We now have two articles regarding Big East expansion. However, the most important issue upon which expansion will be based was left unsaid in both articles...and that is the cost per existing BE school to add one more team.

$17,000,000 BCS money divided by 8 Big East schools equals $2,125,000 per Big East school.

$17,000,000 BCS money divided by 9 Big East schools equals $1,888,888 per Big East school.

The Big East payout is lowered $236,111 each year to add one new BE school. However, the existing 8 Big East school will have to pay $236,111 each year for two years, a total of $472,222, to get that extra BE home game every second year.

Do I, as an existing BE school, payout $472,222 to get a home game with Memphis, ECU, or UCF every other year? It appears to me that is why the Syracuse student newspaper article quotes the BE Assistant Commish as stating that "We're not looking to add schools just for the sake of adding schools to assist in scheduling. And why also in that article WVA Athletic Director Parsons is quoted "Parsons said the Big East is definitely considering a scheduling alliance similar to the MAC-Big 10 agreement but on a smaller scale."

Sounds like the Big East needs to add a school who doesn't want a DIME of that money until they earn it by representing the Big East on the field....that my friend, is East Carolina University.

Regarding the MWC, the MWC added TCU to strengthen the conference power rating, to expose the MWC (which has lowest TV ratings of any NonBCS conference) to a larger tv market, to get a bowl against the Big 12 (Ft. Worth), to get a 4-4 home and home conference scheduling, and make a stronger case for BCS inclusion.

Or, to say the same thing in a different way, there was nothing to lose and everything to gain...by adding TCU. That, however, is not the case with the Big East. The Big East already has its BCS status, tv exposure, bowls, and I don't believe the 4-4 home and home scheduling problem to be as severe as some would portray it.

Hummell Wrote:Sounds like the Big East needs to add a school who doesn't want a DIME of that money until they earn it by representing the Big East on the field....that my friend, is East Carolina University.

You're just worthless scum....Go whore around on the Big East board. Also, enjoy UCF continuing to destroy you....

Be lucky you're in the C-USA. You can't even win here....

blank

lmfao Oh Knighttime, you're such a p@$#$.

Hummell Wrote:Sounds like the Big East needs to add a school who doesn't want a DIME of that money until they earn it by representing the Big East on the field....that my friend, is East Carolina University.

ECU is just an annual school that USM whips terribly. They are our b#tch. We would miss the easy win, but welcome a more competitive school that could honestly give a game. So don't let the door hit you in the azz. One less crappy football team in CUSA is better for all of us. As for basketball, USM sucks, but even we aren't as terribe as ECWho is. So please leave, you hear me, just leave. Not later, but now. Adios. The BE needs a new whipping boy since Temple is gone. Based on USM's history against ECWho, I can't think of a better replacement for Temple than ECWho.

I wish we could, trust me.

It may cost BE schools $472,222 to add a 9th team, but what about an additional bowl game that will most likely come to the BE with a 9th team.

Also, and the main reason, what about the LARGE amount of $$$ BE schools are having to pay DIAA schools to come to BE home stadiums for the 5th OOC game. By adding a 9th member that cost is gone.

You can also avoid it by doing 2 for 1s with other DI BCS conferences. This way you lose huge gate dollars.

I may be biased, but I think a 9th member isn't as costly on the conference as you would think.

My guess is the existing Big East schools can schedule any CUSA team home and home they want to...without having to cough up $472,222 for the privilege to do so.

That amount is less than the going rate for an additional patsy on your OOC schedule. Imagine they add someone like Memphis who could, theoretically, bring a bowl with them, I believe most would think it worth the cost.

Tallgrass Wrote:My guess is the existing Big East schools can schedule any CUSA team home and home they want to...without having to cough up $472,222 for the privilege to do so.

Only if the AD's of those schools aren't very intelligent. The going rate from the SEC/Big 10 is between 750K and a cool million. If the big east adds a 9th member, it'll be because they can't afford to cough up that kind of cash.

Regarding bowls, CUSA fans underestimate their influence. If Memphis and the Liberty Bowl were lost to CUSA, things would not stay the same. Everything is now on the table.

Would the Liberty Bowl be happy with, at best, the Big East's #3 or #4 team? Would SEC #6 be happy with Big East's #3 or #4 team?

If Big East moves its #3 team from Charlotte Bowl to Liberty Bowl, how happy will the Charlotte Bowl be? Especially with ECU and Marshall with their good attendance so close by?

The Big East would then have its, at best, #5 team for the Houston Bowl and my guess is the Big East would lose the Houston Bowl at that point.

CUSA could add a Florida Atlantic and set up a Florida Bowl. The first two teams I would invite would be SEC #6 from the Liberty and/or ACC #5 from the Charlotte Bowl. A warm weather bowl in Florida is attractive.

So, the Big East could land the Liberty but lose the Charlotte and Houston Bowls...and the Big East could land the Liberty but then run the risk of losing that SEC #6 to an attractive warm weather bowl game in Florida vs CUSA #1.

Yes, no one really knows what would happen. But you are automatically making assumptions that have no validity.

Tallgrass Wrote:My guess is the existing Big East schools can schedule any CUSA team home and home they want to...without having to cough up $472,222 for the privilege to do so.

Some could: Syracuse, Pitt W Va, Lou in most locales....but that isn't a sure thing.
The rest could schedule a home and home only in special circumstances (USF with UCF, e.g.).
And I doubt the ACC is knocking at the door to schedule the rest either.

Tallgrass Wrote:Regarding bowls, CUSA fans underestimate their influence. If Memphis and the Liberty Bowl were lost to CUSA, things would not stay the same. Everything is now on the table.

Would the Liberty Bowl be happy with, at best, the Big East's #3 or #4 team? Would SEC #6 be happy with Big East's #3 or #4 team?

If Big East moves its #3 team from Charlotte Bowl to Liberty Bowl, how happy will the Charlotte Bowl be? Especially with ECU and Marshall with their good attendance so close by?

The Big East would then have its, at best, #5 team for the Houston Bowl and my guess is the Big East would lose the Houston Bowl at that point.

CUSA could add a Florida Atlantic and set up a Florida Bowl. The first two teams I would invite would be SEC #6 from the Liberty and/or ACC #5 from the Charlotte Bowl. A warm weather bowl in Florida is attractive.

So, the Big East could land the Liberty but lose the Charlotte and Houston Bowls...and the Big East could land the Liberty but then run the risk of losing that SEC #6 to an attractive warm weather bowl game in Florida vs CUSA #1.

Yes, no one really knows what would happen. But you are automatically making assumptions that have no validity.

Lets say for giggles Memphis becomes the 9th school in a EAC and the Big East keeps it arrangement with Notre Dame since the Irish will remain Independant as long as they get money around 10-11 Million a season from NBC and the BCS.

What would likely happen is with ND the Big East would keep the Gator/Sun Bowl arrangement and the Liberty would become the number 3 bowl. Remember Tallgrass it took pressure from Memphis and their fans to keep it from becoming a Big East/SEC Liberty Bowl.

As for the Car Care Bowl, where are they going to go. Contrary to popular belief the other BCS leagues would rather play among themselves in Bowl games then with schools that are Non BcS schools.

Maize, a bit of clarification here. The pressure on CUSA was not from the Liberty Bowl folks; the pressure came from the SEC who didn't want a Auburn or Alabama to play UAB or Ole Miss and Miss St to play Southern Miss....and lose. Recall, Maize, it took the state legislature to get involved to make Kentucky play you Louisville guys. It is not the SEC had love for BE; rather, SEC had a big fear of CUSA.

ACC was ready to roll on a bowl with CUSA...with the Palmetto Bowl in Charleston, SC. USF attendance at Charlotte Bowl was 2,000. Tulsa, with 4,200 students, brought 15,000 fans to the Liberty Bowl.

Everyone on this board and on the BE board is making assumptions...and that is wrong. No one knows what will happen. I do know one thing. Many, many folks have made dire predictions of the CUSA's future...and they so far have all been proven wrong.

Tallgrass Wrote:We now have two articles regarding Big East expansion. However, the most important issue upon which expansion will be based was left unsaid in both articles...and that is the cost per existing BE school to add one more team.

$17,000,000 BCS money divided by 8 Big East schools equals $2,125,000 per Big East school.

$17,000,000 BCS money divided by 9 Big East schools equals $1,888,888 per Big East school.

The Big East payout is lowered $236,111 each year to add one new BE school. However, the existing 8 Big East school will have to pay $236,111 each year for two years, a total of $472,222, to get that extra BE home game every second year.

Do I, as an existing BE school, payout $472,222 to get a home game with Memphis, ECU, or UCF every other year? It appears to me that is why the Syracuse student newspaper article quotes the BE Assistant Commish as stating that "We're not looking to add schools just for the sake of adding schools to assist in scheduling. And why also in that article WVA Athletic Director Parsons is quoted "Parsons said the Big East is definitely considering a scheduling alliance similar to the MAC-Big 10 agreement but on a smaller scale."

Factor in how much NCAA tourney $$$ will come in from those 9 and how it splits out between 9 instead of 16 or more.

Tallgrass Wrote:Maize, a bit of clarification here. The pressure on CUSA was not from the Liberty Bowl folks; the pressure came from the SEC who didn't want a Auburn or Alabama to play UAB or Ole Miss and Miss St to play Southern Miss....and lose. Recall, Maize, it took the state legislature to get involved to make Kentucky play you Louisville guys.

ACC was ready to roll on a bowl with CUSA...with the Palmetto Bowl in Charleston, SC. USF attendance at Charlotte Bowl was 2,000.

Everyone on this board and on the BE board is making assumptions...and that is wrong. No one knows what will happen. I do know one thing. Many, many folks have made dire predictions of the CUSA's future...and they so far have all been proven wrong.

Well, concerning what I bolded, that simply is not true. There was no law passed or mandated order.

You are off on other stuff in this thread as well. USF did not bring only 2,000. You've been told this on the BE board tonight but I guess you ignored it.

As for your post above about bowls, the Big East is not going to add a team and then lose 1 bowl in total, as you state as a possibility. As for ALL of the bowls you mention, they are locked in till 2009. That means Houston & Charlotte for the Big East and the Liberty for CUSA, so we're a ways off here for any bowls changes there.

As for your last paragraph, what in the world does that have to do with anything? Really, no one is claiming CUSA is about to die. In fact, if I'm reading right you're the one starting multiple threads on basically this same 1 topic on this board and the Big East board today.

Quote: it took the state legislature to get involved to make Kentucky play you Louisville guys.

No it did not, it was set up by CM Newton and Howard Schnellenberger. CM wanted to expand Commonwealth Stadium and both he and the pipe set it up that both schools would play in Lexington until Louisville had a suitable stadium. As a matter of fact the series almost did not get renewed this past summer because of a fight over dates.

The Kentucky legistature had NOTHING to do with it. You are confused with the situation in West Virginia. WVU and Marshall are the ones with the state government getting involved.

Tallgrass Wrote:Would the Liberty Bowl be happy with, at best, the Big East's #3 or #4 team? Would SEC #6 be happy with Big East's #3 or #4 team?

no bowl wants the Big East's #3. Or #2, and you don't want even want to think about how p***ed off the BCS bowl is that gets stuck with the BE #1 is...