Can you guys against expansion of 2-4 teams right now give me a good enough reason to wait on these teams. Don't tell me they will be there later. That is not a strong enough argument.

Please tell me why we shouldn't add them to let them get a chance to strengthen before negotiations have to start with the next tv contract and bowl alignment.

Please tell me you've got something better than hurting bball programs feelings and disrupting the 8/8 hybrid setup.

I feel like Jack Nicholson here sitting in Cuba....yet have the answers and gumption of Cruise in the court room.

Because I said so?

I'm on yer side. I think we add a couple teams now to get to 10. We could take all three ECU, Memphis, UCF and go to 11 I suppose. I don't think there is a good 4th team out there in our part of the country. Maybe am FCS team will step up to the plate.

Because buckaineer says so?...

(06-19-2010 06:24 PM)army56mike Wrote:  Maybe a FCS team will step up to the plate.

Cue Temple supporter(s)...

I'll give you a few reasons...

1) Adding the 2 - 4 teams you want to add (from the group of ECU, UCF, Temple, Memphis, Southern Miss, other CUSA teams???) will weaken the BE both literally and perception wise. Any of these teams will be in the bottom portion of the league from the start, and none of these schools would be respected by the other BCS conferences.

2) These schools are being invited on potential only. There is no guarantee that these schools will become the instant successes that UL had for a short period of time, or be able to make some of the big splashes that USF has made on occasion until their Nov collapses. There is probably a realistic statistical analysis that could be completed to determine the likely success of each candidate school. Out of all of them UCF is probably the only realistic team that MAY significantly improve.

3) Another factor to consider is that the face of the conference would be forever changed, and the football power would be gone from the original remaining BE teams into the new BE teams (the CUSA block). I don't think that Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers or WVU would like to see the CUSA invites be able to outvote the established programs on policy.

I think another way is needed to greatly improve the BE. The BE needs to develop the network first, leverage the large DMAs that are within the BB schools regions and the few FB schools that have larger viewing areas. If/when the money rolls in will be when the BE will be able to invite established, quality FB schools to the conference. Until the BEN becomes a reality, staying the course is the best move in my opinion.

Do I need to provide a list (again) of the BCS AQ schools ECU has played & BEATEN? How can you dis somebody who has beaten you as much as you have beaten them? (Remember ECU is 2-2 vs Pitt). Arrogance right there & nada mas.

When you can't win on the field, do you then pitch out endowment size, market size, Tier level & anything else you can think of to claim your "superiority"?

IF any of y'all are so damn superior, why hasn't the Big 10/11 asked you to join them?

miko, that's a mostly weak argument. Out of UofL, UC and USF, only UofL was a proven winner in football. The others were mediocre at best. UC was about the same level if not weaker than ECU in football. However, those three schools have combined to win 3 Big East championships, 1 BCS bowl game, have had lots of bowl appearances and wins, and been great, respectable and improving basketball teams. They have done a great job in the conference. How could the Big East predict that these schools would provide the excellence that they have achieved?

The same can be said for the Big 3 candidates. All the pieces are in place for them to excel. I am very confident they would be just fine in the Big East.

It's simple. I don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp -

The BE must add teams from its peer conferences - it must take back from the ACC or the like.

There is no alternative. Perhaps adding one of the often mentioned schools with them is fine, but merely adding a CUSA school etc will not add much value to a tv contract or prevent the BE from getting raided.

So little added value and exactly in the same position in terms of being threatened to be raided.

[/align]

Cause it accomplishes very little for the existing 8 teams.
Creates no additional stability. Zip. Nada. Bubkus.
Doesn't increase the TV contract that runs into 2013 one penny.
Splits the $$ for the 2012 season 10 or more ways rather than 8.
They will all be there after June 30th for the 2013 expansion if need be for the new TV deal or network.
They are there if someone picks off one of the existing teams....timing would still be the exact same on exit and entrance.
Limits potential opportunities that still might be created during the next year.
Etc...

Honestly, baring a defection of a BE team or teams in the next week, I've yet to see any convincing reasons to act in the next 11 days rather than on July 1st or later..

(06-19-2010 06:48 PM)joep1 Wrote:  The BE must add teams from its peer conferences - it must take back from the ACC or the like.

What are you willing to bet on that happening? I got 1 cold drink of your choice that says that AIN'T happening...

(06-19-2010 06:50 PM)Den Wrote:  

(06-19-2010 06:48 PM)joep1 Wrote:  The BE must add teams from its peer conferences - it must take back from the ACC or the like.

What are you willing to bet on that happening? I got 1 cold drink of your choice that says that AIN'T happening...

I don't bet on happening. Saying what needs to happen, doesn't mean that it's going to happen. Nonetheless that is the situation.

I want to expand now, but the best reason for not expanding are we don't know what schools are going to be homeless if a conference like the Big 12 or the ACC gets raided. The usual suspects are going to be there 12 months from now; however, I wish the Big East would do something even if it was as simple as brining back Temple or Naby as a football only so we can have a balanced schedule.

My biggest issues with the league are 7 football conference games and 16 teams (too many) and 18 games (too many against too many different schools) for basketball.

When the Big East added Louisville, USF, Cincinnati, and UConn neither of those teams except for Louisville were anything special in football. UConn had recently transitioned from I-AA, Cincy was a 5-6/6-5 CUSA team, and USF had a losing record their last seson in Conference USA.

What being in the Big Eeast has provided those schools is a better national profile in football, increased revenue, and access to better recruits who probably would've gone elsewhere if it hadn't been for the Big East affiliation. Since those teams arrived in the Big East only WVU of the original members has won a conference champtionship, Louisiville 2006 and Cincinnati 2008,2009 have won the other three.

There's no reason to assume that if Memphis, UCF, or ECU were added to the Big East that they wouldn't be able to do the same. All it takes is to have the right coach in place with the advantages of being in a BCS conference and suddenly your school is 11-1 and 12-0 (Bobby Petrino, Brian Kelly).

(06-19-2010 06:27 PM)Den Wrote:  

(06-19-2010 06:24 PM)army56mike Wrote:  Maybe a FCS team will step up to the plate.

Cue Temple supporter(s)...

Sometimes it's not even worth it. mike (amongst several others here) is a tremendous hater.

I know all of you Power Conference members are quickly dismissive, but I think ECU, UCF, and Temple could all compete right away. We're not going to win the conference, or battle it out with UC, Pitt, WVU for top of the BE, but I'm pretty confident that all three would do better than 1-6 in the BE. in 2007 and 2008, we certainly hung with 5-2 and 3-4 UConn, and in fact, beat them in 2007 if not for one of the worst calls in sports history (and with replay no less). Our team is much, much better than 2007 and 2008 as well.

(06-19-2010 06:32 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I'll give you a few reasons...

1) Adding the 2 - 4 teams you want to add (from the group of ECU, UCF, Temple, Memphis, Southern Miss, other CUSA teams???) will weaken the BE both literally and perception wise. Any of these teams will be in the bottom portion of the league from the start, and none of these schools would be respected by the other BCS conferences.
So when we have to expand, and these are the teams that are available are you not taking the chance right now that they improve their profile between now and then? Why not just do it now and stimulate their growth with the BCS tag.

2) These schools are being invited on potential only. There is no guarantee that these schools will become the instant successes that UL had for a short period of time, or be able to make some of the big splashes that USF has made on occasion until their Nov collapses. There is probably a realistic statistical analysis that could be completed to determine the likely success of each candidate school. Out of all of them UCF is probably the only realistic team that MAY significantly improve.
Who do you expect to get if you aren't interested in these teams, because we are going off of potential and thats not good enough? The Big 12 aint exploding leaving KU and the gang available. If the SEC grabs some ACC, the ACC will be grabbing some BE....not the other way around.

3) Another factor to consider is that the face of the conference would be forever changed, and the football power would be gone from the original remaining BE teams into the new BE teams (the CUSA block). I don't think that Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers or WVU would like to see the CUSA invites be able to outvote the established programs on policy.
So there is a top shelf and bottome shelf in the league....NICE! I'm glad we know where we sit now.

I think another way is needed to greatly improve the BE. The BE needs to develop the network first, leverage the large DMAs that are within the BB schools regions and the few FB schools that have larger viewing areas. If/when the money rolls in will be when the BE will be able to invite established, quality FB schools to the conference. Until the BEN becomes a reality, staying the course is the best move in my opinion.

You are getting Fed Ex Sponshorship, 4 new markets (3 urban), and success in both football, baseball, and basketball on the whole taking the four usual suspects.

I mean really guys, I've learned more there is an old guard and new guard, a certain set of programs/fans that would rather wait for lotto ticket of BCS programs to come to the BE, and the common business exercise of invest in a product based on your ROI is not a practice to use in the league.

I would guess the powers that be in the BE believe that those teams would not add monetary value that would make such a move worth it. I also suspect they feel those teams arent going anywhere else so they can wait.
Maybe the BE and its FB presidents believe they have a shot at getting Navy and/or Army, or that schools like UMass Villanova or Fordham will commit to upgrading. If Temple could prove itself i thnk they'd be a natural fit

(06-19-2010 07:27 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  I would guess the powers that be in the BE believe that those teams would not add monetary value that would make such a move worth it. I also suspect they feel those teams arent going anywhere else so they can wait.
Maybe the BE and its FB presidents believe they have a shot at getting Navy and/or Army, or that schools like UMass Villanova or Fordham will commit to upgrading. If Temple could prove itself i thnk they'd be a natural fit

And Army/Navy/Nova/Mass are going to bring more value than the others?

I don't think so

(06-19-2010 07:40 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  

(06-19-2010 07:27 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  I would guess the powers that be in the BE believe that those teams would not add monetary value that would make such a move worth it. I also suspect they feel those teams arent going anywhere else so they can wait.
Maybe the BE and its FB presidents believe they have a shot at getting Navy and/or Army, or that schools like UMass Villanova or Fordham will commit to upgrading. If Temple could prove itself i thnk they'd be a natural fit

And Army/Navy/Nova/Mass are going to bring more value than the others?

I don't think so

Army/Navy maybe... Nova/Mass hell no... problem is none of these schools add value unless we have a network up and running. Adding schools w/out a network cuts into the pie and we all would make less money. I'm all for expansion.

I'm sure we'd take a smaller cut if we were invited back now.

(06-19-2010 07:43 PM)animus Wrote:  

(06-19-2010 07:40 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  

(06-19-2010 07:27 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  I would guess the powers that be in the BE believe that those teams would not add monetary value that would make such a move worth it. I also suspect they feel those teams arent going anywhere else so they can wait.
Maybe the BE and its FB presidents believe they have a shot at getting Navy and/or Army, or that schools like UMass Villanova or Fordham will commit to upgrading. If Temple could prove itself i thnk they'd be a natural fit

And Army/Navy/Nova/Mass are going to bring more value than the others?

I don't think so

Army/Navy maybe... Nova/Mass hell no... problem is none of these schools add value unless we have a network up and running. Adding schools w/out a network cuts into the pie and we all would make less money. I'm all for expansion.

I was thinking PERHAPS long term value. Nova keeps it in the family, UMass helps get the Boston Market.(would they be able to become the next UConn?)
ARMY and Navy have the prestige ACADEMICALLY and (INTER)National appeal. All are also eastern