In a few years our options could also be BC, Maryland, and Virginia too...

LOL. i love all these ACC fans that know what is best for the Big East,and have all the answer for it.
Must be a real boring site over there at the old ACC boards.
As I have said before NOT one of us including yourselves know whta it is going on inside those that make the decisions in the Big East and what its future would be.
Im done beating this dead horse.

I think what some people aren't realizing is that the dominant/favorite team in the region(s) are already members of one of the big 6, fb or not. The exception might be memphis, i would think more people in tennessee are UT fans but i could be wrong.
Adding someone like Temple just because its in Philadelphia wont guarantee ratings or interest

(02-27-2009 03:40 PM)frogman Wrote:  Look fellas. Especially you folks from the ACC here on these boards. I appreciate your great concern about the relationships between BE schools. Too bad this was not a concern of your comissioner or any of your fans or college presidents when you raided the BE conference. I guess you can say your concern is a little to little a little too late. It didn't bother the ACC or their fans that UCONN and Boston College had a relationship so why do you guys seem to have so much concern about Syracuse and Georgotown's relationship? I'm a die hard Syracuse fan and saying "peace" to Georgetown doesn't bother me. I think they will do well without the FB schools but we need FB to grow in the BE.

Again, what positive growth is there to gain for BE football? No additional revenue can be gained by splitting, and any move to 9 will hurt the league by diluting existing payouts. Short of adding ND, which is far more likely as a hybrid with the Catholic schools, or PSU, there's no move that is financially beneficial for BE football.

(Also, the ACC fans that come here haven't just stumbled over. Most of us follow the BE.)

Once again you are looking at this from where the teams are right now. Not from where they will be 5-10 years down the road. When the Big East first added VTech they really didnt bring anything to the league in football other than having another member to schedule. They didnt draw huge crowds, they were NOt a power and they were not an immediate TV revenue increase. We all saw how that turned out. Thesame could be said from adding USF and eventhough we are nowhere near what VTech has achieved YET. Wecertaintly have brought enough attention to the league.
The bottomline is that the basketball side will not grow anymore, the football side can but not with current configuration.As I showed with the other link the basketball side of the equation brings EACH teamin the league (16) about 2 mill in revenues from the league. The football side its bringing about 4 mill for each ofthe schools

and while you ACC fans might follow the Big East-WE are fans of teams IN the Big East. So we certaintly havea bigger stake on its future than just an ACC as a casual observer.

I love how ACC fans always know what's best for the conference they tried to destroy. Their motives haven't changed one bit. I also imagine the frustration from repeated failures to relegate The BEast to mid-major status is giving them a huge inferiority complex too. This is a conference that thought by taking what they thought was the best from The BEast automatically made them the equal of the SEC. They aren't close, and never will be...

The ACC isn't even the equal of The BEast. WVU has as many BCS victories by itself as the ACC does in this decade...

(02-27-2009 06:11 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  LOL. i love all these ACC fans that know what is best for the Big East,and have all the answer for it.

FYI...I think you and some others have been duped.

I sincerely doubt that rferry is a fan of an ACC School...as if you look at his/her post history...you can not find ONE of them from an ACC School's board and/or ACC Conf Board...as all his/her posts are on the Big East Board only. (See link below).

http://ncaabbs.com/search.php?action=res...d=0&page=1

No clue who this person is a fan of (maybe from a team that was once KICKED out of the Big East...maybe a fan of a Full Membership Big East Team...or a non-football member Big East Team...or is actually a fan of say a SEC School...and uses some ACC pts to throw you off) as it just like he/she is just trying to get off driving some of yall a little nuts.

LOL. well he is not driving many of us nuts. It is obvious that he has decided what HE thinks its best for this league, eventhough he says that he is not a fan of any of them. Thats fine with me we all can have our opinions.
As I have said many times the talk about wether a split would be beneficial for the football side of the league is kind of poinless because unless it actually happens we wont know if it would be good or bad. So without that all we can go on its with our opinion of what the results would be.
While I dont think the current league make up is horrible and certaintly way better than what we had with CUSA that doesnt mean that I think is the best in the long run for the football schools.
I do not think that splitting would make it harder for any of our football members to be taken by SEC or Big Ten should they come calling bhut I do think that being the smallest football BCS league, having to get 5 OCCgames a year will not help the football side in its quest to get better.Im also not silly enough to think that Penn state or Notre dame will come and join the league anytime soon

I wasn't bothered by rferry. I seriously doubt he's over 18...

He probably posts ACC somewhere else. I know I talk enough about UNC in my daily life to post Heeltalk 24-7. I like all of college sports, not just my league. I know this is hostile turf, due to conference jumping, but I don't mind tough talk because it doesn't bother me.

(02-28-2009 09:27 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Once again you are looking at this from where the teams are right now. Not from where they will be 5-10 years down the road. When the Big East first added VTech they really didnt bring anything to the league in football other than having another member to schedule. They didnt draw huge crowds, they were NOt a power and they were not an immediate TV revenue increase. We all saw how that turned out. Thesame could be said from adding USF and eventhough we are nowhere near what VTech has achieved YET. Wecertaintly have brought enough attention to the league.
The bottomline is that the basketball side will not grow anymore, the football side can but not with current configuration.As I showed with the other link the basketball side of the equation brings EACH teamin the league (16) about 2 mill in revenues from the league. The football side its bringing about 4 mill for each ofthe schools

and while you ACC fans might follow the Big East-WE are fans of teams IN the Big East. So we certaintly havea bigger stake on its future than just an ACC as a casual observer.

VA Tech still isn't any of those things - that's why it took the Virginia government to land an invite into the ACC. They're still very good football team on the field, but we're still waiting for them to bring in TV money or bowls. Better example may be the resurrection of WV basketball(, but, then that's mostly due to Beilein and Huggins' coaching).
USF has incredible potential, and I look forward to how they, and BE football, progress. However, you can't really say the same for Memphis, UCF or ECU. ECU and Memphis have a long road to compete with UNC, State, USC, and Tennessee (plus Ole Miss, Missouri, and Arkansas). USF caught fire at the right time, when Miami and FSU were down. I don't think UCF will have the same opportunity, with additional competition from USF for Florida's top talent.
This is much tougher competition than what Cincy (tOSU, Notre Dame) or Louisville (Kentucky) had to face, and without the fertile recruiting ground that was open to USF. It would take many years to build up Memphis, ECU or UCF. Especially at a time when the BE already has to grow its existing programs. Cincy, Louisville, USF and even UConn and Rutgers have shown promise, but none have shown any consistency. Throw in that WV is a state of transition and Syracuse is trying to come back. The league needs to build up those programs before it can take on another project. Diluting the BCS payout to place a bet on one of these programs isn't going to help.

(02-28-2009 10:47 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  you can not find ONE of them from an ACC School's board and/or ACC Conf Board...as all his/her posts are on the Big East Board only. (See link below).

The great thing about the internet is that it caters to specific populations. NCAABBS does a wonderful job of hosting many of these populations, but the better ACC boards are elsewhere. Likewise, there's many BE boards out there, but few discuss football or splitting as much as this specific population does.

Really. Who has been the ACC champ and representative last few years? Who has been the darling of thursday night games?. Had the ACC chosen Cuse instead of VTech their football would be in even worse shape. You guys were lucky the Virginia legislature got in the way and forced the VTech card. The ACC wanted Miami (without them they would not have expanded and UM wanted Cuse and BC to come along with them.
VTech IMPROVED once they got into the Big East and they certaintly were not as TV and Bowl attractive before they joined the BE.As for wether the other teams would or wouldnt do the same
is ALL speculation at this point.

I'm not going to say that VA Tech hasn't helped the ACC. They were good at the time we needed someone, but it hasn't translated much off the field.
Any one who has followed college football over the years can tell you that Thursday night games didn't become something to brag about until very recently. Before that time, they were associated with 2nd-tier programs desperate for TV attention. And now, VA Tech is being bumped off the spot for schools that would have objected to playing on Thursdays. The exposure helped, but don't confuse Thursday night coverage for more than it was.
Now, to your point of VA Tech improving within the Big East. Weren't they ranked in the top 25 three times between 1990 (before BE football) and 1994, and the top 5 in 1995? If so, that was a quick turn around. It would seem that VA Tech was growing into a strong program regardless of the Big East. Of course, they benefited from the bowl bids Miami and WV brought the league and rivalries with other eastern football programs. But it didn't make the program. Beamer did that all by himself.

rferry Wrote:Any one who has followed college football over the years can tell you that Thursday night games didn't become something to brag about until very recently.

Thursday night games became a big event because The BEast gave ESPN great games on weeknights. Prior to that, no big time programs were forced into weeknight TV games because they couldn't get decent coverage otherwise. But The BEast made that move work, due to our success in 2006. WVU-Louisville, Rutgers-Louisville, and WVU-Rutgers battling it out to close out the season and determine who would win The BEast's BCS bid, brought Thursday night college football to the forefront of the national conscience.

Now that The BEast has made weeknight games an event, TV has decided that we no longer deserve such coverage. Only one BEast game is a weeknight broadcast this year - WVU-Colorado. No other BEast team has been deemed worthy of such coverage...

(03-02-2009 10:58 AM)rferry Wrote:  I'm not going to say that VA Tech hasn't helped the ACC. They were good at the time we needed someone, but it hasn't translated much off the field.

Listen, I can get down with belittling talk about Jokies with the best of them, but if you don't think their success (along with BC's success) has kept the ACC from being a complete laughingstock these past couple of years - think again.

I do agree with your point that they haven't had as big an impact on the ACC's bowl package as I thought they might have though. And of course, their market will never truly help the ACC much in TV contracts.

Quote:Any one who has followed college football over the years can tell you that Thursday night games didn't become something to brag about until very recently. Before that time, they were associated with 2nd-tier programs desperate for TV attention. And now, VA Tech is being bumped off the spot for schools that would have objected to playing on Thursdays. The exposure helped, but don't confuse Thursday night coverage for more than it was.

Agree with the point regarding Thursday night slot, but I don't see it as VT being bumped so much as VT has gained enough respect as a football near-elite to warrant Saturday coverage. Others see how they achieved this success and are now willing to take on Thursday night slots since it no longer has a big a stigma attached to it as it use to.

Quote:Now, to your point of VA Tech improving within the Big East. Weren't they ranked in the top 25 three times between 1990 (before BE football) and 1994, and the top 5 in 1995? If so, that was a quick turn around. It would seem that VA Tech was growing into a strong program regardless of the Big East. Of course, they benefited from the bowl bids Miami and WV brought the league and rivalries with other eastern football programs. But it didn't make the program. Beamer did that all by himself.

Agree and disagree. The 1990 year was a 6-5 season with them somehow being ranked at #25 that year by the coaches poll. Hardly a ringing endorsement of their going to be successful from that point on. As their next two seasons demonstrate with the recruits Beamer was typically getting prior to the Hokies Big East affiliation.

BE play actually started on a limited basis in 1991 and its first full season was 1993. So for the 1993 and 1994 seasons VT's success was mainly being built on recruits that came about as a result of Beamer saying VT would be now be playing the likes of Miami, Syracuse, and West Virginia. Just as Cincinnati's success was built on D'Antonio's same recruiting pitch, but it took Kelly as coach to take it to the next level.

They had continual success from that point forward, so yes, I think the Big East can be partially credited with VT's success.

Cheers,
Neil

Well just wanted to drop my 2 cents in for whats its worth. Been a Memphis Tiger Fan from the age of 6 and so im loyal to my team. I dont think CUSA was raided everyone and their mom was trying to get
that BCS tag from the Big East for Football Prestige. I was sad that our old rivals were leaving and we got left behind ,but I was hoping that all the old rivals would do well in the Big East and the Bearcats seemed alot like Memphis teams, great basketball for years and improving football. I was happy (thou I love to hate them ) for Bearcat Nation to finally get to see some of the profits of BCS play and they have done well. UL love to hate was was allready getting really good on the football side so a no-brainer for them to go. I have alot of respect for the Big East they never snuck in the night and swooped up the teams.They offered CUSA and Memphis was found lacking.

I really wish Memphis would have been picked and i dont think there will be a Big East split anytime soon but I have seen major improvement on all the sports in CUSA I know people mock our little group but in another 3 to 4 years even without BCS I think CUSA will do fine and improve just as we did with our prior lineup just gonna take time to gell and get the rivalry's going but it has been fun to read and talk about. I dont like to think about it to much PAIN lol.