It seems like several of our additions were added quickly. I think ECU was one, and Tulane came out of nowhere.

Does anyone know why Tulsa is taking some time? Does Tulsa have some "issues" that the others did not? I don't believe Tulsa is hesitating on making a decision, or that they can't get enough votes to get in.

Maybe Tulane just had all of their ducks in a row and they were ready in day or two. That may have been an unusual situation. And the Tulsa add is happening at the same speed that these things normally do.

Or maybe the C7 leaving has complicated the voting process. Is it possible that the only schools that can vote are UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, and USF?

I'm still cautiously optimistic about this conference, but it is somewhat of a cluster right now.

No need to rush. We really don't need them until 2015

There are more important issues right now.
1. Tv deal for basketball next year.
2. Tv money for new league in 2014
3. Split from C7 deal

I would guess that we, the C-7, are a big part of the holdup.

Aresco: Hey, just a heads-up, we're going to vote on bringing in Tulsa after you guys leave.
C-7: Sounds great. Do we have that agreement on the name worked out yet?

I wonder if there is no reason to move on Tulsa yet because the conference has time. Another option could be that Cincinnati, UConn, and USF are waiting to see what the Big 12 does this week. Maybe Tulsa wants to see the TV deal first too?

(01-27-2013 10:12 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  No need to rush. We really don't need them until 2015

This. And I think its debatable that we need Tulsa.

Also, Navy is sounding positive now, but the new contract might not thrill them, so you might not need a #12 if you don't have a #11.

One hypothesis is that we are still negotiating fees.

I imagine it's also difficult to move as quickly simply bc we don't have an AD at the moment...our very capable finance VP and president are handling the duties but they also have a school to run.

We had a board meeting two weeks ago and I'd guess they probably approved a move pending some details. If not well before that.

Just some guesses. Tulsa is extremely tight lipped on everything so we realize reps from other schools probably have more concrete leaked info...

(01-27-2013 10:14 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Also, Navy is sounding positive now, but the new contract might not thrill them, so you might not need a #12 if you don't have a #11.

Good Lord, if Navy doesn't join we're going to start seeing names here like ODU, Charlotte, JMU, Georgia State, Missouri State ....

Overall, it seems like there's several reasons why there's no rush to add Tulsa. And there's not one reason to get it done right now.

I would rather have ODU for the long run. Tulsa is only drawing 20k with all their recent success. ODU has 14k season ticket holders that would explode in the Big East. Umass would also be better.

My God, what this conference has sunk to.

(01-27-2013 10:13 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Maybe Tulsa wants to see the TV deal first too?

Ah......no.

Whatever the Big East ends up with will still easily be better vs what Tulsa is stuck with in regards to CUSA (approx $1 Million per year through 2015-2016), let alone the teams that will now make up a majority of the new CUSA like ODU, FAU, North Texas, MTSU, UNCC, FIU, etc....

(01-27-2013 10:13 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I would guess that we, the C-7, are a big part of the holdup.

Aresco: Hey, just a heads-up, we're going to vote on bringing in Tulsa after you guys leave.
C-7: Sounds great. Do we have that agreement on the name worked out yet?

The only part of the holdup regarding the C7 is that they are still deciding if they want to pony up some cash to leave early, or if they stick around until 2015 and leave without an exit fee. Nothing else is contractually up for negotiations.

I know you C7 guys believe this will be a splitting of the assets, but it's not. Thats not the holdup. The holdup is waiting for the C7 to decide if they want to bend over and pony up exit fees to leave the conference early, or if they sit tight. Right now they are sitting tight.

(01-27-2013 10:51 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  My God, what this conference has sunk to.

Hopefully our time here is short

(01-27-2013 11:44 AM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(01-27-2013 10:51 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  My God, what this conference has sunk to.

Hopefully our time here is short

One can only hope.

(01-27-2013 10:51 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  My God, what this conference has sunk to.

Sounds like what Pitt, Syracuse, WVU, Boston College, the C-7, etc said when UC, UL, USF, DePaul and Marquette were added a few years ago.

We don't need Tulsa for a while. Also, Tulsa may want to see how the tv contract negotiations go before making a move that will involve significant expenses.

(01-27-2013 10:13 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  I wonder if there is no reason to move on Tulsa yet because the conference has time. Another option could be that Cincinnati, UConn, and USF are waiting to see what the Big 12 does this week. Maybe Tulsa wants to see the TV deal first too?

Maybe reason has broken out that he is no need to add anyone just yet.

i d guess one reason is the uncertainty about who will be in the conference next tear (2013-14) and the year after. which is probably the hold up with an all sport invite for ecu. once the BE knows when everyone is leaving, they can ask others to join and give them(and the networks) a firm date

If we don't need them until 2015, the BE can wait 2 years and see what the landscape looks like. C-USA or the MAC (U Mass) may have developed some other promising candidates by that time. As it is, there's certainly an internal debate within the BE whether to go to the western front or stay east, and time may bring the best answer to that question.

Attack made a good point above that for "mid-majors", interest is mainly tied to winning, most win inconsistently, so the idea is to get teams in major metropolitan areas so that you can capitalize on large numbers when they win. There are some, however, that do win consistently like USM (and they're basically team is really tough). Unfortunately, they didn't last year. Time will tell if that was an anomaly or not. And time might allow them to significantly improve their limited budget. Then you have a school like Marshall that draws fairly well, despite a series of mediocre teams (not bad, but not particularly good). Now, the league will have issues with them academically, which may preclude any real interest. And then U mass, Old Dominion, Charlotte, UTSA, even Ga State.....what if one of them starts winning 9-10 games a year?

(01-27-2013 01:07 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(01-27-2013 10:51 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  My God, what this conference has sunk to.

Sounds like what Pitt, Syracuse, WVU, Boston College, the C-7, etc said when UC, UL, USF, DePaul and Marquette were added a few years ago.

Check post #9 before I made post #10. Their talking about adding ODU and UMass for football. I think your post was unwarranted towards me. If talking about ODU and UMass for football is not sinking to the low end right now, you sir are sadly mistaken, aren't you a mod, why are you attacking me and my post.Incidently, I do hope UC,UL and Memphis all end up in the same conf. again.