(04-22-2018 04:25 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-22-2018 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Thats one of the many reasons I always thought it was a mistake to sell the name unless the money was invested in something that would yield long term conference value (like using it to create a high end bowl game for the conference champ).

But the name wouldn't have done you any good. The "Big East" would be like the WAC, or the Missouri Valley or the Southern Conference, or Conference USA--a league that used to be important before a big shift in membership. UConn would be like Memphis in CUSA 2.0, a great program stranded in a bad conference.

The name is valuable for us because it's part of our history and vice versa. Separated from the schools that made it mean something, it doesn't mean anything.

If the teams were all that mattered then the BIg East would never have paid 100 million for the name. The name itself had value and 4 of the teams in the AAC were ex-Big East schools. Yes, I dont disagree that the it would have been a diminished Big East---but starting from scratch in building name recognition is infinitely much harder than starting with a known brand name. In fact, I have little doubt that not even having a name was at least a factor in the current sad little AAC media deal. If Im NBC or ESPN---Im much more interested in something I can market as the Big East than I am the "conference to be named later".

That said, I would have looked much more postively on the transaction had a significant portion of the money been invested in something that would yield a long term return to the conference (like a major bowl game).