USFMike Wrote:i also seriously doubt they would kick out any members to go to ten, the only way a member leaves is if they go voluntarily. as far as syracuse to the big 10, i think pitt would have the edge. but interestingly, i read an article by a big ten writer on expansion a couple of months back saying pitt's position remains to be they would prefer to build the big east back up and lure penn st into the be (of course take that with a grain of salt).

Yes Pitt is very loyal to the Big East. The ultimate goal of Jeff Long would be to lure PSU in to the BE. That would require a few things however, as discussed in another thread you'd need to sit Maryland, BC, and Penn State down together and present all the data and such. Showing them how much money can be made and saved by participating in a new Eastern conference they would probably go for it. We'd also have to invite Temple as well, which as far as I'm concerned is fine by me.

To be fair....I should mentiond that Providence wants to play BC in hoops after this season...so it isn't just Syacuse


Jackson

Quote:USFMike Posted on Jun 11 2005, 01:08 PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the question you have to ask is why would the big 10 powers, such as michigan and ohio state, want to have a championship game that by your own admission would only be worth 8-10 mill, which is split 12 ways? that would be welcome revenue for northwestern but it would just be another unneccessary stumbling block en route to a national championship for michigan/ohio state, etc, expecially considering the new 12 game schedule.

The Michigan fan's point is that no #12 would make $$$ for the conference. Since the conference doles out checks of between 9-10 million to each of its 11 conference members now, #12 by virtue of going to a championship game, ensures that no conference member loses money, like the ACC will experience since the projections fell just a smidgeon off by taking VT over SU.

Now add in a Mizzou which gives you the St. Louis markets and some bb NCAA units and the conference begins to make slightly more $$$ as a result.

Add in a Pitt or an SU, and not only do you get bb NCAA units, you solidfy and strengthen the markets PSU has already provided to the B10. In other words, the conference can't lose $$$, but can stay even with 12 or make slightly more.

Obviously add a strong ND and it makes a lot more!!! But ND isn't joining, at least not while she is strong.

Quote:i also seriously doubt they would kick out any members to go to ten, the only way a member leaves is if they go voluntarily.

While I wouldn't expect a vote-out, a certain school that does a lot of complaining might be encouraged to leave on their own. Especially if they continue their downward spiral.

Quote: as far as syracuse to the big 10, i think pitt would have the edge. but interestingly, i read an article by a big ten writer on expansion a couple of months back saying pitt's position remains to be they would prefer to build the big east back up and lure penn st into the be (of course take that with a grain of salt).

I'm sure the Pennsylvania state government will strongly encourage PSU to advocate for Pitt if B10 expansion talks got serious. Pluses to Pitt is that it is a top-notch research institution. The minus is that they don't bring a market that PSU and tOSU doesn't already have solidfied. But Pitt certainly would be an excellent choice, as would Missouri, and as would SU.

Quote:having said that, i hope the current big east lineup will not change much at least in the next 5 years and if it does it will only be to add a ninth football member, the conference has a lot of potenial especially with a bcs bid every year. i think we're very similar to the pac ten as far as football, except we don't have a dominating team like usc (yet). if programs want to use the big east as a stepping stone to another conference than so be it, it's not ideal but that's reality. i personally like the big east in its current format and i'm confident we can build football back into respectability.

Ahh...you like it now in comparison to what you had, but for SU, WVU, and Pitt this is a step backwards.

Agree each institution needs to do what is best for its own programs and as a result perhaps the NBE will grow into a good conference.

It's just that for many of us, we won't forget that at the point the BE had at least equaled the 9-team ACC (and make no mistake about it, the BE did indeed do that), the conference finds itself rebuilding again.

Cheers,
Neil

Quote:Ahh...you like it now in comparison to what you had, but for SU, WVU, and Pitt this is a step backwards.

-- I wouldn't blame any football school if they found a more stable situation for there sports and left...if the Big 10 comes calling Pitt or SU really don't have a choice but to accept...same goes if the SEC called Louisville or West Virginia....the NBE did nothing to solve the stability issue for the football schools..in fact it may have made things a little worse

-- just another point...no way Pitt gets in the Big 10 while Joe Pa is still coaching in Happy Valley


Jackson

Just because they are in two different conferences doesn't mean they can't play against each other. I also think Boston College should play against Connecticut also.

BullsFanatic Wrote:

Quote:BC's main love is hockey.

Good point...I forgot about hockey

Quote:Syracuse could have taken the acc invite if they wanted to. But they did not. All they had to do was call the acc and beg for the 3rd spot like BC did. But since they had already recommitted to the BE, and had got assurances from the acc that they would not interefere with the BE again, they wanted to try and make everything work.

Once the ACC got to 11, they wanted to make sure they got to 12. If they didn't take BC or Cuse, they would have gone after WV, Louisville, anyone they could get their hands on so they could make it 12. I think it would have been pretty cool had the Big East teams shut down the ACC...I just think had BC not cracked, someone would have.

You know what the saddest part of this whole thing is. Around 2001 and 2002, the Big East could have raided the ACC. Miami and VT were strong, and FSU was starting to decline slightly. There was that year where Maryland was the ACC football champ, ranked #12, and got pasted by Florida in the Orange Bowl. They were in danger of getting their BCS spot sent in for review (the Syracuse rule). The Big East football schools could have split from hoops onlies then, and approached FSU, Clemson, Georgia Tech, with GT having a respectable hoops program, and asked them to join BC, Cuse, storz, Rutgers, Pitt, WVU, VT, Miami. FSU, Clemson, and GT were/are not happy with the Carolina mafia that runs the ACC, and always felt like 2nd class citizens. I think they would have loved the chance to stick it to the Carolina mafia. With an all sports league of those 11 teams, you have something to offer a perspective 12 team. I'd say that pecking order would have gone like this: 1. ND 2. Penn St. 3. Maryland 4. Louisville One of those 4 schools would have taken the opportunity. The football schools of the Big East should have split, said F you to Mikey T., and raided the ACC when they had the chance. Lost opportunity.

omnicarrier Wrote:

Quote:USFMike Posted on Jun 11 2005, 01:08 PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the question you have to ask is why would the big 10 powers, such as michigan and ohio state, want to have a championship game that by your own admission would only be worth 8-10 mill, which is split 12 ways? that would be welcome revenue for northwestern but it would just be another unneccessary stumbling block en route to a national championship for michigan/ohio state, etc, expecially considering the new 12 game schedule.

The Michigan fan's point is that no #12 would make $$$ for the conference. Since the conference doles out checks of between 9-10 million to each of its 11 conference members now, #12 by virtue of going to a championship game, ensures that no conference member loses money, like the ACC will experience since the projections fell just a smidgeon off by taking VT over SU.

Now add in a Mizzou which gives you the St. Louis markets and some bb NCAA units and the conference begins to make slightly more $$$ as a result.

Add in a Pitt or an SU, and not only do you get bb NCAA units, you solidfy and strengthen the markets PSU has already provided to the B10. In other words, the conference can't lose $$$, but can stay even with 12 or make slightly more.

Obviously add a strong ND and it makes a lot more!!! But ND isn't joining, at least not while she is strong.

Quote:i also seriously doubt they would kick out any members to go to ten, the only way a member leaves is if they go voluntarily.

While I wouldn't expect a vote-out, a certain school that does a lot of complaining might be encouraged to leave on their own. Especially if they continue their downward spiral.

Quote: as far as syracuse to the big 10, i think pitt would have the edge. but interestingly, i read an article by a big ten writer on expansion a couple of months back saying pitt's position remains to be they would prefer to build the big east back up and lure penn st into the be (of course take that with a grain of salt).

I'm sure the Pennsylvania state government will strongly encourage PSU to advocate for Pitt if B10 expansion talks got serious. Pluses to Pitt is that it is a top-notch research institution. The minus is that they don't bring a market that PSU and tOSU doesn't already have solidfied. But Pitt certainly would be an excellent choice, as would Missouri, and as would SU.

Quote:having said that, i hope the current big east lineup will not change much at least in the next 5 years and if it does it will only be to add a ninth football member, the conference has a lot of potenial especially with a bcs bid every year. i think we're very similar to the pac ten as far as football, except we don't have a dominating team like usc (yet). if programs want to use the big east as a stepping stone to another conference than so be it, it's not ideal but that's reality. i personally like the big east in its current format and i'm confident we can build football back into respectability.

Ahh...you like it now in comparison to what you had, but for SU, WVU, and Pitt this is a step backwards.

Agree each institution needs to do what is best for its own programs and as a result perhaps the NBE will grow into a good conference.

It's just that for many of us, we won't forget that at the point the BE had at least equaled the 9-team ACC (and make no mistake about it, the BE did indeed do that), the conference finds itself rebuilding again.

Cheers,
Neil

i understand that the big 10 could potentially make money by adding a 12th team and champ game, but do you really think teams like michigan or ohio state will be in favor of 13 games every year? going undefeated and winning the champ game doesn't automatically gurantee you a NC bid, just ask auburn how much winning their champ game helped their NC aspirations, most of the time it does more harm than good. with the addition of a 12th game and the new bcs criteria, 9 or 10 team conferences seem the most logical. champ games don't have the same appeal as they used to, say when acc raided the be.

if you want to be arrogant about it, you're right this is a step up for usf and it is a step down for syracuse. but you have to ask yourself why the national consensus was that miami and va tech carried this league throught the nineties and into the present. and why proud programs like pitt and syracuse haven't used the big east's success to improve their programs. would we be even having this discussion if pitt and syracuse were at least on par with va tech, of course not.

i still remain optimistic. as long as we have a bcs bid, a team or two will separate themselves and become the dominant team, ala USC. my money is on louisville with pitt coming in second, but who knows. the big east if anything has always proven to be very resilient.

Quote:USFMike Posted on Jun 11 2005, 11:16 PM
i understand that the big 10 could potentially make money by adding a 12th team and champ game, but do you really think teams like michigan or ohio state will be in favor of 13 games every year? going undefeated and winning the champ game doesn't automatically gurantee you a NC bid, just ask auburn how much winning their champ game helped their NC aspirations, most of the time it does more harm than good. with the addition of a 12th game and the new bcs criteria, 9 or 10 team conferences seem the most logical. champ games don't have the same appeal as they used to, say when acc raided the be.

Nonsense. The coaches don't like conference championship games because it is another high caliber game with a potential loss. They'll despise a playoff as well, for similar reasons. I doubt you'll be seeing the SEC, B12, or ACC getting rid of those games anytime soon since they make at least twice as much (in the SEC's case 3 times as much) as getting an extra conference team into a BCS Bowl.

It's all about $$$ with the ADs and Presidents - the ones who actually make the decisions. The Big 10 and the Pac 10 are very conservative leagues. They never set the trends but only follow them - and usually anywhere from a decade to two decades behind.

Quote:if you want to be arrogant about it, you're right this is a step up for usf and it is a step down for syracuse.

There was nothing 'arrogant' about my comment. You stated that you personally liked the makeup of the NBE and I put forth a reason why you might like it and why others such as myself would not. It's called communicating different ideas.

Quote:but you have to ask yourself why the national consensus was that miami and va tech carried this league throught the nineties and into the present. and why proud programs like pitt and syracuse haven't used the big east's success to improve their programs. would we be even having this discussion if pitt and syracuse were at least on par with va tech, of course not.

VT 'passing' SU in terms of both 'perception' and in reality, only happened over the past few years. As of the end of the 2001 season SU had more wins since the 1-A demarcation point in 1978 while playing a much tougher schedule, more BE wins, more BE titles, produced higher quality NFL players, etc.

The failure of our coaching staff to get Vick was the beginning of the turn of the tide. But I have no doubt the new AD and new coaching staff will revitalize the program rather quickly. It's not as though the Orange have tumbled off the ends of the world. We still have only had one losing season in the past 17 years. Not many programs can say that.

By the way, VT's building blocks to success was modeling its offense and defense along SU's while playing a Kansas State fluff schedule.

Quote:i still remain optimistic. as long as we have a bcs bid, a team or two will separate themselves and become the dominant team, ala USC. my money is on louisville with pitt coming in second, but who knows. the big east if anything has always proven to be very resilient.

Obviously Louisville will be the prohibitive favorite this year, but next year I'm betting the Eers become the favorite and the year after is when I expect SU to become the favorite.

Cheers,
Neil

the president's make the decisions, but the presidents also look at the exposure and alumni money they could possibly rake in from a national championship and take that into account as well. like the michigan fan said, unless the team is going to bring in the money on the caliber of a notre dame it wouldn't make much sense to go to 12 in the current circumstances.

don't get me wrong i'm rooting for cuse to succeed, hopefully your new coach turns it around, it was quite painful watching the champs game. as of now they are a big east team and anything else is speculation, and if they do in fact bolt hopefully they'll leave this conference in better shape than it is now. i still maintain that the big ten will only expand unless its notre dame, but that's my opinion.