Tradition holds value with fans, the last five years is where you make a statement with recruits. Is this a universal Law of College Athletics? No, but that is where this thread is going.

(08-20-2012 10:14 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Pitt has been "solid" for many of the past few years. Then have 8 or 9 bowl games going back to about 2000. National Contender? No. But solid teams build the core of your conference. I believe they nearly had a player win the Heisman in the last decade as well (Larry Fitzgerald). Syracuse has had a rough go of the past decade. But then again so had Temple, SMU and Baylor up until about two years ago, and everyone thinks of them abel to catch up to past glory.

i remember pitt being blown out in the fiesta by utah and smu beating pitt recently, other than that i cant remember any remarkable wins by pitt since 2000. i cant remember syracuse doing anything of note since 2000. i just dont see them being the hand wringing loss that everyone else does. i can see them becoming lost in the sea of mediocrity that is acc football. the acc is a 2 team conference footballwise right now, those teams being va tech and fsu.

houston and boise easily make up for their loss, this is not 1930

If the Big East ends up earning money similar to or better than the ACC and has as good or better coverage (weekley over the air games on NBC for the next 10 year that turn the Big East into a powerful national brand)---then I will be fine weather Pitt or Syracuse regret thier decision or not. Its far more important to me that we become a powerful national brand than it is that we teach defectors a lesson--but I do appreciate Aresco's lofty goal. Its nice to have a guy in charge with that type of thinking.

(08-20-2012 10:42 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-20-2012 10:14 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Pitt has been "solid" for many of the past few years. Then have 8 or 9 bowl games going back to about 2000. National Contender? No. But solid teams build the core of your conference. I believe they nearly had a player win the Heisman in the last decade as well (Larry Fitzgerald). Syracuse has had a rough go of the past decade. But then again so had Temple, SMU and Baylor up until about two years ago, and everyone thinks of them abel to catch up to past glory.

i remember pitt being blown out in the fiesta by utah and smu beating pitt recently, other than that i cant remember any remarkable wins by pitt since 2000. i cant remember syracuse doing anything of note since 2000. i just dont see them being the hand wringing loss that everyone else does. i can see them becoming lost in the sea of mediocrity that is acc football. the acc is a 2 team conference footballwise right now, those teams being va tech and fsu.

houston and boise easily make up for their loss, this is not 1930

Good Lord. I just saw your "Hi Brad!" gif signature. Excellent choice---I must say I cant believe that was 30 years ago either!

(08-20-2012 10:44 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If the Big East ends up earning money similar to or better than the ACC and has as good or better coverage (weekley over the air games on NBC for the next 10 year that turn the Big East into a powerful national brand)---then I will be fine weather Pitt or Syracuse regret thier decision or not. Its far more important to me that we become a powerful national brand than it is that we teach defectors a lesson--but I do appreciate Aresco's lofty goal. Its nice to have a guy in charge with that type of thinking.

Yep. The BE definitely has never had anybody like this in charge before, at least not with Tranghese and Marinatto. Gavitt was before I became seriously interested, and the BE was still mostly a BB league.