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

This would give the American three strong basketball additions and the Army-Navy game under contract. Geographic gaps are filled which helps with attendance. UC also would be playing in northeastern centric divisions in both sports which does its best to replicate the Big East experience for UC. Football is about having a couple of really good teams at the top that can compete for the access bowl game while basketball is about adding quality depth to increase the number of tournament bids each year. In my structure regional rivalry games are the backbone of the league divisions. I think this type of league could earn a decent TV contract and compete for the access bowl most seasons in football while earning 4 to 7 tournament bids in basketball.

Yes to Army, hell no to UMass. If we are going to add another in the east I'd rather take Marshall or Southern Miss*. At least those people care about football.


* I'd rather not take either, but if this is our lot in life we might as well sit back and enjoy being raped.

UMass is my gift to UConn. Gives them an regional opponent that makes life easier for olympic sports and an easy road game for football fans to travel to. At some point the conference needs to give each schools a regional partner in football or basketball.

Cincinnati-Dayton
ECU-VCU-Temple-Navy
UConn-UMass-Army
Wichita State-Tulsa
Houston-SMU
Tulane-Memphis
USF-UCF

The conference would then have entire group of schools west in Wichita State, Memphis, Tulane, Houston, Tulsa, and SMU. Another group on the east coast in UConn, UMass, Temple, ECU and VCU. Two in Ohio and in Florida within an hour of so from each other. I imagine there would be some cost saving on travel as well with setup.

This still doesn't solve the problem of perennial basketball deadweights like Tulane and ECU. Neither should be in this conference IMHO. Tulane adds absolutely nothing other than a nice travel destination. What ECU adds in football could easily be found elsewhere and is barely worth its lead anchor status in basketball. Bottom line is NCAA credits are good money for this conference and the chaff in this conference is preventing us from getting more of it.

I hate the idea of expanding much. Wichita is perfect. Adds another program committed to basketball, spending a bunch of money. Maybe Marshall leaves eventually but I don't think he's leaving until a major major program backs up the brinks truck for him. Wichita will pay and if they're in the AAC he's going to have an opportunity for better seeds than when he was in the MVC. Get the UConn, Temple, Memphis group back to normal... get the bottom programs to just a ok level and the league suddenly is going to be viewed much differently.

I really like the idea of the AAC expanding with these teams, hopefully to make up for UC leaving in the near future.

(03-24-2017 09:21 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  I hate the idea of expanding much. Wichita is perfect. Adds another program committed to basketball, spending a bunch of money. Maybe Marshall leaves eventually but I don't think he's leaving until a major major program backs up the brinks truck for him. Wichita will pay and if they're in the AAC he's going to have an opportunity for better seeds than when he was in the MVC. Get the UConn, Temple, Memphis group back to normal... get the bottom programs to just a ok level and the league suddenly is going to be viewed much differently.

I hope you are right. I think UConn has a chance to compete for an NCAA bid next year while Temple will improve enough to be an NCAA bubble team. Memphis as a program looks lost under Tubby Smith. I like him as a coach but it just seems like he was the wrong fit for that school. Memphis seems like they are going to be a couple years away from competing for the NCAA tournament.

My concern is that this is the new normal for those schools. UConn doesn't have a hall of fame coach anymore or the Big East to recruit too. Memphis doesn't have Coach Cal bringing in elite players anymore. Temple was never great but always good. Their level of consistency has dropped off since they joined the American. I am not sure how much of that is a new league or coaching.

My rankings for the current members of the American (plus Wichita State) in terms of confidence going forward with gaps to evidence which tier a feel the schools will be at. This is all about stability for the program and the ability to win at a high level every year.

1. Cincinnati
2. Wichita State

3. SMU
4. UConn


5. Temple
6. Memphis
7. Houston
8. UCF


9. Tulane

10. ECU

11. USF

(03-24-2017 09:38 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 09:21 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  I hate the idea of expanding much. Wichita is perfect. Adds another program committed to basketball, spending a bunch of money. Maybe Marshall leaves eventually but I don't think he's leaving until a major major program backs up the brinks truck for him. Wichita will pay and if they're in the AAC he's going to have an opportunity for better seeds than when he was in the MVC. Get the UConn, Temple, Memphis group back to normal... get the bottom programs to just a ok level and the league suddenly is going to be viewed much differently.

I hope you are right. I think UConn has a chance to compete for an NCAA bid next year while Temple will improve enough to be an NCAA bubble team. Memphis as a program looks lost under Tubby Smith. I like him as a coach but it just seems like he was the wrong fit for that school. Memphis seems like they are going to be a couple years away from competing for the NCAA tournament.

My concern is that this is the new normal for those schools. UConn doesn't have a hall of fame coach anymore or the Big East to recruit too. Memphis doesn't have Coach Cal bringing in elite players anymore. Temple was never great but always good. Their level of consistency has dropped off since they joined the American. I am not sure how much of that is a new league or coaching.

My rankings for the current members of the American (plus Wichita State) in terms of confidence going forward with gaps to evidence which tier a feel the schools will be at. This is all about stability for the program and the ability to win at a high level every year.

1. Cincinnati
2. Wichita State

3. SMU
4. UConn


5. Temple
6. Memphis
7. Houston
8. UCF


9. Tulane

10. ECU

11. USF

I agree with your thoughts with respect to Temple, Memphis and UConn. I don't see a rebound year in the cards for Memphis or Temple and while UConn has to be better than they were this year, they won't be the Huskies of old.

UH and UCF will continue to get better. The problem though for the ACC is that it is just like when Pitt and Syracuse sucked in the Big East (and we ruled), it will be perceived as a sign of weakness. Perception is if the stronger brands are failing that means the entire conference is weak. I hate that is the way people look at it, but it is what it is.

UConn may not return to the level it was at previously but it will be a tourney team more often than not.

2017-18 season in play

Sources said there’s a strong chance that the Shockers could play in the AAC in the 2017-18 season, as both sides would prefer Wichita State avoiding playing a lame duck year in the Missouri Valley Conference.

Valley officials are prepared for the move, as one told Sports Illustrated on Thursday night: “We understand that this is in the works and that it’s a strong possibility.”

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/20...uri-valley

(03-30-2017 09:43 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  2017-18 season in play

Sources said there’s a strong chance that the Shockers could play in the AAC in the 2017-18 season, as both sides would prefer Wichita State avoiding playing a lame duck year in the Missouri Valley Conference.

Valley officials are prepared for the move, as one told Sports Illustrated on Thursday night: “We understand that this is in the works and that it’s a strong possibility.”

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/20...uri-valley

That would be awesome if that happened. Guessing they would need to announce this very quickly, like in the next couple weeks for this to have any chance of happening.

(03-31-2017 07:26 AM)BigDawg Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 09:43 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  2017-18 season in play

Sources said there’s a strong chance that the Shockers could play in the AAC in the 2017-18 season, as both sides would prefer Wichita State avoiding playing a lame duck year in the Missouri Valley Conference.

Valley officials are prepared for the move, as one told Sports Illustrated on Thursday night: “We understand that this is in the works and that it’s a strong possibility.”

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/20...uri-valley

That would be awesome if that happened. Guessing they would need to announce this very quickly, like in the next couple weeks for this to have any chance of happening.

I think it's going to happen. The AAC needs more high quality games for next year with UConn, Memphis, and Temple all down.

Wichita returns every player off a 30 win team and will likely be a preseason top 10-15 team, they don't want to waste that potential with another season in the MVC, where they end up with a 10 seed again.

(03-31-2017 08:57 AM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 07:26 AM)BigDawg Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 09:43 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  2017-18 season in play

Sources said there’s a strong chance that the Shockers could play in the AAC in the 2017-18 season, as both sides would prefer Wichita State avoiding playing a lame duck year in the Missouri Valley Conference.

Valley officials are prepared for the move, as one told Sports Illustrated on Thursday night: “We understand that this is in the works and that it’s a strong possibility.”

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/20...uri-valley

That would be awesome if that happened. Guessing they would need to announce this very quickly, like in the next couple weeks for this to have any chance of happening.

I think it's going to happen. The AAC needs more high quality games for next year with UConn, Memphis, and Temple all down.

Wichita returns every player off a 30 win team and will likely be a preseason top 10-15 team, they don't want to waste that potential with another season in the MVC, where they end up with a 10 seed again.

For next year I'd be great. UC and Wichita State are both possible top 10-15 teams... Hell SMU may be as well. The top of the league could be damn good with those three next year. If a couple of UCF/UConn/Temple/Houston/Memphis can compete to be bubble teams suddenly the league looks much better.

I think WSU returns pretty much the entire team. They could win the AAC next year.

I tend to think Wichita State was a little over hyped this past year. Yes, they will be a very welcome addition to the conference, but they didn't beat a single NCAA tournament team in the regular season. Granted they only had 3 tries, but I tend to think their computer numbers were boosted by beating the doors off of garbage competition. I'd have UC 1 and WSU 2 at this point.

I'm not willing to put UC Number 1 until we actually see Broome and JJ play well consistently against higher level teams and Cumberland be able to play 30 minutes of consistent basketball and see a freshman who can do what Cumberland did last year, now it's all just potential and we know where that gets you......