(10-29-2011 08:44 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Come on, guys, this isn't remotely difficult. If the Big East's very survival as a major athletic league is dependent on Boise State finding a home for its other sports the league will simply grit its teeth and take Boise in all sports. That's certainly an imperfect solution for all concerned but desperate times call for desperate measures and I can guarantee you that they are not going to let things unravel over something as mninor as travel considerations.

Doc, you're not saying there is any plausible scenario whereby Boise St. is added to the Big East for MBB and other Olympic sports, are you?

(10-29-2011 08:51 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 08:44 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Come on, guys, this isn't remotely difficult. If the Big East's very survival as a major athletic league is dependent on Boise State finding a home for its other sports the league will simply grit its teeth and take Boise in all sports. That's certainly an imperfect solution for all concerned but desperate times call for desperate measures and I can guarantee you that they are not going to let things unravel over something as mninor as travel considerations.

Doc, you're not saying there is any plausible scenario whereby Boise St. is added to the Big East for MBB and other Olympic sports, are you?

there's no way in hell the nonFB schools agree to that to "save" the BE BCS status.

(10-29-2011 06:04 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  If they can't get Boise, they just aren't going to expand? Really? LOL

Get it together seriously. Why is Boise a unanimous pick? They're in freaking Idaho.

Don't LOL just yet. Once again, when it comes down to it, even the Big East conference doesn't want Big East football to survive. EVERYTHING--including coming up with the most absurd option it can and saying, "Oh, well, we tried" when that option doesn't pan out--makes sense once you accept this premise.

We'll all know soon enough, but I'd put it at 90%+ Boise doesn't go anywhere because:

1) They've already been hosed once with an AQ promise only to have the conference that wooed them have teams bolt and get left holding its own wiener. Consider that the MWC schools in question weren't putting on nearly the show some Big East schools are currently about getting out, and Boise has got to be having serious doubts about what they'd be getting into.

2) The inconvenience of relocating its other sports

3) Boise has a $31 million dollar athletic budget. Unlike UCF and SMU, they don't have a bottomless pit of money with which to pay exit and entry fees every time the wind changes direction.

(10-29-2011 08:44 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Come on, guys, this isn't remotely difficult. If the Big East's very survival as a major athletic league is dependent on Boise State finding a home for its other sports the league will simply grit its teeth and take Boise in all sports. That's certainly an imperfect solution for all concerned but desperate times call for desperate measures and I can guarantee you that they are not going to let things unravel over something as mninor as travel considerations.

So you're gonna have your tennis, track, soccer, etc teams travel to New Jersey for a Wednesday matchup one week and then Orlando for a Sunday matchup. Is the Mysterious AQ Bid worth all that? I don't think All Sports is an option. Even with all the realignment that has gone on, most of the conferences are still somewhat regional more than cross country.

(10-29-2011 09:00 PM)ECUPirated Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 08:44 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Come on, guys, this isn't remotely difficult. If the Big East's very survival as a major athletic league is dependent on Boise State finding a home for its other sports the league will simply grit its teeth and take Boise in all sports. That's certainly an imperfect solution for all concerned but desperate times call for desperate measures and I can guarantee you that they are not going to let things unravel over something as mninor as travel considerations.

So you're gonna have your tennis, track, soccer, etc teams travel to New Jersey for a Wednesday matchup one week and then Orlando for a Sunday matchup. Is the Mysterious AQ Bid worth all that? I don't think All Sports is an option. Even with all the realignment that has gone on, most of the conferences are still somewhat regional more than cross country.

The nonFB schools couldnt give a damn about that BCS bid. They probably don't even understand what BCS even is. Cuse, Pitt & WV are now gone and they don't make $$$ off of the BCS bid anyway.

(10-29-2011 08:42 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:14 PM)cyc46 Wrote:  Someone posted Boise was having trouble finding a taker on their all sports anyone else hear this?

I thought I saw where the WAC would take them

might be wrong

Unless things change this is what has happened

AFA, was told no by MVC, WCC might be an option but WCC is worried that BYU will leave and they'd be stuck w/ AFA.

BSU: WAC said no after their commish said yes, all the WAC Prez' said no. They said they have 2 members w/ football coming in and they'll stop at 9/12. Plus their is probably a rule that doesn't allow you to play fb in 1 fbs conf. and play other sports in another fbs conf. No one has ever since I can remember.
WCC told BSU no, since they're not private/church or special like AFA might be.
Big West: wants to stay at 10, BSU would have to pay for travel like Hawaii but they said no.
Big Sky needs to change its bylaw, I have no idea if they are willing to do that. But it seems like their only hope. Also remember BSU sucks at other sports, they're not like BYU, who have other things to offer, besides fb.

(10-29-2011 09:08 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  BSU: WAC said no after their commish said yes, all the WAC Prez' said no.

Hopefully, the WAC is smart enough to know that if they help Boise leave the MWC, then the MWC will swipe Utah State or SJSU away from them.

(10-29-2011 09:21 PM)Chappy Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 09:08 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  BSU: WAC said no after their commish said yes, all the WAC Prez' said no.

Hopefully, the WAC is smart enough to know that if they help Boise leave the MWC, then the MWC will swipe Utah State or SJSU away from them.

Apparently Karl Benson isn't smart enough to know that, but fortunately for the WAC, the school presidents are.

(10-29-2011 06:39 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:33 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:23 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:04 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  If they can't get Boise, they just aren't going to expand? Really? LOL

It just officially lost it's flagship program in West Virginia.

WV has exactly 0 BCS points as of today. I agree the BE is going to expand no matter what. The BE without big time football is just another good mid major BB conf. The BB schools stand to lose millions if the BE does not rebuild.

Despite 0 BCS points it was still the flagship of the leftover football programs and now it is gone. One less reason for these C-USA programs to join the Big East.

In the Big East now you have Rutgers and UConn which will leap for the ACC or B1G if given the opportunity and beyond them you have three previous C-USA programs that will come begging to join the CUSA/Alliance when Rutgers and/or UConn split. At this point I don't see why any C-USA or MWC teams would submit themselves to the whims of the Big East basketball schools when they could combine and create something new that will be stronger in football.

The power is not in the hands of the Big East programs in this issue. All they can do now is hope and with Louisville and UConn still publicly showing the desire to leave the Big East, it really doesn't appear to be a positive choice for any program when the Big East is on track to lose it's AQ status to anyone able to put together a few BCS points.

'flagship program', 'signature program', yada yada are all ways of saying the same thing: existing members with zero BCS points. Teams that were not winning in the BE. Everyone want's to curl up in a fetal position because WV and Pitt left, but last time I checked our AQ was in jepordy last year even WITH these football powerhouses. (that's why we had to go get TCU) Cinci adds far more to the next AQ cycle than either WV or Pitt. This thread really drives the point home, Boise and Houston matter far more to BE football now than any of the departure schools. Thus, I could care less if WV or Pitt want to be mid/lower tier schools in the ACC or B12. I might have lost the AQ with them, but without them (and the new additions) we may keep it. The BE still have a huge carrot to bring in BSU, I think/hope it will happen and our new 12 team FB conference will do just fine. I'm really looking forward to seeing our champion in a BCS bowl year after year while the runaway don't even get close... But we'll have to wait a few years to see who was right about this.

Bull, BCS affiliation as an AQ has nothing to do with formulas & points. It has everything to do with who those BCS bowls want. They want schools who will sell tickets, who travel well, & who attract eyeballs to TV sets. That's why Notre Dame is a shoe in for the BCS despite the fact that they haven't been a serious contender for the NC for more than 15 years.

The Big East is in jeopardy for AQ regardless of whom they add because as a group, they don't travel well, don't sell tickets, & don't attract a national TV audience. A lot of this would be helped by winning games, but they don't do that very well either.

(10-29-2011 10:37 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:39 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:33 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:23 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 06:04 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  If they can't get Boise, they just aren't going to expand? Really? LOL

It just officially lost it's flagship program in West Virginia.

WV has exactly 0 BCS points as of today. I agree the BE is going to expand no matter what. The BE without big time football is just another good mid major BB conf. The BB schools stand to lose millions if the BE does not rebuild.

Despite 0 BCS points it was still the flagship of the leftover football programs and now it is gone. One less reason for these C-USA programs to join the Big East.

In the Big East now you have Rutgers and UConn which will leap for the ACC or B1G if given the opportunity and beyond them you have three previous C-USA programs that will come begging to join the CUSA/Alliance when Rutgers and/or UConn split. At this point I don't see why any C-USA or MWC teams would submit themselves to the whims of the Big East basketball schools when they could combine and create something new that will be stronger in football.

The power is not in the hands of the Big East programs in this issue. All they can do now is hope and with Louisville and UConn still publicly showing the desire to leave the Big East, it really doesn't appear to be a positive choice for any program when the Big East is on track to lose it's AQ status to anyone able to put together a few BCS points.

'flagship program', 'signature program', yada yada are all ways of saying the same thing: existing members with zero BCS points. Teams that were not winning in the BE. Everyone want's to curl up in a fetal position because WV and Pitt left, but last time I checked our AQ was in jepordy last year even WITH these football powerhouses. (that's why we had to go get TCU) Cinci adds far more to the next AQ cycle than either WV or Pitt. This thread really drives the point home, Boise and Houston matter far more to BE football now than any of the departure schools. Thus, I could care less if WV or Pitt want to be mid/lower tier schools in the ACC or B12. I might have lost the AQ with them, but without them (and the new additions) we may keep it. The BE still have a huge carrot to bring in BSU, I think/hope it will happen and our new 12 team FB conference will do just fine. I'm really looking forward to seeing our champion in a BCS bowl year after year while the runaway don't even get close... But we'll have to wait a few years to see who was right about this.

Well said and very true

(10-29-2011 10:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Bull, BCS affiliation as an AQ has nothing to do with formulas & points. It has everything to do with who those BCS bowls want. They want schools who will sell tickets, who travel well, & who attract eyeballs to TV sets. That's why Notre Dame is a shoe in for the BCS despite the fact that they haven't been a serious contender for the NC for more than 15 years.

The Big East is in jeopardy for AQ regardless of whom they add because as a group, they don't travel well, don't sell tickets, & don't attract a national TV audience. A lot of this would be helped by winning games, but they don't do that very well either.

Really? BCS affiliation has everything to do with formulas and points....right now. Now that's not to say the whole system will change in 2014 but as of right now it is based on a formula that works very well for the SEC, B12, Pac12, B10 and to a lesser extent ACC and Big East. IF.....IF the current system remains in place AND the Big East adds Boise & Houston they have nothing to worry about.

If the system changes into something that won't favor the Big East (say....top 5 conferences) then the BE has a lot to be concerned about football wise. They will always be a player in basketball and I don't believe the term "mid major" can be applied to the nonFB schools even if FB and nonFB go their separate ways.

(10-29-2011 11:11 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 10:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Bull, BCS affiliation as an AQ has nothing to do with formulas & points. It has everything to do with who those BCS bowls want. They want schools who will sell tickets, who travel well, & who attract eyeballs to TV sets. That's why Notre Dame is a shoe in for the BCS despite the fact that they haven't been a serious contender for the NC for more than 15 years.

The Big East is in jeopardy for AQ regardless of whom they add because as a group, they don't travel well, don't sell tickets, & don't attract a national TV audience. A lot of this would be helped by winning games, but they don't do that very well either.

Really? BCS affiliation has everything to do with formulas and points....right now. Now that's not to say the whole system will change in 2014 but as of right now it is based on a formula that works very well for the SEC, B12, Pac12, B10 and to a lesser extent ACC and Big East. IF.....IF the current system remains in place AND the Big East adds Boise & Houston they have nothing to worry about.

If the system changes into something that won't favor the Big East (say....top 5 conferences) then the BE has a lot to be concerned about football wise. They will always be a player in basketball and I don't believe the term "mid major" can be applied to the nonFB schools even if FB and nonFB go their separate ways.

I don't get what you're talking about "right now." The Big East is guaranteed BCS membership as an AQ through the 2013-14 academic year. No formulas or points can jeopardize that.

In 2014, the BCS will either cease to exist or will be replaced by a successor agreement. Like the one before it, that agreement will be a voluntary association of conferences with each other & with the bowls. That association will also have absolutely nothing to do with formulas & points. It will be totally voluntary & will be based entirely on who those conferences choose to associate with.

I know that it's guaranteed. That's what I mean by right now. I'm not one of the folks that thinks the BE will magically lose it's AQ bid.

In 2014 I think we'll see something very different and it probably won't favor the BE. The writing is on the wall with the SEC commish pushing for an additional BCS bids. As conferences like that get larger he actually has a pretty good point. I just hope that the BCS somehow becomes the BCS poll's top 8 to 12 teams...period, regardless of conference association. A playoff would be great but it will probably never happen.

Here is a link to the article (I'm all smart like that)...

http://digital.olivesoftware.com/Olive/O...w=ZW50aXR5

(10-29-2011 10:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Bull, BCS affiliation as an AQ has nothing to do with formulas & points. It has everything to do with who those BCS bowls want. They want schools who will sell tickets, who travel well, & who attract eyeballs to TV sets. That's why Notre Dame is a shoe in for the BCS despite the fact that they haven't been a serious contender for the NC for more than 15 years.

The Big East is in jeopardy for AQ regardless of whom they add because as a group, they don't travel well, don't sell tickets, & don't attract a national TV audience. A lot of this would be helped by winning games, but they don't do that very well either.

Exactly.

(10-30-2011 07:03 AM)Dub591 Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 10:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Bull, BCS affiliation as an AQ has nothing to do with formulas & points. It has everything to do with who those BCS bowls want. They want schools who will sell tickets, who travel well, & who attract eyeballs to TV sets. That's why Notre Dame is a shoe in for the BCS despite the fact that they haven't been a serious contender for the NC for more than 15 years.

The Big East is in jeopardy for AQ regardless of whom they add because as a group, they don't travel well, don't sell tickets, & don't attract a national TV audience. A lot of this would be helped by winning games, but they don't do that very well either.

Exactly.

Are we confusing being 'attractive' to a BCS bowl with a conference holding an automatic qualifying position? AQ is strictly numbers, and our champion goes to a BCS bowl no matter what (ie unranked Uconn last year). Sure there may be grousing, but that's the way it is. Yes, they could change the rules next cycle, but until they do we would need to re-qualify the same way. Pitt/WV currently contriubte nothing to that requirement. BSU and Houston likely would. Even UCF does with their finish last year.

BTW, we could sure change that by winning a few BCS bowls... love to see Cincy do it this year.

(10-30-2011 06:33 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Here is a link to the article (I'm all smart like that)...

http://digital.olivesoftware.com/Olive/O...w=ZW50aXR5

+1 rep. Nice job.

(10-30-2011 10:03 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-30-2011 07:03 AM)Dub591 Wrote:  

(10-29-2011 10:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Bull, BCS affiliation as an AQ has nothing to do with formulas & points. It has everything to do with who those BCS bowls want. They want schools who will sell tickets, who travel well, & who attract eyeballs to TV sets. That's why Notre Dame is a shoe in for the BCS despite the fact that they haven't been a serious contender for the NC for more than 15 years.

The Big East is in jeopardy for AQ regardless of whom they add because as a group, they don't travel well, don't sell tickets, & don't attract a national TV audience. A lot of this would be helped by winning games, but they don't do that very well either.

Exactly.

Are we confusing being 'attractive' to a BCS bowl with a conference holding an automatic qualifying position? AQ is strictly numbers, and our champion goes to a BCS bowl no matter what (ie unranked Uconn last year). Sure there may be grousing, but that's the way it is. Yes, they could change the rules next cycle, but until they do we would need to re-qualify the same way. Pitt/WV currently contriubte nothing to that requirement. BSU and Houston likely would. Even UCF does with their finish last year.

BTW, we could sure change that by winning a few BCS bowls... love to see Cincy do it this year.

Yeah, i'd like to see Boise, Cincy, and Houston do great things this year. If all three can win out, then you have two BCS bowl bound teams and one playing a mediocre SEC team in the Liberty Bowl. BE could definately rake in some BCS points, when it comes time for the BCS contract renewal in 2014.

(10-29-2011 08:44 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Come on, guys, this isn't remotely difficult. If the Big East's very survival as a major athletic league is dependent on Boise State finding a home for its other sports the league will simply grit its teeth and take Boise in all sports. That's certainly an imperfect solution for all concerned but desperate times call for desperate measures and I can guarantee you that they are not going to let things unravel over something as mninor as travel considerations.

That presupposes that the non-football schools realize the full extent of their ambivalence to the football side of the conference. I'm not sure that's the case, and they are the ones who will end up determining what ultimately takes place...