Sorry to all those pimping out their obscure directional commuter schools calling the Big East idiots for not wanting to take you guys on, but I am glad we are keeping our standards high and not expanding for the sake of expanding.

If we lose a team or two someday, we can expand then. But to expand now just to expand is STUPID. UCF, ECU, Memphis, Temple and the other ugly ducklings add nothing that will stabilize the league. They just add more mouths to feed and don't in any way add value.

Lots of C-USA'ers here calling the Big East stupid for not wanting their schools, but I am happy that we aren't taking on this slop. We have a BCS bid, 75% of our league makes a bowl game, we recruit as well as we are going to at this time, adding some bunk teams that nobody outside of their immediate fan bases follow will not change any of that.

And for those of us with diplomas from the current Big East schools, sorry but perhaps we prefer our schools be affiliated with academic heavyweights like Notre Dame, Georgetown and Villanova over some open enrollment commuter schools.
Say NO to turning the Big East into a glorified C-USA.

(07-12-2010 12:47 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Sorry to all those pimping out their obscure directional commuter schools calling the Big East idiots for not wanting to take you guys on, but I am glad we are keeping our standards high and not expanding for the sake of expanding.

If we lose a team or two someday, we can expand then. But to expand now just to expand is STUPID. UCF, ECU, Memphis, Temple and the other ugly ducklings add nothing that will stabilize the league. They just add more mouths to feed and don't in any way add value.

Lots of C-USA'ers here calling the Big East stupid for not wanting their schools, but I am happy that we aren't taking on this slop. We have a BCS bid, 75% of our league makes a bowl game, we recruit as well as we are going to at this time, adding some bunk teams that nobody outside of their immediate fan bases follow will not change any of that.

Say NO to turning the Big East into a glorified C-USA.

Psst...you do realize that almost 50% of the current Big East football lineup is made up of programs that very recently jumped over from CONFUSA, right?

Just checking.....

Yes, I do realize that. And if we add 2 or 4 more former C-USA teams, suddenly we are nothing more than a glorified C-USA.

And Louisville and Cincy are on a different level in terms of national prestige and following than any of the current C-USA teams. Those are legitimate national programs. We poached the only ones worthy of poaching already.

(07-12-2010 12:47 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Sorry to all those pimping out their obscure directional commuter schools calling the Big East idiots for not wanting to take you guys on, but I am glad we are keeping our standards high and not expanding for the sake of expanding.

If we lose a team or two someday, we can expand then. But to expand now just to expand is STUPID. UCF, ECU, Memphis, Temple and the other ugly ducklings add nothing that will stabilize the league. They just add more mouths to feed and don't in any way add value.

Lots of C-USA'ers here calling the Big East stupid for not wanting their schools, but I am happy that we aren't taking on this slop. We have a BCS bid, 75% of our league makes a bowl game, we recruit as well as we are going to at this time, adding some bunk teams that nobody outside of their immediate fan bases follow will not change any of that.

Say NO to turning the Big East into a glorified C-USA.

Good luck keeping BCS status with this mentality. MWC and WAC both have a team above Big East in the preseason rankings.

Glorified CUSA, is funny because last time a checked its the CUSA teams that you added last time that are carrying the conference

(07-12-2010 12:50 PM)Capital Pirate Wrote:  

(07-12-2010 12:47 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Sorry to all those pimping out their obscure directional commuter schools calling the Big East idiots for not wanting to take you guys on, but I am glad we are keeping our standards high and not expanding for the sake of expanding.

If we lose a team or two someday, we can expand then. But to expand now just to expand is STUPID. UCF, ECU, Memphis, Temple and the other ugly ducklings add nothing that will stabilize the league. They just add more mouths to feed and don't in any way add value.

Lots of C-USA'ers here calling the Big East stupid for not wanting their schools, but I am happy that we aren't taking on this slop. We have a BCS bid, 75% of our league makes a bowl game, we recruit as well as we are going to at this time, adding some bunk teams that nobody outside of their immediate fan bases follow will not change any of that.

Say NO to turning the Big East into a glorified C-USA.

Psst...you do realize that almost 50% of the current Big East football lineup is made up of programs that very recently jumped over from CONFUSA, right?

Just checking.....

He's a Nova fan masquerading as a Cuse fan. Like most Nova fans, he's never watched college football.

(07-12-2010 12:52 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Yes, I do realize that. And if we add 2 or 4 more former C-USA teams, suddenly we are nothing more than a glorified C-USA.

And Louisville and Cincy are on a different level in terms of national prestige and following than any of the current C-USA teams. Those are legitimate national programs. We poached the only ones worthy of poaching already.

Both teams got that prestige with the BCS tag.

Adding ECU, UCF or Temple isn't going to help us with maintaining our BCS bid. Our conference's loft computer rankings and solid performance in bowl games is what is going to help us keep our BCS bid.

The "fear factor" of "add us or lose your BCS bid" is laughable.

(07-12-2010 01:00 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(07-12-2010 12:52 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Yes, I do realize that. And if we add 2 or 4 more former C-USA teams, suddenly we are nothing more than a glorified C-USA.

And Louisville and Cincy are on a different level in terms of national prestige and following than any of the current C-USA teams. Those are legitimate national programs. We poached the only ones worthy of poaching already.

Both teams got that prestige with the BCS tag.

No, both schools' athletic programs have been highly respected national programs for generations, from the Big O through Denny Crumb and Kenyan Martin through present. Cincy and Louisville were major athletic programs stuck in a mid-major conference, much like Marquette and Xavier.

Sorry, but UCF, ECU and the other ugly ducklings are not on that level. They are obscure schools that people outside of Orlando and wherever the heck ECU is located have never heard of, never seen on tv, could never name any of their players in any sport, or care about in any way.

Most casual sports fans could tell you significant moments/players/teams from Cincy and Louisville's history prior to joining the Big East.

(07-12-2010 01:03 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  

(07-12-2010 01:00 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(07-12-2010 12:52 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Yes, I do realize that. And if we add 2 or 4 more former C-USA teams, suddenly we are nothing more than a glorified C-USA.

And Louisville and Cincy are on a different level in terms of national prestige and following than any of the current C-USA teams. Those are legitimate national programs. We poached the only ones worthy of poaching already.

Both teams got that prestige with the BCS tag.

No, both schools' athletic programs have been highly respected national programs for generations, from the Big O through Denny Crumb and Kenyan Martin through present. Cincy and Louisville were major athletic programs stuck in a mid-major conference, much like Marquette and Xavier.

Sorry, but UCF, ECU and the other ugly ducklings are not on that level. They are obscure schools that people outside of Orlando and wherever the heck ECU is located have never heard of, never seen on tv, could never name any of their players in any sport, or care about in any way.

Most casual sports fans could tell you significant moments/players/teams from Cincy and Louisville's history prior to joining the Big East.

Now I know this thread is nothing more than flamebait.....

This is not a flame. This is a BIG EAST message board. All I see on it are a bunch of fans of Non-Big East schools telling us how stupid our conference leadership is for not lowering our standards and weakening our product. Sorry if I have a point of view as a Big East fan on a Big East message board.

They should rename this board to the C-USA & Ugly Duckling Pimp Board.

Well that's all ball does.

(07-12-2010 01:00 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Adding ECU, UCF or Temple isn't going to help us with maintaining our BCS bid. Our conference's loft computer rankings and solid performance in bowl games is what is going to help us keep our BCS bid.

The "fear factor" of "add us or lose your BCS bid" is laughable.

Agree with your post Orange-nice to see some Big East blood here for a change. No way, no how do these teams being pimped add to and not take away from the Big East's BCS bid. It is quite laughable. The reality is as I've pointed out numerous times, if the Big East added these schools it is much more likely the Big East would lose its bid than if it simply stands pat.

Even if the Big East loses schools there are better "out of the box" possibilities that could actually help the league.

(07-12-2010 12:57 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(07-12-2010 12:47 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Sorry to all those pimping out their obscure directional commuter schools calling the Big East idiots for not wanting to take you guys on, but I am glad we are keeping our standards high and not expanding for the sake of expanding.

If we lose a team or two someday, we can expand then. But to expand now just to expand is STUPID. UCF, ECU, Memphis, Temple and the other ugly ducklings add nothing that will stabilize the league. They just add more mouths to feed and don't in any way add value.

Lots of C-USA'ers here calling the Big East stupid for not wanting their schools, but I am happy that we aren't taking on this slop. We have a BCS bid, 75% of our league makes a bowl game, we recruit as well as we are going to at this time, adding some bunk teams that nobody outside of their immediate fan bases follow will not change any of that.

Say NO to turning the Big East into a glorified C-USA.

Good luck keeping BCS status with this mentality. MWC and WAC both have a team above Big East in the preseason rankings.

Glorified CUSA, is funny because last time a checked its the CUSA teams that you added last time that are carrying the conference

The BE BCS bid isn't going anywhere. The BE is meeting all criteria and then some. While I am not totally opposed to adding a 9th member for scheduling purposes, there is no reason for the BE to just add CUSA teams willy nilly and dilute the BCS rankings of the conf which currently are very solid. My advice to any CUSA team wanting in...go on a Boise State type run and you'll be in, in about 2 seconds.

Well I'll bite...a little.

In terms of "ugly ducklings" you must be talking about academics. I see your point there, although the problem with only thinking about academics is that it leaves out a lot of what makes sense about conference affiliation. The B10 didnt add Nebraska because of their academics, not that they are bad, but that wasnt why they added them.

The BE added USF, Louisville and Cincy without really thinking about academics.

My point is I believe when conferences are considering expansion, academics may be on the table, but the decisions that affect the revenue are front and center.

And finally, I dont think you have to be regarded as an academic "elite" school to function well in the college world. Those elite schools have a TRACK RECORD of decline. Duke basketball and Stanford are the exceptions (apparently because they can select the best talent of the group), look at Vandy, Northwestern, Rice and Tulane, all academically "elite" schools, but wallowing at the bottom of their conferences in many things in athletics. 'Cuse football may be in the same situation right now, you would know more then me.

But to not want to align yourself with "emerging" markets in the athletic world may not be the best thing for your bottom line in the AD's office. The big question is whether or not you have the choice.

But I dont mind you calling (labelling) us names, hell this is a message board after all, it doesnt mean anything.

Not just academics.

How about national reputation?
National prestige?
National exposure?

How many ECU games has somebody in New York or Texas or Michigan ever watched?
How many UCF players can somebody from Boston name?
How many nationally televised games has Temple played the last 5 years?

Syracuse may be down now, but our school's athletic program is heavily covered in the national media, and the FB history is the stuff of Disney movies. People can name Donovan McNabb and Marvin Harrison. Jim Boeheim is a household name.

There are college sports fans out there who would likely have to google ECU just to know what state it is in. Colorado? California? Which Carolina?

(07-12-2010 01:34 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  How many nationally televised games has Temple played the last 5 years?

Around 25

(07-12-2010 01:37 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(07-12-2010 01:34 PM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  How many nationally televised games has Temple played the last 5 years?

Around 25

Really?

please name them. Temple has had 5 games per year televised nationally? What were the 5 last year?

I'm looking at this 2009 MAC TV schedule announcement, let's see how many were nationally televised;

Villanova - no
Penn State - no (subscription package only)
Buffalo - no (game plan package only)
Akron - ESPNU (does that count?)
Kent State - no (Mack All Access)
Ohio - ESPNU

Don't know about your other games. Maybe those Eastern Michigan, Ball State and Toledo games received some really nice TV slots?

So 2 ESPNU games? Looks like little to no television fan interest from here.

Regarding the BE as it is constituted today, it is a fair assessment to say that the last round of expansion has exceeded expectations. It also helped greatly that WVU caught fire for about 3 years at the exact perfect time. But there is also a legit concern that the BE expansion during the last round already captured the best non-BCS teams that made geographic sense to the conference. Could ECU, UCF and Memphis catch fire like the previous schools? Perhaps, but it is also just as likely that these 3 teams end up being dead wood for the conference. The bottom line is that it is a gamble. In 2003/2004, the BE had no choice - we had to gamble. Right now, we don't have to gamble. If the money is there for the conference, I'd be open to adding a 9th member from among ECU, UCF or Memphis. If the money is not there, and our only option with the 3 candidates would be to rely on "potential only", then I would be opposed.

If you look at the BE objectively, the 3 CUSA schools have exceeded expectations, but they are not carrying the BE today. UL had 1 BCS appearance - that's it. Cincy had 2 BCS appearances, but it was not the clear cut top notch program in 2008 and 2009 due to the fact that the majority of BE teams could have been good representatives too. There is more parity at this time in the league than ever before. As much as it hurts to admit it, WVU was the only school that can lay a legitimate claim to carrying the conference during the darkest years. As of 2008, the BE is legitimately solid and does not need any one team to carry it now.

Sorry, but I don't listen to people with -12 reputation points.