(04-19-2022 02:01 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:54 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:47 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:12 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 11:37 AM)e-parade Wrote:  UMass is just under 2 hours from Boston, whereas it's just under an hour from Hartford. That's also a very reasonable trip for fans in either direction to get to away games.

(04-19-2022 12:10 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  * I agree with esayem that UMass would be a very solid addition to the Big East as a "partner" for UConn. It simply makes sense.

If the Big East had any interest in UMass, they would have gotten a call a long time ago. I don't see it happening any time soon. UMass has an alumni base in Boston, but it's hardly a Boston team. In my view, UMass would have to become one of the dominant members of the A10 for a few years, and demonstrate they were more than a one coach wonder as they were with Calipari, for the Big East to consider the possibility.

I would also offer that UConn already has a partner in the conference in Providence. There is no need to add another member for this reason.

I was thinking more or less in the potential size of the fanbase. The Big East could benefit from another large alumni base in the northeast. For instance, I remember seeing a guy in a UMass shirt beyond the announcers at the Big East tournament, or maybe it was Brooklyn.

Plus, PC, Boston College, and UConn were all original members of the Big East.

Its a solid idea because of how big UMass is.

The problem though is their BB program isn't very good by A10 standards.

BE is wary about adding another bottom feeder to the conference.

I think we'll see UMass and URI move to the top tier of the conference with their new coaching hires.

Tier 1: Davidson, VCU, Dayton, UMass, URI

Tier 2: UR, St. Bona, SLU, Loyola

Tier 3: Fordham, St. Joe's, LaSalle, Duquesne, GW, GMU

UMass basketball is on year 30 of a 5 year rebuilding plan.

(04-19-2022 02:33 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 02:01 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:54 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:47 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:12 PM)orangefan Wrote:  If the Big East had any interest in UMass, they would have gotten a call a long time ago. I don't see it happening any time soon. UMass has an alumni base in Boston, but it's hardly a Boston team. In my view, UMass would have to become one of the dominant members of the A10 for a few years, and demonstrate they were more than a one coach wonder as they were with Calipari, for the Big East to consider the possibility.

I would also offer that UConn already has a partner in the conference in Providence. There is no need to add another member for this reason.

I was thinking more or less in the potential size of the fanbase. The Big East could benefit from another large alumni base in the northeast. For instance, I remember seeing a guy in a UMass shirt beyond the announcers at the Big East tournament, or maybe it was Brooklyn.

Plus, PC, Boston College, and UConn were all original members of the Big East.

Its a solid idea because of how big UMass is.

The problem though is their BB program isn't very good by A10 standards.

BE is wary about adding another bottom feeder to the conference.

I think we'll see UMass and URI move to the top tier of the conference with their new coaching hires.

Tier 1: Davidson, VCU, Dayton, UMass, URI

Tier 2: UR, St. Bona, SLU, Loyola

Tier 3: Fordham, St. Joe's, LaSalle, Duquesne, GW, GMU

UMass basketball is on year 30 of a 5 year rebuilding plan.

The only reason to feel better about our situation now is that for the first time in forever we decided to spend actual money and hire someone with real coaching experience.

But time will tell how that works out.

With great respect to UMass, and the potential it very well could have under Frank Martin, how well would UMass fit into the current membership of the Big East if UConn was not a member? UConn could be a member in the Big East 30 years from now; similarly it could also not be a member ten years from now. If the "fit" of UMass is directly tied to UConn, who very much was and remains a unicorn for the Big East, I question how strong of an expansion candidate that they could be from the league's perspective. For various reasons, the C7 did not pursue a UMass, a VCU, a Rhode Island, etc., when it reformed the Big East in 2013; it would certainly be a dramatic course change to do so in the coming years ahead (especially after the league has enjoyed a significant amount of success).

I wasn't thinking about the strong point GW11 has made.

The Big East's having UMass makes sense only if UConn is present. And until we see how everything shakes out with conference realignment (and many on the board feel major change looms) ... perhaps it's best for the Big East to sit tight (unless, of course, it wants to invite a university with no DI-A football).

Who knows where UConn and/or UMass might be once the dust settles? Obviously, none of us.

(04-19-2022 02:39 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 02:33 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 02:01 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:54 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:47 PM)esayem Wrote:  I was thinking more or less in the potential size of the fanbase. The Big East could benefit from another large alumni base in the northeast. For instance, I remember seeing a guy in a UMass shirt beyond the announcers at the Big East tournament, or maybe it was Brooklyn.

Plus, PC, Boston College, and UConn were all original members of the Big East.

Its a solid idea because of how big UMass is.

The problem though is their BB program isn't very good by A10 standards.

BE is wary about adding another bottom feeder to the conference.

I think we'll see UMass and URI move to the top tier of the conference with their new coaching hires.

Tier 1: Davidson, VCU, Dayton, UMass, URI

Tier 2: UR, St. Bona, SLU, Loyola

Tier 3: Fordham, St. Joe's, LaSalle, Duquesne, GW, GMU

UMass basketball is on year 30 of a 5 year rebuilding plan.

The only reason to feel better about our situation now is that for the first time in forever we decided to spend actual money and hire someone with real coaching experience.

But time will tell how that works out.

I continue to feel optimistic for UMass's long-term future in college sports. Your university simply offers too many plusses academically and athletically to not be deserving of something positive.

(04-19-2022 03:27 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  With great respect to UMass, and the potential it very well could have under Frank Martin, how well would UMass fit into the current membership of the Big East if UConn was not a member? UConn could be a member in the Big East 30 years from now; similarly it could also not be a member ten years from now. If the "fit" of UMass is directly tied to UConn, who very much was and remains a unicorn for the Big East, I question how strong of an expansion candidate that they could be from the league's perspective. For various reasons, the C7 did not pursue a UMass, a VCU, a Rhode Island, etc., when it reformed the Big East in 2013; it would certainly be a dramatic course change to do so in the coming years ahead (especially after the league has enjoyed a significant amount of success).

Does membership have to tie to UConn? I guess I don't understand why that matters. Sure, UConn is a chief rival, but UMass is in a state the Big East hasn't been in for twenty years and they'd still offer regional competition for the heart of the conference in many sports outside of basketball.

I don't see BU or Northeastern being viable candidates anytime soon.

(04-19-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 03:27 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  With great respect to UMass, and the potential it very well could have under Frank Martin, how well would UMass fit into the current membership of the Big East if UConn was not a member? UConn could be a member in the Big East 30 years from now; similarly it could also not be a member ten years from now. If the "fit" of UMass is directly tied to UConn, who very much was and remains a unicorn for the Big East, I question how strong of an expansion candidate that they could be from the league's perspective. For various reasons, the C7 did not pursue a UMass, a VCU, a Rhode Island, etc., when it reformed the Big East in 2013; it would certainly be a dramatic course change to do so in the coming years ahead (especially after the league has enjoyed a significant amount of success).

Does membership have to tie to UConn? I guess I don't understand why that matters. Sure, UConn is a chief rival, but UMass is in a state the Big East hasn't been in for twenty years and they'd still offer regional competition for the heart of the conference in many sports outside of basketball.

I don't see BU or Northeastern being viable candidates anytime soon.

I would think the argument for the Big East is that it is more practical to add another public university if the league knows it will indefinitely keep the public UConn.

Otherwise, focus on private schools (with Dayton and Saint Louis at the top of the list).

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:15 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:48 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

12 years ago, five Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25. The Big East champion, Miami, was the national champion.

What on God's green earth are you talking about?

Miami was long gone in 2010. And there were ZERO Big East Football Conference teams ranked in the final AP poll that year. That was the absolute nadir of Big East football, the year an 8-4 UConn brought no fans to the Fiesta Bowl and got crushed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NCAA_...l_rankings

He may have done the thing where "the year 2000 was only 12 years ago!" that people do before realizing "oh **** I lost a decade"

You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:15 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:48 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

12 years ago, five Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25. The Big East champion, Miami, was the national champion.

What on God's green earth are you talking about?

Miami was long gone in 2010. And there were ZERO Big East Football Conference teams ranked in the final AP poll that year. That was the absolute nadir of Big East football, the year an 8-4 UConn brought no fans to the Fiesta Bowl and got crushed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NCAA_...l_rankings

He may have done the thing where "the year 2000 was only 12 years ago!" that people do before realizing "oh **** I lost a decade"

You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

It was disrespected, not respected, IMO.

Yeah, I remember the sentiment, whether the metrics could back it up or not, was that either the Big East needed to lose its autobid to the BCS, or that if the Big East were to keep it, then the MWC deserved to gain an autobid themselves. Remember, the MWC at one time had Utah, TCU, and BYU, all of whom, IIRC, finished in the Top 15 or so one year.

(04-19-2022 05:24 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 03:27 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  With great respect to UMass, and the potential it very well could have under Frank Martin, how well would UMass fit into the current membership of the Big East if UConn was not a member? UConn could be a member in the Big East 30 years from now; similarly it could also not be a member ten years from now. If the "fit" of UMass is directly tied to UConn, who very much was and remains a unicorn for the Big East, I question how strong of an expansion candidate that they could be from the league's perspective. For various reasons, the C7 did not pursue a UMass, a VCU, a Rhode Island, etc., when it reformed the Big East in 2013; it would certainly be a dramatic course change to do so in the coming years ahead (especially after the league has enjoyed a significant amount of success).

Does membership have to tie to UConn? I guess I don't understand why that matters. Sure, UConn is a chief rival, but UMass is in a state the Big East hasn't been in for twenty years and they'd still offer regional competition for the heart of the conference in many sports outside of basketball.

I don't see BU or Northeastern being viable candidates anytime soon.

I would think the argument for the Big East is that it is more practical to add another public university if the league knows it will indefinitely keep the public UConn.

Otherwise, focus on private schools (with Dayton and Saint Louis at the top of the list).

I don't think we're getting invited either way, but I agree with this.

UCONN was the exception to not having large public institutions in the Big East, and it's because they're UCONN and have the history with the conference. It wouldn't make sense to have UMass as an exception here unless there was a guarantee that UCONN would also be around, especially since there's really no much history with the rest of the conference (outside of a relatively short stint in the A10 for Xavier, and an extremely short one for Butler). Though I'm sure Providence wouldn't mind having another close by rival, and to a lesser extent the other eastern members of the league.

(04-19-2022 05:56 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:15 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  What on God's green earth are you talking about?

Miami was long gone in 2010. And there were ZERO Big East Football Conference teams ranked in the final AP poll that year. That was the absolute nadir of Big East football, the year an 8-4 UConn brought no fans to the Fiesta Bowl and got crushed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NCAA_...l_rankings

He may have done the thing where "the year 2000 was only 12 years ago!" that people do before realizing "oh **** I lost a decade"

You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

It was disrespected, not respected, IMO.

Yeah, I remember the sentiment, whether the metrics could back it up or not, was that either the Big East needed to lose its autobid to the BCS, or that if the Big East were to keep it, then the MWC deserved to gain an autobid themselves. Remember, the MWC at one time had Utah, TCU, and BYU, all of whom, IIRC, finished in the Top 15 or so one year.

IIRC, in the late 2000s, there were ideas to oust the Big East from AQ, trial balloons floated, but the problem was, when they came up with an objective measure of performance that could oust the Big East, it would oust all of the other AQ conferences save for the SEC as well, so the idea was quietly dropped.

So then the focus shifted to creating a performance-path for the MW or WAC to possibly join the AQ club. That happened, I believe, but realignment quickly came to wreck that possibility.

(04-19-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 03:27 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  With great respect to UMass, and the potential it very well could have under Frank Martin, how well would UMass fit into the current membership of the Big East if UConn was not a member? UConn could be a member in the Big East 30 years from now; similarly it could also not be a member ten years from now. If the "fit" of UMass is directly tied to UConn, who very much was and remains a unicorn for the Big East, I question how strong of an expansion candidate that they could be from the league's perspective. For various reasons, the C7 did not pursue a UMass, a VCU, a Rhode Island, etc., when it reformed the Big East in 2013; it would certainly be a dramatic course change to do so in the coming years ahead (especially after the league has enjoyed a significant amount of success).

Does membership have to tie to UConn? I guess I don't understand why that matters. Sure, UConn is a chief rival, but UMass is in a state the Big East hasn't been in for twenty years and they'd still offer regional competition for the heart of the conference in many sports outside of basketball.

I don't see BU or Northeastern being viable candidates anytime soon.

True, UMass is the only option in that state. Unless of course Freido downgrades football. Don't get any ideas though they are all yours!

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:15 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 12:48 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

12 years ago, five Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25. The Big East champion, Miami, was the national champion.

What on God's green earth are you talking about?

Miami was long gone in 2010. And there were ZERO Big East Football Conference teams ranked in the final AP poll that year. That was the absolute nadir of Big East football, the year an 8-4 UConn brought no fans to the Fiesta Bowl and got crushed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NCAA_...l_rankings

He may have done the thing where "the year 2000 was only 12 years ago!" that people do before realizing "oh **** I lost a decade"

You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

BE FB was a running joke in the power club analysis on sports talk shows. It was like a lazy co-worker that really didn't belong.

Making fun of AAC 2.0 is like making fun of those lined up outside of a thrift store or meal kitchen. Its too pathetic to even slight.

(04-19-2022 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:56 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  Yeah, I remember the sentiment, whether the metrics could back it up or not, was that either the Big East needed to lose its autobid to the BCS, or that if the Big East were to keep it, then the MWC deserved to gain an autobid themselves. Remember, the MWC at one time had Utah, TCU, and BYU, all of whom, IIRC, finished in the Top 15 or so one year.

IIRC, in the late 2000s, there were ideas to oust the Big East from AQ, trial balloons floated, but the problem was, when they came up with an objective measure of performance that could oust the Big East, it would oust all of the other AQ conferences save for the SEC as well, so the idea was quietly dropped.

So then the focus shifted to creating a performance-path for the MW or WAC to possibly join the AQ club. That happened, I believe, but realignment quickly came to wreck that possibility.

I can't challenge Michael's or Quo's memories or perceptions. You saw what you saw and heard what you heard. All I can say is that I was following college sports in the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s, and I never heard or saw any serious challenges in the sports media to the idea that the Big East was a full-fledged power conference.

Perhaps one had to live in a certain region of the country - - e.g., regions where the northeast was despised and looked down upon, in general, for cultural and historical reasons dating back to the U.S. Civil War. I lived in the northeastern U.S., so maybe that explains why I never heard or saw any serious criticism of the legitimacy of the Big East.

Another possibility is that, one could find that kind of snarky, sniping chatter on (AM) sports radio talk shows that only a subset of sports fans listened to.

There were discussions about which was the strongest FB or BB conference, and there were a number of years when the Big East and ACC were ranked 5th and 6th, but the whole idea of chucking the weakest conferences out of the BCS was little more than trash talking, like it would be today. I may have come across it somewhere, but never took it seriously.

.

I printed this before in small print, but it seems apt to reprint it in full size print, because it presents the case that the Big East was a full-fledged power conference:

Miami finished the 1991 as the nation's #1 ranked football team (notably, Miami finished 11 of its 12 seasons in the Big East (1991-2001) ) in the Final AP Top 20.

The Big East football was a BCS conference from the inception of the BCS. Many college sports fans viewed the Big East as being comparable with most of the other power conferences - - which it certainly was in the national rankings, in 2000, and between 2006 and 2012:

The Big East football conference finished the 2008 and 2009 seasons ranked #2nd nationally, ahead of 4 P5 conferences, according to:

https://cfbrpi.blogspot.com/2008/01/fina...e-rpi.html
https://masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2009-15.htm

In 2000 and 2007, the Big East was ranked #3 or #4th, nationally, by Sagarin and/or teamrankings.com, respectively, according to this source:

https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/20...college-fo

In 2006, the Big East was ranked #3rd, on average, based on the average rankings of realtimerpi.com and of Sagarin and teamrankings.com.

http://www.realtimerpi.com/football/2006...f_Men.html
https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/20...college-fo

In 2011 and 2012, the Big East was the 5th-ranked P5 football conference, ranked ahead of the ACC.

https://masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2011-15.htm
https://masseyratings.com/cf/arch/compare2012-15.htm

.

Number of Top 25 football teams:
........Big
........East..ACC...PAC...SWC*
1991: 2.......2.......4.......1
1992: 3.......4.......3.......1
1993: 4.......3.......3.......1
1994: 2.......3.......4.......2
1995: 3.......2.......2.......3
1996: 3.......2.......2
1997: 1.......3.......4
1998: 3.......3.......2
1999: 2.......2.......1
2000: 2.......3.......3
2001: 4.......3.......4
2002: 4.......4.......2
2003: 1.......3.......2
2004: 2.......4.......3
2005: 2.......5.......4
2006: 3.......3.......3
2007: 2.......3.......4
2008: 2.......3.......3
2009: 3.......4.......2
2010: 0.......4.......2
2011: 2.......3.......3
2012: 1.......2.......3

*SWC teams: Texas, Texas A&M, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, UH, SMU, & Rice.

.

(04-19-2022 10:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:15 PM)e-parade Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:09 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  What on God's green earth are you talking about?

Miami was long gone in 2010. And there were ZERO Big East Football Conference teams ranked in the final AP poll that year. That was the absolute nadir of Big East football, the year an 8-4 UConn brought no fans to the Fiesta Bowl and got crushed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NCAA_...l_rankings

He may have done the thing where "the year 2000 was only 12 years ago!" that people do before realizing "oh **** I lost a decade"

You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

BE FB was a running joke in the power club analysis on sports talk shows. It was like a lazy co-worker that really didn't belong.

Making fun of AAC 2.0 is like making fun of those lined up outside of a thrift store or meal kitchen. Its too pathetic to even slight.

That's a good point, and it reminded me of something else. I've been talking about the "respect and status" that the AAC and Big East (old and new) had and have, but I have neglected one thing:

While I have said that the AAC has not, despite the strident pushing of the "P6" campaign, been accorded any respect as a "P" league, it has been given *plenty* of respect as a "G" league.

In fact, I think one can make a good case that the one area that the "P6 campaign" has been very effective is in creating the impression in the minds of fans and writers that the the AAC is the clear-cut, slam-dunk dominant G5 league, when in fact its dominance of the G5 hasn't been nearly as evident on the field. The AAC has been the best G5 football conference during the CFP era, but I think that thanks to Aresco's campaign, fans and media generally seem to think that it is the Unquestioned Master of the G5, and the only issue is how it compares to the P5.

In reality, the AAC hasn't been nearly that dominant. It has been the best G5 conference at least 4 of the 8 years of the CFP, but it has also been beaten out by the MW in 3 of those years, including 2 of the last 4, and probably once by the SBC as well, in 2020.

So IMO, the AAC has more status and prestige as a G-league than it merits, given its performance. This has had an impact, it means that the top AAC team is putatively regarded as the "front runner" for the G5 Access spot, even if there isn't a strong basis for that, e.g., Cincy vs Coastal in 2020.

(04-19-2022 10:16 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:56 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  Yeah, I remember the sentiment, whether the metrics could back it up or not, was that either the Big East needed to lose its autobid to the BCS, or that if the Big East were to keep it, then the MWC deserved to gain an autobid themselves. Remember, the MWC at one time had Utah, TCU, and BYU, all of whom, IIRC, finished in the Top 15 or so one year.

IIRC, in the late 2000s, there were ideas to oust the Big East from AQ, trial balloons floated, but the problem was, when they came up with an objective measure of performance that could oust the Big East, it would oust all of the other AQ conferences save for the SEC as well, so the idea was quietly dropped.

So then the focus shifted to creating a performance-path for the MW or WAC to possibly join the AQ club. That happened, I believe, but realignment quickly came to wreck that possibility.

I can't challenge Michael's or Quo's memories or perceptions. You saw what you saw and heard what you heard. All I can say is that I was following college sports in the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s, and I never heard or saw any serious challenges in the sports media to the idea that the Big East was a full-fledged power conference.

Perhaps one had to live in a certain region of the country - - e.g., regions where the northeast was despised and looked down upon, in general, for cultural and historical reasons dating back to the U.S. Civil War. I lived in the northeastern U.S., so maybe that explains why I never heard or saw any serious criticism of the legitimacy of the Big East.

Another possibility is that, one could find that kind of snarky, sniping chatter on (AM) sports radio talk shows that only a subset of sports fans listened to.

(snip for space)

Wow, I just thought it was "common knowledge" that in the late 2000s, after the initial ACC raids resulted in Miami, VT and BC leaving for the ACC, that the Big East was commonly derided as a "they-are-not-worthy" AQ conference.

I remember specifically creating the "BCS Conference Comparison" in 2009 to try and fight that perception. The whole idea was that the Big East actually was performing well on the field (as your data indicates), but was unfairly getting tagged by the national media and fans as the runt of the AQ litter and constantly getting talked down to.

As you say, people have differing memories. Maybe others can chime in?

But to me, saying that in the late 2000s the Big East was given the respect of an AQ conference is like saying, I don't know, that after Hurricane Katrina George W Bush was a popular president or that in the late 2000s the Backstreet Boys were just as popular as they were at the end of the 1990s. Just a very surprising view to me.

(04-20-2022 06:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 10:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:15 PM)e-parade Wrote:  He may have done the thing where "the year 2000 was only 12 years ago!" that people do before realizing "oh **** I lost a decade"

You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:

(04-18-2022 02:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'd say the Big East today has more status and respect than it did 12 years ago

That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

BE FB was a running joke in the power club analysis on sports talk shows. It was like a lazy co-worker that really didn't belong.

Making fun of AAC 2.0 is like making fun of those lined up outside of a thrift store or meal kitchen. Its too pathetic to even slight.

That's a good point, and it reminded me of something else. I've been talking about the "respect and status" that the AAC and Big East (old and new) had and have, but I have neglected one thing:

While I have said that the AAC has not, despite the strident pushing of the "P6" campaign, been accorded any respect as a "P" league, it has been given *plenty* of respect as a "G" league.

In fact, I think one can make a good case that the one area that the "P6 campaign" has been very effective is in creating the impression in the minds of fans and writers that the the AAC is the clear-cut, slam-dunk dominant G5 league, when in fact its dominance of the G5 hasn't been nearly as evident on the field. The AAC has been the best G5 football conference during the CFP era, but I think that thanks to Aresco's campaign, fans and media generally seem to think that it is the Unquestioned Master of the G5, and the only issue is how it compares to the P5.

In reality, the AAC hasn't been nearly that dominant. It has been the best G5 conference at least 4 of the 8 years of the CFP, but it has also been beaten out by the MW in 3 of those years, including 2 of the last 4, and probably once by the SBC as well, in 2020.

So IMO, the AAC has more status and prestige as a G-league than it merits, given its performance. This has had an impact, it means that the top AAC team is putatively regarded as the "front runner" for the G5 Access spot, even if there isn't a strong basis for that, e.g., Cincy vs Coastal in 2020.

All good points. I agree overall, QV.

It's worth noting that since 2014 the AAC has had four football programs (those of UC, UH, UCF and Memphis) in a NY6 Bowl, compared to the MWC's one (Boise) and MAC's one (WMU). The Belt and C-USA have had none.

In addition, the AAC during this time frame saw Houston make a Final Four trip. Memphis won an NIT and has had two top 10 men's basketball recruiting classes (and both of those achievements count for something in terms of keeping the AAC in the "national college sports media spotlight").

It is those type achievements in the "Big Two" sports that have, in part, elevated the AAC over the other four G leagues.

But I do feel, like you, the AAC is often overrated on this board by various fans of AAC programs.

(04-19-2022 05:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 03:27 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  With great respect to UMass, and the potential it very well could have under Frank Martin, how well would UMass fit into the current membership of the Big East if UConn was not a member? UConn could be a member in the Big East 30 years from now; similarly it could also not be a member ten years from now. If the "fit" of UMass is directly tied to UConn, who very much was and remains a unicorn for the Big East, I question how strong of an expansion candidate that they could be from the league's perspective. For various reasons, the C7 did not pursue a UMass, a VCU, a Rhode Island, etc., when it reformed the Big East in 2013; it would certainly be a dramatic course change to do so in the coming years ahead (especially after the league has enjoyed a significant amount of success).

Does membership have to tie to UConn? I guess I don't understand why that matters. Sure, UConn is a chief rival, but UMass is in a state the Big East hasn't been in for twenty years and they'd still offer regional competition for the heart of the conference in many sports outside of basketball.

I don't see BU or Northeastern being viable candidates anytime soon.

It may not have to tie to UConn, but it definitely would need to be approved by the ten other institutions that came together and rebooted the Big East. In 2013, the C7 was deliberate in inviting Butler, Creighton and Xavier - which may not have been East Coast schools, but each were Private, Basketball-First athletic departments (without FBS football) and that were located in major metropolitan markets. Butler and Xavier both had significant postseason success, and both schools (along with Creighton to a lesser extent) had demonstrated a sustained high-level men's basketball program that was well-funded and also had strong fan support. The C7 could have easily added a VCU, a UMass, a Rhode Island, etc. Each had East Coast presence and a basketball-first athletic department (even with UMass having an FBS program). It purposefully chose Butler, Creighton and Xavier for its like-minded and institutional fit. As Frank has repeatedly noted, a school needs to provide value to a conference even if its top program is down; even if/when Butler, Creighton or Xavier come in last, the BE's Presidents value these schools because of their peer compatibility and the values that they can provide the rest of the conference outside of basketball. To highlight, the C7 (and BE) having a uniform train of thought not just in terms of athletics, but also academics, was a major value addition after being in the former version of the Big East (which was a mixture of Privates/Publics, Football/Basketball, Metro/Rural, etc. schools).

Fans don't have to agree with it, but it was clearly what the league focused on when it had its first (and likely only) opportunity to create a league for themselves.

Now, onto UConn. UConn was, and remains, a unicorn in realignment. There is no other school, from a realignment perspective, quite like it. Aside from its location, it is an FBS athletic department, but basketball-first in direction. It is a public institution, but also lacks the same revenues and endowments that other NE schools in the area have (i.e. Rutgers, Boston College, Syracuse). It also, most importantly, lacks the football history and prestige that these other NE schools have had, as it only elevated football at the turn of the century. UConn can choose to be in the Big East, but it also can choose to be in the AAC (which it decided to leave); it can leverage its basketball programs and choose to go to the MAC or C-USA or even the Sun Belt, if it ultimately needed a home for its football program. The Big East accepted UConn back because, despite its differences as an institution, it remains a like-minded fit; it is a basketball-first athletic department, with a championship brand, with a strong fan base in the NE (and especially MSG), and was an original member of the Big East. The Big East made an exception to UConn because UConn, by itself, is an exception. If UConn ultimately gets a call to a depleted ACC down the road, I truly don't think there will be any hard feelings, as UConn is not a Private and was not one of the "new" founding members. It is a relationship that is beneficial to both parties for the near and long-term, and one that has tremendous history connected to it.

It is beating a dead horse, but if/when the Big East expands, both SLU and Dayton will be heavy favorites. Many on here (and on the other site) will disagree because neither is a Syracuse, or an ND, or a UConn, but the reality is that major conferences are expanding, and these types of schools are the strongest institutional fits that would still provide value even if their basketball programs aren't competing for national championships. SLU definitely gets the nod, since it is in a new recruiting area and media market. It's no secret why SLU and UD are investing so heavily in their programs at the moment. The Big East will expand again, the only question is when. If it's not in the next two years (in advance of the next FOX media deal), then it is very likely the Big East holds firm until the 2030's, waiting to see what shakes from the ACC (if anything). Gonzaga remains a scheduling alliance relationship, at best.

(04-20-2022 08:10 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 06:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 10:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 01:33 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  You guys are right - I made a mistake. Have corrected the error. I was trying to do too much too fast, and didn't take the time to double-check. There wasn't a top 25 Big East team in 2012 after all.

However, there were two Big East top 25 teams in 2011, 3 in 2009, two in 2008, three in 2007, and two in 2005.

The point still stands, however, that the Big East was considered a legitimate football power (BCS) conference most years, since 2000.

The sentence in question has been rewritten as follows:


That's not an easy case to prove considering...

EXHIBIT A:

Two Big East football teams were ranked in the Final AP Top 25 in 2011. There is no Big East football conference in 2022.

FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

BE FB was a running joke in the power club analysis on sports talk shows. It was like a lazy co-worker that really didn't belong.

Making fun of AAC 2.0 is like making fun of those lined up outside of a thrift store or meal kitchen. Its too pathetic to even slight.

That's a good point, and it reminded me of something else. I've been talking about the "respect and status" that the AAC and Big East (old and new) had and have, but I have neglected one thing:

While I have said that the AAC has not, despite the strident pushing of the "P6" campaign, been accorded any respect as a "P" league, it has been given *plenty* of respect as a "G" league.

In fact, I think one can make a good case that the one area that the "P6 campaign" has been very effective is in creating the impression in the minds of fans and writers that the the AAC is the clear-cut, slam-dunk dominant G5 league, when in fact its dominance of the G5 hasn't been nearly as evident on the field. The AAC has been the best G5 football conference during the CFP era, but I think that thanks to Aresco's campaign, fans and media generally seem to think that it is the Unquestioned Master of the G5, and the only issue is how it compares to the P5.

In reality, the AAC hasn't been nearly that dominant. It has been the best G5 conference at least 4 of the 8 years of the CFP, but it has also been beaten out by the MW in 3 of those years, including 2 of the last 4, and probably once by the SBC as well, in 2020.

So IMO, the AAC has more status and prestige as a G-league than it merits, given its performance. This has had an impact, it means that the top AAC team is putatively regarded as the "front runner" for the G5 Access spot, even if there isn't a strong basis for that, e.g., Cincy vs Coastal in 2020.

All good points. I agree overall, QV.

It's worth noting that since 2014 the AAC has had four football programs (those of UC, UH, UCF and Memphis) in a NY6 Bowl, compared to the MWC's one (Boise) and MAC's one (WMU). The Belt and C-USA have had none.

In addition, the AAC during this time frame saw Houston make a Final Four trip. Memphis won an NIT and has had two top 10 men's basketball recruiting classes (and both of those achievements count for something in terms of keeping the AAC in the "national college sports media spotlight").

It is those type achievements in the "Big Two" sports that have, in part, elevated the AAC over the other four G leagues.

But I do feel, like you, the AAC is often overrated on this board by various fans of AAC programs.

No question, the AAC dominance of the G6 Access spot by multiple teams, and Cincy making the playoffs, has shined a big spotlight on the AAC and fed in to this narrative.

And as I indicated, I think they feed in to each other - the AAC gets respect as the dominant conference, which then gives its top team a leg up perception-wise when it comes to ranking G5 teams for the NY6 bowl spot.

(04-20-2022 08:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 08:10 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 06:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 10:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(04-19-2022 05:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  FWIW, as I explained above, I don't think the point stands. Despite the Big East's objective success on the field between 2005- 2012, IMO the Big East football of that time around 2010 was disrespected far more than respected. It was routinely derided in the media and fans as not being worthy of Power status, was looked down upon.

BE FB was a running joke in the power club analysis on sports talk shows. It was like a lazy co-worker that really didn't belong.

Making fun of AAC 2.0 is like making fun of those lined up outside of a thrift store or meal kitchen. Its too pathetic to even slight.

That's a good point, and it reminded me of something else. I've been talking about the "respect and status" that the AAC and Big East (old and new) had and have, but I have neglected one thing:

While I have said that the AAC has not, despite the strident pushing of the "P6" campaign, been accorded any respect as a "P" league, it has been given *plenty* of respect as a "G" league.

In fact, I think one can make a good case that the one area that the "P6 campaign" has been very effective is in creating the impression in the minds of fans and writers that the the AAC is the clear-cut, slam-dunk dominant G5 league, when in fact its dominance of the G5 hasn't been nearly as evident on the field. The AAC has been the best G5 football conference during the CFP era, but I think that thanks to Aresco's campaign, fans and media generally seem to think that it is the Unquestioned Master of the G5, and the only issue is how it compares to the P5.

In reality, the AAC hasn't been nearly that dominant. It has been the best G5 conference at least 4 of the 8 years of the CFP, but it has also been beaten out by the MW in 3 of those years, including 2 of the last 4, and probably once by the SBC as well, in 2020.

So IMO, the AAC has more status and prestige as a G-league than it merits, given its performance. This has had an impact, it means that the top AAC team is putatively regarded as the "front runner" for the G5 Access spot, even if there isn't a strong basis for that, e.g., Cincy vs Coastal in 2020.

All good points. I agree overall, QV.

It's worth noting that since 2014 the AAC has had four football programs (those of UC, UH, UCF and Memphis) in a NY6 Bowl, compared to the MWC's one (Boise) and MAC's one (WMU). The Belt and C-USA have had none.

In addition, the AAC during this time frame saw Houston make a Final Four trip. Memphis won an NIT and has had two top 10 men's basketball recruiting classes (and both of those achievements count for something in terms of keeping the AAC in the "national college sports media spotlight").

It is those type achievements in the "Big Two" sports that have, in part, elevated the AAC over the other four G leagues.

But I do feel, like you, the AAC is often overrated on this board by various fans of AAC programs.

No question, the AAC dominance of the G6 Access spot by multiple teams, and Cincy making the playoffs, has shined a big spotlight on the AAC and fed in to this narrative.

And as I indicated, I think they feed in to each other - the AAC gets respect as the dominant conference, which then gives its top team a leg up perception-wise when it comes to ranking G5 teams for the NY6 bowl spot.

Correct. And as you and I agree, that "semi-control" of the NY6 bowl spot almost certainly will end with the membership change coming to the AAC.