(11-25-2011 12:06 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(11-25-2011 11:38 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  And the Big East master plan has gotten so crazy, that even a Big East writer won't tote water for the league on the plan anymore. The big transcontinental plan is the stupidest expansion idea ever. EVER. Hell, even pro leagues try to limit their geography by grouping teams into sensible divisions and conferences.

ESPN has assigned a writer to the Big East who hates the conference. Shocking.

The transcontinental conference idea will work. I don't know if it will be AQ, but it will be light years ahead of C-USA, MWC, MAC, WAC, and the Sun Belt. It will also have a better product on the field than the ACC. And it will have a nice, fat TV contract.

If an ESPN writer has jumped on board as hating the idea, then that is two writers that now hate the dufus plan. The writer I spoke of is from the NY Daily.

Secondly, the way that the Big East is attempting to put together the plan, is much worse than anything that the CUSA/MWC merger is putting forth; because the MountCUSA plan is keeping rivals together and will limit travel for vast majority of the league (think about it; UTEP will now be aligned with the MWC division and the CUSA division is aiming to bring in Temple), whereas the Big East is just bringing in a hodge podge of teams that have zero history together and are so spread out that they will not be able to even develop a history. If the Big East brought in Memphis, ECU, Tulsa, Southern Miss, ECU, Temple, Houston and UCF; then the Big East would be importing rivalaries that would at least make the conference interesting and geographically sensible.

where can I read about moving utep to the mwc division?

(11-25-2011 02:04 PM)the1sttransport Wrote:  where can I read about moving utep to the mwc division?

Right now it sounds like speculation, but in a thread on the CUSA board it was noted that the ECU President commented that the MWC/CUSA alignment would be 18 members and that CUSA, which already has 9 members, was looking to bring in a prestigious member for the East (sounds like Temple); which would make 10 members. Since the MWC only has 8 members and nothing has officially been said about them adding another member then the speculation is that UTEP will be in the MWC division.

(11-25-2011 10:32 AM)NestaKnight Wrote:  

(11-25-2011 09:49 AM)fishpro12345 Wrote:  

(11-25-2011 09:35 AM)NestaKnight Wrote:  

(11-23-2011 09:26 AM)Eagleweiser Wrote:  Oh it is the joke that just keeps on giving.

Are the geographical differences with adding SDSU so different than the current C-USA configuration. Sure there is the addition of a new time zone, but with football only membership for most purported new western additions, travel should not be a huge issue. I get USM's fan base bitterness, you'll certainly owned UCF in football, however the Big East is focusing on markets that increase potential revenue to the future TV rights negotiations. USM's chief liability is it's location. USM should consistently be one of the top five Non-AQ which will only increase their national brand and consequently their following. They should be included in the next round if they consistently win. But "should" is by it's nature subjective. Good luck in the C-USA championship game, and your bowl game.

If that were true they would be adding Temple before UCF, SDSU or anybody else. The BE is a clusterfudge trying to keep BB-onlies happy (read power-sharing) while the big picture maximization you speak of gets pushed to the back burner,. It is recipe for either failure or third world status. Take your pick.

I was referring to in football, Temple does not remotely deliver the Philly market, and the BE has Villanova in basketball to cover exposure in that market. At a minimum the BE is establishing footholds in new and emerging markets. The BE is merely covering the bases if AQ status is to be retained (with the inclusion of Boise St. and their traveling partner) when the current BCS contract expires. Football only invites limit other complications as it relates to travel. Although I'm not sure TV execs are sitting around wetting themselves at the prospect of exposure to the Bosie, Idaho market. Bosie St. does have somewhat of a national brand by virtue of their onfield play over the last 5-6 years.

Temple has more potential to deliver the Philly market than Villanova ever will. Look at the TV numbers for Temple's 2009 bowl game with UCLA before you lecture others about what Temple can and cannot deliver.

(11-25-2011 11:33 AM)ConanX Wrote:  Let's see, large market where no one watches or small market where everyone watches. Decisions, decisions....

and bank on the BE "leadership" making the wrong ones