cuseroc
Super Moderator
Posts: 15,261
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota
|
RE: What if: Big East signs new contract w/ ESPN in 2011
(07-29-2020 09:25 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote: (07-28-2020 07:41 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote: (07-28-2020 11:35 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote: (07-28-2020 10:39 AM)cuseroc Wrote: (07-27-2020 05:55 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote: The entire premise of this entire thread rests on the idea that ACC expansion to 14 was inevitable. It wasn't. It was engineered by ESPN (per the BC president) to punish the Big East for going to the open market.
There's all sorts of scenarios that could play out (maybe the Big 12 goes back to 12 if they can get WVU + Pitt + UL together). Who knows, the most likely result is that WVU, Pitt, and UL are still in the Big East, with Syracuse having gone to the ACC to replace Maryland. I very much doubt the Big East with those three plus potentially TCU, UCF, and Houston, would have lost AQ/Power status.
One thing that we have to keep in mind is that the first and most major step in securing AQ status is being aligned as an anchor with a major bowl (Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, Rose). Without that there is no AQ status. The BE did not have an agreement to anchor any major bowl during the last BCS era. There was an arrangement for the BE to have a roving opportunity to play in the major bowls, except the Rose Bowl, depending on how the other bowl choices worked out each season.
While setting up the current P5 system, there was not going to be any more major revolving bowl opportunities. Thus went the BE AQ status opportunity. You needed multiple current and unquestionable football powers that attract tv eyeballs and or fb powers with a history of traveling well for a major bowl to take a chance on giving anchor status to a conference. It was not a foregone conclusion that even the ACC, with the likes of Clemson, FSU, Miami and VT, would be an anchor to the Orange Bowl. I remember that whole Orange Bowl deal signing with the ACC well, because SU and Pitt had accepted an invitation to the ACC, and I was thinking that if the ACC didnt re-up with the OBowl, SU would have left one conference that lost AQ/BCS status to go to another that lost AQ status.
So even with the new additions, it doesnt seem likely that the BE would have gained AQ status
If ESPN wanted the Big East to be part of a Power 6, they would have been. The Peach Bowl or another bowl would have become the anchor bowl. The Gator Bowl was willing for years to become the Big East anchor in the BCS, and I'd bet the Citrus Bowl would have taken that deal to become a NY6(7) bowl as well.
Under the above scenario, the Big East would have retained several of their brands and added some strong football programs in large markets. It all depends on how ESPN chose to value the conference and their prospects for supporting a major bowl game.
Ok...so much wrong with your facts and premises. BUT...
1) It was the Boston College ATHLETIC DIRECTOR, Gene DiFillippo who "admitted" (said) that it was ESPN who told the ACC "what to do," NOT the BC president. (It was, however, the BC President who referred to UC as a "City College".)
2) The Big East had ALREADY lost its marquee bowl--the Fed-Ex, then Nokia--Orange Bowl...AND its second, major Bowl, the Gator Bowl...BEFORE the conference fell apart. That was with the "brands" of Pitt, Syracuse, AND the conference heavy: WVU. There is ZERO reason to think that a "BE" shorn of its major brands...especially the ND tie-in...would "attract" a "major bowl." None.
3) Let's remember why Notre Dame was included in the BE under the terms they were: BOWL ACCESS. With no ND tie-in, none of the bowls...even the bowls the BE created (Tire/Meineke/Belk and Pin Stripe)...wanted the BE tie-in.
4) The BE name had NO equity in the FB realm...actually it was a liability. That's why we sold it to the NBE.
You're completely in fantasy land. (Pun intended.)
1. Sorry my memory has failed me on a quote from 10 years ago. It changes not one thing about what I've argued in this thread.
2. No one has disputed that the Big East lost the Orange Bowl as an anchor. I never said anything to the effect. Rather, I said that if ESPN had wanted to maintain the Big East as part of the P6 in the CFP/contract bowl era, they would have arranged a contract bowl, whether it was the Peach or adding another bowl to create a NY7 (Gator, Citrus, etc.). The Gator Bowl was quite interesting in joining the BCS, and post-2005, they offered to be the Big East anchor bowl in order to achieve that. So there was interest from a major bowl game.
3. No one has disputed this, but likely a P6 Big East would have retained at least some of the bowls, but that also depends on which teams are in this alignment.
4. I disagree. The Big East was a well known brand for recruits in both FB and BB. No one has the slightest clue what The American is. The Big East brand may not have been SEC/B1G level, but it immediately told recruits and TV viewers that the conference was superior to the G4 conferences. The conference name was sold as part of a money grab by Cincy, UConn, and USF, who kept the spoils of that for themselves.
The Gator Bowl got exactly what they deserve to get, on the outside looking in. I remember the head of that bowl making disparaging remarks about the BE before they finally left the league high and dry. Now that bowl is reduced to a lower tier bowl. Its too bad that they didnt play their cards right because the Gator Bowl still has big time name recognition.
|
|