(04-03-2021 09:06 AM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 08:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  as for uconn as long as you dont care about football its the right move.. which has been the case so its fine

i disagree with the narrative they wouldnt have gotten a bid in the aac... uconn won quality games in the nonconference, which is what hurt memphis, wichita and smu...they probably win more games when bouknight was out in the aac.. they not only make the tourney in the aac they would have likely gotten a higher seed

but their fans are happy and dont blame the conference for their struggles, so i think its the right move..
uconn failed to reach the title this year again and there were no hot take articles that the big east didnt prepare them, like with the aac...thy just accepted that they lost

Completely agree. As a basketball move it makes sense for them and still does. They will be fine in basketball and their fans seem fine with that. Now football that’s a different story, basically they are a glorified FCS team and they haven’t felt the consequences of that yet since they haven’t played yet. I can see them eventually dropping back to FCS in football.

this

(04-03-2021 08:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  as for uconn as long as you dont care about football its the right move.. which has been the case so its fine

i disagree with the narrative they wouldnt have gotten a bid in the aac... uconn won quality games in the nonconference, which is what hurt memphis, wichita and smu...they probably win more games when bouknight was out in the aac.. they not only make the tourney in the aac they would have likely gotten a higher seed

but their fans are happy and dont blame the conference for their struggles, so i think its the right move..
uconn failed to reach the title this year again and there were no hot take articles that the big east didnt prepare them, like with the aac...thy just accepted that they lost

The bolded is spot on.

anyone could have told you its a good move for hoops but its going to kill their football program long term. Memphis for example would never have made the Cotton and Liberty bowls and that's not OK with us.

(04-03-2021 08:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  as for uconn as long as you dont care about football its the right move.. which has been the case so its fine

i disagree with the narrative they wouldnt have gotten a bid in the aac... uconn won quality games in the nonconference, which is what hurt memphis, wichita and smu...they probably win more games when bouknight was out in the aac.. they not only make the tourney in the aac they would have likely gotten a higher seed

but their fans are happy and dont blame the conference for their struggles, so i think its the right move..
uconn failed to reach the title this year again and there were no hot take articles that the big east didnt prepare them, like with the aac...thy just accepted that they lost

Exactly. UConn was better this year. That’s why they git a bid. Personally, I think UConn made the right call because the Big East is what the UConn fans really wanted. I think it’s generally a very good idea to give your customers what they want. The mistake they made is not making the move until they had secured a landing spot for football. I don’t think Indy is going to work out any better for UConn than it has for UMass.

The whole “the Big East name was toxic for football” is just getting caught up in a talking point. It was “toxic” in the way the Pac12 is currently “toxic. In other words—-the Big East was widely considered to be the weakest of the 6 power conferences. Aren’t we pretty much TRYING to brand ourselves as exactly the same thing with the P6 campaign? We are trying to market ourselves as more like the weakest of the top 6 than the best of the bottom five.

The reality is that talking point was made because they wanted to sell the name and get the cash to balance the budgets. I don’t think there was much long term strategic planning going on at the time—-they (primarily the left behind BE teams) were far more concerned with budget shortfalls knowing the new tv deal wasn’t going to be the 10-15 million a team shot in the arm they had been expecting for several years. They now had budget holes to fill in the short run while they retooled their budgets for G5 land and navigated the next 6 years toward a second (hopefully better) tv deal. They needed that cash as a bridge to the next tv deal and as a bribe to hold the conference together in those early years.

UCONN


Arizona coach flipping the bird after the win.

We will need a few more years to know if the UConn move ends up being successful — or not.

For men's basketball and for general fan interest ... no doubt, the correct move.

For women's hoops, likely a wash though I would give the BE a slight edge — particularly as it relates to UConn's history with some of the BE schools.

For baseball ... not a good move. The American is strong in baseball. The Big East ... not so much.

For football, hard to say. I can see how being indy could be positive or negative.

Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

(04-03-2021 10:32 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

I've posted many times that I felt the UConn departure hurts the American in many ways. Stellar women's hoops. A damn good baseball program. National titles in men's basketball. A major Top 70 university.

Penny Hardaway said he did not want UConn to leave the AAC. I agree with him.

https://www.middletownpress.com/sports/a...114552.php

(04-03-2021 10:19 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 08:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  as for uconn as long as you dont care about football its the right move.. which has been the case so its fine

i disagree with the narrative they wouldnt have gotten a bid in the aac... uconn won quality games in the nonconference, which is what hurt memphis, wichita and smu...they probably win more games when bouknight was out in the aac.. they not only make the tourney in the aac they would have likely gotten a higher seed

but their fans are happy and dont blame the conference for their struggles, so i think its the right move..
uconn failed to reach the title this year again and there were no hot take articles that the big east didnt prepare them, like with the aac...thy just accepted that they lost

Exactly. UConn was better this year. That’s why they git a bid. Personally, I think UConn made the right call because the Big East is what the UConn fans really wanted. The mistake they made is not making the move until they had secured a landing spot for football. I don’t think Indy is going to work out any better for UConn than it has for UMass.

The whole “the Big East name was toxic for football” are just repeating a talking point. It was “toxic” in the way the Pac12 is currently “toxic. In other words—-the abig East was widely considered to be the weakest of the 6 power conferences. Aren’t we pretty much TRYING to brand ourselves as exactly the same thing with the P6 campaign?

The reality is that talking point was made because they wanted to sell the name and get the cash to balance the budgets. I don’t think there was much long term strategic planning going on at the time—-they (primarily the left behind BE teams) were far more concerned with budget shortfalls knowing the new tv deal wasn’t going to be the 10-15 million a team shot in the arm they had been expecting for several years. They now had budget holes to fill in the short run while they retooled their budgets and navigated the next 6 years toward a second (hopefully better) tv deal.

the pac 12 comp is not comparable.. its the exact same teams, they were just having down years...
most assume at some point the will cycle back.. the big east had a dying reputation, that would have only gotten worse with our teams ... the big east name was only valuable to us if we had kept the c7

the big east with aac teams, would have been non stop ridiculed, non stop comparisons to the old big east, something we were never going to live up to... no matter how much better we got we are never going to be in a situation where we are sending 8 to the tournament

with houston's final 4 this year, we get 4 bids next year (2 with 6 or higher seeds).. and we'll be considered one of the best up and coming leagues a in the nations...
only 2 bids even in a final 4 run is a terrible big east year, only 4 bids next years is just as bad....

we have branded ourselves with growth and our own identity... it is 100% better not to be trapped in some else's past, that we could not live up to....

the value of something like a big east name is reputation and perception...but with our schools is would have worked against us...we needed a big core of the original for it to have any value to us, and not be seen as some cheap knockoff on its deathbed

(04-03-2021 10:36 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:32 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

I've posted many times that I felt the UConn departure hurts the American in many ways. Stellar women's hoops. A damn good baseball program. National titles in men's basketball. A major Top 70 university.

Penny Hardaway said he did not want UConn to leave the AAC. I agree with him.

https://www.middletownpress.com/sports/a...114552.php

nobody wanted UConn to leave...it was the only reason we put up with their football program. it was their fans and administration and their love for big-spending that forced them to move.

can you imagine a strong conference with WSU,Cincy,UConn,Memphis,Temple and Houston in basketball? insane.

(04-03-2021 10:46 AM)Agust Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:36 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:32 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

I've posted many times that I felt the UConn departure hurts the American in many ways. Stellar women's hoops. A damn good baseball program. National titles in men's basketball. A major Top 70 university.

Penny Hardaway said he did not want UConn to leave the AAC. I agree with him.

https://www.middletownpress.com/sports/a...114552.php

nobody wanted UConn to leave...it was the only reason we put up with their football program. it was their fans and administration and their love for big-spending that forced them to move.

can you imagine a strong conference with WSU,Cincy,UConn,Memphis,Temple and Houston in basketball? insane.

I've seen many posts from posters who have been dismissive of UConn and basically say "good riddance." They may not have "wanted" UConn to leave the AAC originally. But now that UConn is gone, the mindset with these folks is "Well, no big deal. UConn was not worth keeping."

I feel that is a misguided approach to take.

My take: The UConn departure is a blow to the AAC. I don't sugarcoat it. But the league will continue to move forward. All will be fine.

(04-03-2021 10:41 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:19 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 08:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  as for uconn as long as you dont care about football its the right move.. which has been the case so its fine

i disagree with the narrative they wouldnt have gotten a bid in the aac... uconn won quality games in the nonconference, which is what hurt memphis, wichita and smu...they probably win more games when bouknight was out in the aac.. they not only make the tourney in the aac they would have likely gotten a higher seed

but their fans are happy and dont blame the conference for their struggles, so i think its the right move..
uconn failed to reach the title this year again and there were no hot take articles that the big east didnt prepare them, like with the aac...thy just accepted that they lost

Exactly. UConn was better this year. That’s why they git a bid. Personally, I think UConn made the right call because the Big East is what the UConn fans really wanted. The mistake they made is not making the move until they had secured a landing spot for football. I don’t think Indy is going to work out any better for UConn than it has for UMass.

The whole “the Big East name was toxic for football” are just repeating a talking point. It was “toxic” in the way the Pac12 is currently “toxic. In other words—-the abig East was widely considered to be the weakest of the 6 power conferences. Aren’t we pretty much TRYING to brand ourselves as exactly the same thing with the P6 campaign?

The reality is that talking point was made because they wanted to sell the name and get the cash to balance the budgets. I don’t think there was much long term strategic planning going on at the time—-they (primarily the left behind BE teams) were far more concerned with budget shortfalls knowing the new tv deal wasn’t going to be the 10-15 million a team shot in the arm they had been expecting for several years. They now had budget holes to fill in the short run while they retooled their budgets and navigated the next 6 years toward a second (hopefully better) tv deal.

the pac 12 comp is not comparable.. its the exact same teams, they were just having down years...
most assume at some point the will cycle back.. the big east had a dying reputation, that would have only gotten worse with our teams ... the big east name was only valuable to us if we had kept the c7

the big east with aac teams, would have been non stop ridiculed, non stop comparisons to the old big east, something we were never going to live up to... no matter how much better we got we are never going to be in a situation where we are sending 8 to the tournament

with houston's final 4 this year, we get 4 bids next year (2 with 6 or higher seeds).. and we'll be considered one of the best up and coming leagues a in the nations...
only 2 bids even in a final 4 run is a terrible big east year, only 4 bids next years is just as bad....

we have branded ourselves with growth and our own identity... it is 100% better not to be trapped in some else's past, that we could not live up to....

the value of something like a big east name is reputation and perception...but with our schools is would have worked against us...we needed a big core of the original for it to have any value to us, and not be seen as some cheap knockoff on its deathbed

Your missing the point. The NAME wasn’t any more toxic than the Pac12 NAME is now. As for the “decling” performance of the Big East—that’s largely a myth if you look at the actual numbers. The post Miami Big East was not always the weakest conference in power ranking and it had a bowl record that was similar or better than some other power conferences like the ACC.

That said—-it’s the NAME we are talking about. The toxicity of the NAME is what we are discussing. Frankly, I think the feeling at that time of a lot of the school administrators was that “we aren’t going to be here long” so let’s cash that chip in for 100 million and use the cash while we bide our time positioning for a chance to move up/out. I don’t think building a long term conference home was in the minds of many school administrators at that time—regardless of what they may have said in public. Once the mass exodus began in fall 2012—everyone had one eye on the exit door when making decisions.

The name is worthless to the schools in the American. We don't have any long-term Big East basketball members (other than UConn at the time) and only have one long-term football member in Temple (had Rutgers at the time). Louisville, Cincinnati, USF are not historically embedded with that name even though their fans greatly lament its demise. There is nothing East about Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Memphis (Tennessee). We are better off building our identity together. The American is a better name for this group of schools than the Big East. If we had managed to keep the Catholic 7 in the fold then the Big East name would have been a no-brainer. They didn't want to stay and that name is their identity, not ours. It made sense to sell it to them.

(04-03-2021 10:53 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:46 AM)Agust Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:36 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:32 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

I've posted many times that I felt the UConn departure hurts the American in many ways. Stellar women's hoops. A damn good baseball program. National titles in men's basketball. A major Top 70 university.

Penny Hardaway said he did not want UConn to leave the AAC. I agree with him.

https://www.middletownpress.com/sports/a...114552.php

nobody wanted UConn to leave...it was the only reason we put up with their football program. it was their fans and administration and their love for big-spending that forced them to move.

can you imagine a strong conference with WSU,Cincy,UConn,Memphis,Temple and Houston in basketball? insane.

I've seen many posts from posters who have been dismissive of UConn and basically say "good riddance." They may not have "wanted" UConn to leave the AAC originally. But now that UConn is gone, the mindset with these folks is "Well, no big deal. UConn was not worth keeping."

I feel that is a misguided approach to take.

My take: The UConn departure is a blow to the AAC. I don't sugarcoat it. But the league will continue to move forward. All will be fine.

I think it depends on what we do with the departure.

Doing nothing? UCONN loss hurts
Replacing with a Dayton level program? Hurts worse
Replacing with a west of Boise, BYU, Army/Gonzaga (no I don’t believe this will happen)? Much better than having UCONN

It depends on what we do moving forward but there are better scenarios than having the worst FB school in D1 and a middling basketball program over the last 5 years

(04-03-2021 12:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Your missing the point. The NAME wasn’t any more toxic than the Pac12 NAME is now. As for the “decling” performance of the Big East—that’s largely a myth if you look at the actual numbers. The post Miami Big East was not always the weakest conference in power ranking and it had a bowl record that was similar or better than some other power conferences like the ACC.

That said—-it’s the NAME we are talking about. The toxicity of the NAME is what we are discussing. Frankly, I think the feeling at that time of a lot of the school administrators was that “we aren’t going to be here long” so let’s cash that chip in for 100 million and use the cash while we bide our time positioning for a chance to move up/out. I don’t think building a long term conference home was in the minds of many school administrators at that time—regardless of what they may have said in public. Once the mass exodus began in fall 2012—everyone had one eye on the exit door when making decisions.

i think keeping the big east name was the short term money grab move... say we are the old big east for as long as we can till they stop believing..we could not build anything long term with that name, we would be forever in the shadow of its past

we are not the post Miami big east.. the c7 Louisville, pitt, wvu, Syracuse, Rutgers, nd (basketball) arent in the aac.

pac 12 name isnt that bad...our current team lineup with the big east name would have been insanely more toxic.
i think your point is the big east 2.0 brand value name was "that bad" and we could have retained that value... when that backs my point, big east 2.0 was a good league but trapped in the legacy of the past that devalued them and brought ridicule. losing 13 more members from that league had zero chance of retaining any value with just 1 original members and majority of the members not in the east.

I think the key to our longterm success is the big east formula, not the big east name.. they started completely fresh in the 80s, didnt keep the ECAC name, hat had bonded them previously.
our current members have to be the backbone of the value of our conference name..

let me put it this way..
if the Beatles disbanded and was replaced with the members of the backstreet boys.. the "new" beatles would have been ridiculed and disrespected. nothing like the past and not as good. keeping the Beatles name is just a short term money grab...
The backstreet boys making their own name allowed them to make their own place in history without comparison to others
if ringo and Harrison left, and McCartney and Lennon added a new drummer and guitarist and wanted to keep the name, that is a situation where the beatles name still has values.. thats not our case

(04-02-2021 11:56 PM)PirateJP Wrote:  

(04-02-2021 11:25 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  It was definitely the right move, from the NBE they made the NCAA Tournament in Men's BB, as members of the AAC they would have ben in the NIT with Memphis and SMU, the BIAS against the AAC is too great because of the G5 label.

Which is why we were absolutely foolish to get rid of the Big East name. Worst decision this conference has ever made.

Funny you brought that up. I was just thinking about it a couple days ago. Perception is everything.

(04-03-2021 10:53 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:46 AM)Agust Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:36 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:32 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

I've posted many times that I felt the UConn departure hurts the American in many ways. Stellar women's hoops. A damn good baseball program. National titles in men's basketball. A major Top 70 university.

Penny Hardaway said he did not want UConn to leave the AAC. I agree with him.

https://www.middletownpress.com/sports/a...114552.php

nobody wanted UConn to leave...it was the only reason we put up with their football program. it was their fans and administration and their love for big-spending that forced them to move.

can you imagine a strong conference with WSU,Cincy,UConn,Memphis,Temple and Houston in basketball? insane.

I've seen many posts from posters who have been dismissive of UConn and basically say "good riddance." They may not have "wanted" UConn to leave the AAC originally. But now that UConn is gone, the mindset with these folks is "Well, no big deal. UConn was not worth keeping."

I feel that is a misguided approach to take.

My take: The UConn departure is a blow to the AAC. I don't sugarcoat it. But the league will continue to move forward. All will be fine.

It's a huge blow to the conference in BB. Perception of the conference really took a hit.

(04-03-2021 01:15 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 12:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Your missing the point. The NAME wasn’t any more toxic than the Pac12 NAME is now. As for the “decling” performance of the Big East—that’s largely a myth if you look at the actual numbers. The post Miami Big East was not always the weakest conference in power ranking and it had a bowl record that was similar or better than some other power conferences like the ACC.

That said—-it’s the NAME we are talking about. The toxicity of the NAME is what we are discussing. Frankly, I think the feeling at that time of a lot of the school administrators was that “we aren’t going to be here long” so let’s cash that chip in for 100 million and use the cash while we bide our time positioning for a chance to move up/out. I don’t think building a long term conference home was in the minds of many school administrators at that time—regardless of what they may have said in public. Once the mass exodus began in fall 2012—everyone had one eye on the exit door when making decisions.

i think keeping the big east name was the short term money grab move... say we are the old big east for as long as we can till they stop believing..we could not build anything long term with that name, we would be forever in the shadow of its past

we are not the post Miami big east.. the c7 Louisville, pitt, wvu, Syracuse, Rutgers, nd (basketball) arent in the aac.

pac 12 name isnt that bad...our current team lineup with the big east name would have been insanely more toxic.
i think your point is the big east 2.0 brand value name was "that bad" and we could have retained that value... when that backs my point, big east 2.0 was a good league but trapped in the legacy of the past that devalued them and brought ridicule. losing 13 more members from that league had zero chance of retaining any value with just 1 original members and majority of the members not in the east.

I think the key to our longterm success is the big east formula, not the big east name.. they started completely fresh in the 80s, didnt keep the ECAC name, hat had bonded them previously.
our current members have to be the backbone of the value of our conference name..

let me put it this way..
if the Beatles disbanded and was replaced with the members of the backstreet boys.. the "new" beatles would have been ridiculed and disrespected. nothing like the past and not as good. keeping the Beatles name is just a short term money grab...
The backstreet boys making their own name allowed them to make their own place in history without comparison to others
if ringo and Harrison left, and McCartney and Lennon added a new drummer and guitarist and wanted to keep the name, that is a situation where the beatles name still has values.. thats not our case

I dont completely disagree---much of what your are saying is true---but if the goal is to be P6---a familiar name that people connected to a power conference would have helped---especially among the more casual fans. Furthermore--my point is multi-pronged. Yes--I think it was a mistake to sell the Big East name. But----if you do sell the name for 100 million---if you're really concerned with strategic brand building----then you needed to put some of that money back into conference brand building to create substance for the new completely unknown "American Athletic Conference" brand. If the idea was the Big East was toxic to football----then why not spend 25% of that money building a new major bowl game with a payout high enough to attract a quality P5 opponent as a destination for our champion (or runner up in years the AAC wins the access bowl)? Thats how a conference thinking long term about conference building and branding building thinks. A major bowl game tied to the champ is a significant hallmark of a power conference. Every single P5 has that---and the Big East---which was the weakest--also had the weakest tie to a major bowl (remember---the Big East champ rotated to different bowls and wasnt tied to just one). But we didnt do that. We put aside a tiny bit of money to create the lowest paying bowl in all of FBS and were surprised when that tiny $100K payout didnt attract a major P5 opponent....so of course such a lame poorly financed effort failed to produce fruit.

My second point is important when you discuss the long term implications of selling the Big East name. We got 100 million for the name, but because we did not think strategically and reinvest any of that money into the conference---we have no long term benefit from the sale. Since there was no long term benefit---we would have been better off keeping the name as that Big East brand still has value today---certainly more value than the nothing we have to show for the 100 million we got in return.

(04-03-2021 01:44 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:53 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:46 AM)Agust Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:36 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-03-2021 10:32 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Our conference has an identity...strongest football conference by far outside the P5 and rivaling the lower P5s. Good competitive multi-bid basketball conference that will average 3 bids/year. UConn doesn’t fit that image with their football indifference and haven’t been good enough in hoops to make up for it

I've posted many times that I felt the UConn departure hurts the American in many ways. Stellar women's hoops. A damn good baseball program. National titles in men's basketball. A major Top 70 university.

Penny Hardaway said he did not want UConn to leave the AAC. I agree with him.

https://www.middletownpress.com/sports/a...114552.php

nobody wanted UConn to leave...it was the only reason we put up with their football program. it was their fans and administration and their love for big-spending that forced them to move.

can you imagine a strong conference with WSU,Cincy,UConn,Memphis,Temple and Houston in basketball? insane.

I've seen many posts from posters who have been dismissive of UConn and basically say "good riddance." They may not have "wanted" UConn to leave the AAC originally. But now that UConn is gone, the mindset with these folks is "Well, no big deal. UConn was not worth keeping."

I feel that is a misguided approach to take.

My take: The UConn departure is a blow to the AAC. I don't sugarcoat it. But the league will continue to move forward. All will be fine.

It's a huge blow to the conference in BB. Perception of the conference really took a hit.

That can be easily remedied with VCU and/or Dayton. Jim Calhoun isn't walking back through the door. UConn may remain a fairly consistent tourney team, but they aren't becoming a national powerhouse again.

And regardless, football is what drives the bus. It determines conference TV deals, and it determines whether we are a "power" conference or not. Almost anyone - and certainly any of the usual suspect names - would be an upgrade on UConn football. Now if we add UL-Monroe, then I'll admit we've downgraded. But even not replacing UConn is addition by subtraction.

I always hated the idea of selling the name. I also hated the American because it sounds to much like CUSA. Best early strategy should have been this

North:
UConn
Temple
Navy
Marshall
UMass
Cincinnati

South:
Memphis
UCF
USF
SMU
Houston
ECU

plus VCU all under the Big East name. North division would have stayed in the Big East footprint, Cincinnati would most likely have ruled the division but I imagine UConn would have better off in this regional division. Temple, Marshall, and Navy could also contend. The South division would football centric and where the bulk of the conferences ranked teams would have come from. Basketball would be strong as UConn, UMass, Cincinnati, Temple, and VCU
would still have provided a solid northern and eastern core to sell the Big East name.

The AAC may have done better with a name that suggests most of its schools are located in the Eastern half of the US near the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Not Big East. But something like Atlantic Gulf Conference. Could be improved upon. Otherwise, the AAC was described by one detractor as Conference USA on steroids. Not fair.

I also think several AAC schools and possibly UConn might end up in the P5 sooner than the next decade. Look forward to that day.