Just so it doesn't get lost in the buzz about the 7th bowl, Aresco said on Tim Brando's show today that the BE has not discussed going to 16 teams, and that he does not see much support for it. He also mentioned it would cause problems for splitting into divisions, and for scheduling.

He also mentioned again that he did not consider Louisville and Cincinnati to be eastern teams. Maybe Louisville, Memphis and Cincy are all going west? Doesn't make sense, unless he adds another eastern team, and not BYU or AFA.

Oh, you mean McMurphy wasn't right about that either? I'm shocked.

(10-24-2012 10:44 AM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  Oh, you mean McMurphy wasn't right about that either? I'm shocked.

True. McMurphy's "source" was apparently wrong about going to 16, lol.

(10-24-2012 10:49 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 10:44 AM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  Oh, you mean McMurphy wasn't right about that either? I'm shocked.

True. McMurphy's "source" was apparently wrong about going to 16, lol.

McMurphy has the Big East logo on his dart board and is just trying his darndest to hit the center.

It reminds me of that reporter in the Bay Area that just kept insisting Boise State would back out.

These people have agendas.

True. Now back to the OP.

The Big East is not going to 16 teams.

He also said they are not adding anyone else for hoops. So the only eastern teams I would think is the picture is Army and Nova. Oh God!
He done a quick 10 minute interview on KTVB in Boise. Nothing special about the interview other than that. He did say they have moved away from the 14th team negotiations since those were finished to concentrate on TV and bowls.

(10-24-2012 11:12 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  He also said they are not adding anyone else for hoops. So the only eastern teams I would think is the picture is Army and Nova. Oh God!
He done a quick 10 minute interview on KTVB in Boise. Nothing special about the interview other than that. He did say they have moved away from the 14th team negotiations since those were finished to concentrate on TV and bowls.

That makes sense to put all energy into TV negoatiations and Bowl access. When the Big East solidifies a lucrative TV contract and top tier Bowl access there shouldn't be a problem attracting #14 (BYU pack your bags).

(10-24-2012 11:12 AM)War Torn Ruston Wrote:  He also said they are not adding anyone else for hoops. So the only eastern teams I would think is the picture is Army and Nova. Oh God!
He done a quick 10 minute interview on KTVB in Boise. Nothing special about the interview other than that. He did say they have moved away from the 14th team negotiations since those were finished to concentrate on TV and bowls.

Wait...what? As in there is a 14th team ready to go?

(10-24-2012 10:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  He also mentioned again that he did not consider Louisville and Cincinnati to be eastern teams. Maybe Louisville, Memphis and Cincy are all going west?

What is meant by "eastern" can really vary depending on where you are. For example, someone from the western parts of the US probably considers anything east of the Mississippi. Louisville and Cincinnati would be "eastern" to them.

When I look at Aresco's bio (born in Connecticut, college in Massachusetts, lived and worked in Connecticut for a number of year), I can see why he probably doesn't consider UofL or UC "eastern" teams. After all, UofL and UC aren't in New England, the Mid-Atlantic, or the South Atlantic regions. Instead, he'd probably call us "Midwestern" (or "Southern" in Louisville's case).

Basically, I wouldn't read too much into it.

(10-24-2012 11:30 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 10:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  He also mentioned again that he did not consider Louisville and Cincinnati to be eastern teams. Maybe Louisville, Memphis and Cincy are all going west?

What is meant by "eastern" can really vary depending on where you are. For example, someone from the western parts of the US probably considers anything east of the Mississippi. Louisville and Cincinnati would be "eastern" to them.

When I look at Aresco's bio (born in Connecticut, college in Massachusetts, lived and worked in Connecticut for a number of year), I can see why he probably doesn't consider UofL or UC "eastern" teams. After all, UofL and UC aren't in New England, the Mid-Atlantic, or the South Atlantic regions. Instead, he'd probably call us "Midwestern" (or "Southern" in Louisville's case).

Basically, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Is there a tongue in cheek icon on here? I wasn't serious. I don't think for one second that UC and UL are going west. Then it would be unbalanced to the west, if #14 is western.

I just think it's curious that Aresco keeps saying that, regardless of what his criteria for "eastern" is.

(10-24-2012 11:53 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 11:30 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 10:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  He also mentioned again that he did not consider Louisville and Cincinnati to be eastern teams. Maybe Louisville, Memphis and Cincy are all going west?

What is meant by "eastern" can really vary depending on where you are. For example, someone from the western parts of the US probably considers anything east of the Mississippi. Louisville and Cincinnati would be "eastern" to them.

When I look at Aresco's bio (born in Connecticut, college in Massachusetts, lived and worked in Connecticut for a number of year), I can see why he probably doesn't consider UofL or UC "eastern" teams. After all, UofL and UC aren't in New England, the Mid-Atlantic, or the South Atlantic regions. Instead, he'd probably call us "Midwestern" (or "Southern" in Louisville's case).

Basically, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Is there a tongue in cheek icon on here? I wasn't serious. I don't think for one second that UC and UL are going west. Then it would be unbalanced to the west, if #14 is western.

I just think it's curious that Aresco keeps saying that, regardless of what his criteria for "eastern" is.

I could see a scenario where in a 14 team format, Ville, cincy and memphis come west with sdsu,boise, houston and smu. Especially if #14 is ecu who goes east with rutgers, uconn, navy, usf, ucf and temple. Actually i'd be good with this alignment, this boise fan is getting tired of byu dragging their feet and Ecu brings a very solid program with a rabid fan base plus this alignment would get us cincy and ville every year, that'd be outstanding!!!

(10-24-2012 12:00 PM)Hardcore Bronc Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 11:53 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 11:30 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 10:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  He also mentioned again that he did not consider Louisville and Cincinnati to be eastern teams. Maybe Louisville, Memphis and Cincy are all going west?

What is meant by "eastern" can really vary depending on where you are. For example, someone from the western parts of the US probably considers anything east of the Mississippi. Louisville and Cincinnati would be "eastern" to them.

When I look at Aresco's bio (born in Connecticut, college in Massachusetts, lived and worked in Connecticut for a number of year), I can see why he probably doesn't consider UofL or UC "eastern" teams. After all, UofL and UC aren't in New England, the Mid-Atlantic, or the South Atlantic regions. Instead, he'd probably call us "Midwestern" (or "Southern" in Louisville's case).

Basically, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Is there a tongue in cheek icon on here? I wasn't serious. I don't think for one second that UC and UL are going west. Then it would be unbalanced to the west, if #14 is western.

I just think it's curious that Aresco keeps saying that, regardless of what his criteria for "eastern" is.

I could live with it but travel would be a bearcat for all of us! (just kidding, Cincy). Also, a problem I see is the unbalance in conference strength and no way would either Louisville and Cincy be happy in the West, anyway. Why create unhappiness?

As for BYU, they might not be dragging their feet at all but just waiting until the media contract is done to see how it will break down---that and the Bowl game. So, they haven't said yes, but they haven't said no, either. Look how long it took for Boise to get our ducks lined up before we could make the jump.

(10-24-2012 11:53 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 11:30 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 10:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  He also mentioned again that he did not consider Louisville and Cincinnati to be eastern teams. Maybe Louisville, Memphis and Cincy are all going west?

What is meant by "eastern" can really vary depending on where you are. For example, someone from the western parts of the US probably considers anything east of the Mississippi. Louisville and Cincinnati would be "eastern" to them.

When I look at Aresco's bio (born in Connecticut, college in Massachusetts, lived and worked in Connecticut for a number of year), I can see why he probably doesn't consider UofL or UC "eastern" teams. After all, UofL and UC aren't in New England, the Mid-Atlantic, or the South Atlantic regions. Instead, he'd probably call us "Midwestern" (or "Southern" in Louisville's case).

Basically, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Is there a tongue in cheek icon on here? I wasn't serious. I don't think for one second that UC and UL are going west. Then it would be unbalanced to the west, if #14 is western.

I just think it's curious that Aresco keeps saying that, regardless of what his criteria for "eastern" is.

This is at least the second time that he's mentioned it. The first time is what sparked my prediction from yesterday.

Just for sh!ts and giggles...

EAST
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Rutgers
Temple
UCF
USF

WEST
Boise State
Cincinnati
Houston
Louisville
Memphis
San Diego State
SMU

Perhaps the whole idea of zippers was a secret ploy to get Cincy and Louisville to open up to the idea of playing more games out West.

ATLANTIC
UMass \ UConn
Rutgers \ Temple
Navy
USF \ UCF

PACIFIC
Cincy \ Louisville
Memphis
Houston \ SMU
Boise State \ SDSU

UMass would help in basketball, lacrosse, and a number of non-revenue sports while adding the flagship of a populous state in the East.

Aresco may not consider UofL or UC eastern, and I think his geographic background does play into that. While he certainly has influence and gives guidance as the commish, he won't be issuing a directive on divisions. Something to keep in mind.

Why else would he keep mentioning it, then? Like I said, I think that's not happening, but don't think he can't influence the majority of the presidents to go along with any idea of his. UL and UC alone couldn't block it.

That travel for Cincinnati and Louisville isn't that bad because its only one western game each year.

How is this different than UC's road schedule from 2007 to 2010

@SDSU 2007
@Oklahoma 2008
@Hawaii 2008
@Oregon State 2009
@Fresno State 2010

For a four year period the Bearcats played at least one game out west including on game in Hawaii. If you look at UC's non conference schedule going forward it has games at Illinois, Ohio, Ohio State, and Miami Ohio. I don't see any difference if we move our one western game a year to the conference schedule.

(10-24-2012 12:38 PM)3601 Wrote:  Just for sh!ts and giggles...

EAST
UConn East Carolina Navy Rutgers Temple UCF USF

WEST
Boise State Cincinnati Houston Louisville Memphis San Diego State SMU

ecu for football only seems to fit all the talk - doesn't it?

(10-24-2012 04:04 PM)e-bethMSU Wrote:  

(10-24-2012 12:38 PM)3601 Wrote:  Just for sh!ts and giggles...

EAST
UConn East Carolina Navy Rutgers Temple UCF USF

WEST
Boise State Cincinnati Houston Louisville Memphis San Diego State SMU

ecu for football only seems to fit all the talk - doesn't it?

Thats exactly what I got from that