You forgot USF, UConn, and Cincinnati in 2012 when Big East imploded. All of those schools lost power status, and in the case of USF and UConn, haven't got it back 10-12 years later.

(08-17-2023 03:30 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  You forgot USF, UConn, and Cincinnati in 2012 when Big East imploded. All of those schools lost power status, and in the case of USF and UConn, haven't got it back 10-12 years later.

And they've both done so much since then to show how much they really "deserved" that status all along?

(08-17-2023 03:41 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:30 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  You forgot USF, UConn, and Cincinnati in 2012 when Big East imploded. All of those schools lost power status, and in the case of USF and UConn, haven't got it back 10-12 years later.

And they've both done so much since then to show how much they really "deserved" that status all along?

Posted this on the AAC board. Since the demise of the Big East, USF has the 3rd most top 25 appearances of ALL group of 5 schools since then. Only Boise and Memphis have more, and just barely in the case of Memphis.

Since 2012, USF has more top 25 appearances in the AP poll than everyone you can think of: SMU, SDSU, Tulane, Etc. etc. etc. Look it up.

(08-17-2023 03:44 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:41 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:30 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  You forgot USF, UConn, and Cincinnati in 2012 when Big East imploded. All of those schools lost power status, and in the case of USF and UConn, haven't got it back 10-12 years later.

And they've both done so much since then to show how much they really "deserved" that status all along?

Posted this on the AAC board. Since the demise of the Big East, USF has the 3rd most top 25 appearances of ALL group of 5 schools since then. Only Boise and Memphis have more, and just barely in the case of Memphis.

Since 2012, USF has more top 25 appearances in the AP poll than everyone you can think of: SMU, SDSU, Tulane, Etc. etc. etc. Look it up.

2?

(You also didn't include the schools that were G5 during that time but aren't going to be anymore).

(08-17-2023 03:25 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:15 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  At one time West Texas A&M played in the big time. So did The Citadel. Why should I feel bad about them evolving to a new existence that is different and better aligned to who they are?

If Washington State were to stun us and join Big Sky, I am fine with that.

This is 100% my point.

It isn't really a meritocracy (which sucks) but it also wasn't when schools who feel "left behind" got wherever they used to be.

I find conference realignment not terribly different from what I see with law firms and ad agencies and I'm sure exists in other industries I'm not as familiar with.

Partnership is formed. Over time an imbalance begins to form. Some partners becomes less effective generating new revenue and retaining old revenue. If a satisfactory resolution isn't found, the firm breaks up with plays well with others and revenue generators departing to start a new firm, often bringing in people who had proven they generate but had not been given partnership because the firm was content in its current form to take the profits the person generated without giving them an equity stake.

If the SEC broke up, Vandy, Ole Miss, and Miss State would be in a bad situation. They once offered value, now they extract more value than they contribute to the cash flow. They'd be in trouble. As long as SEC revenue keeps growing, no one cares. If revenue stagnates and the only path to growth in partnership distribution is to have fewer partners, well that's a problem for those schools and if it happens, well that's life in free market economy. Maybe Ole Miss and Miss State are generating at their peak and geography and demographics screws them. Vanderbilt is in a large and fast growing market with a LOT of money flowing around. Their situation would be a failure to fully develop their market.

(08-17-2023 03:58 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:44 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:41 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 03:30 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  You forgot USF, UConn, and Cincinnati in 2012 when Big East imploded. All of those schools lost power status, and in the case of USF and UConn, haven't got it back 10-12 years later.

And they've both done so much since then to show how much they really "deserved" that status all along?

Posted this on the AAC board. Since the demise of the Big East, USF has the 3rd most top 25 appearances of ALL group of 5 schools since then. Only Boise and Memphis have more, and just barely in the case of Memphis.

Since 2012, USF has more top 25 appearances in the AP poll than everyone you can think of: SMU, SDSU, Tulane, Etc. etc. etc. Look it up.

2?

(You also didn't include the schools that were G5 during that time but aren't going to be anymore).

Correct, I didn't include UCF, Houston, and Cincinnati, because they already made it to the Big 12.

(08-16-2023 08:49 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  We can agree Had the C7 not pulled off the crap they did in pulling out and taking the BE name with it, the AAC likely could have added a few more schools and with the Big East name possibly had a chance at P6. But when the C7 sank that ship it was done

Absolutely not. The Big East lost their TV value when 50% of the football members left for the ACC/B12 (and took Notre Dame with them).

And the idea that the C7 "pulled off the crap" is only the view of someone who was a later addition and spent the previous two decades mostly outside the Big East.

Everyone had known for DECADES that Syracuse was the lynchpin of the old Big East. The assumption that the Big East would eventually split on football lines was long-held. But the OLD OLD Big East lasted so long and was able to survive the first ACC raid because there NEVER WAS a "C5 vs Football" situation...

Notre Dame private and Catholic like them, but wanted a Power Football conference in non-football sports.
Syracuse, Boston College and Miami were private schools WITH football.
Pitt, West Virginia, Va Tech and Rutgers were Public schools with football
UConn was a public school without FBS football and committed to basketball.

On any given issue of Big East discussion, the C5 had Syracuse, UConn, Pitt and Notre Dame thinking the same about basketball, and Syracuse, Notre Dame, BC and Miami thinking the same on Public vs Private matters. The C5 GAVE the conference the right to add schools unilaterally for football BECAUSE they trusted the decisions of Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College and Miami with regard to not harming the basketball league and not tilting the balance of power too far in terms of public/private or hoops/football..

But with the trusted schools gone, and the remaining football schools (all public) now had that power to make decisions WITHOUT the inclusion of the C7. Which really was the reason they left. It was less about "you added Tulane and East Carolina" and more about "we're not even CONSULTED and find out ECU and Tulane are joining our conference via Twitter."

The first quartet only TCU and eventually Houston got back in the power grouping. The second quartet all wound up arguably better off, especially Rutgers, and none ever lost power status, except Rutgers for a year or two.

The third quartet, I think only Stanford will retain autonomous status by going independent. Oregon State and Washington State have probably lost it permanently. Cal has a long and difficult path to regain that status, may even get passed by SMU.

Hence, I voted 3rd.

(08-16-2023 08:49 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  the AAC likely could have added a few more schools and with the Big East name possibly had a chance at P6.

No, I don't buy this. It's about the schools in the conference (and the P5 had no incentive to want a P6).

(08-17-2023 03:15 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 02:41 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(08-17-2023 12:41 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  longer than they deserved

I am less inclined to feel sorry for a school that once (undeservedly) had some extra special P5/BCS status and then eventually lost it, than a school (like a Boise State) who has been better on the field of play for a long time but can't break through because they weren't a bigger school 80 years ago, or didn't have the right person in the room slapping backs.

Those schools at one time did offer something that made those other schools consider them a peer and worth entering a full partnership with them.

The economics changed. The marketplace changed. In many cases such institutions failed to utilize the tools and resources their status afforded them.

I'm much more sympathetic to the women (and a few men) who worked the nearby shirt and shoe factories and saw their jobs leave because their employer saw a chance to move the factory to Malaysia and pay less than the $5.50 an hour the more experienced workers were making. Kind of hard to shift careers at age 50 and learn skills that were in demand but not in demand where they lived. Selling the house you raised your kids in on land you got a great deal on from your parents and moving 2 hours or 10 hours to where the work existed is a big ask vs telling an 18 year old they need to do that.

Markets are always evolving. It is difficult for humans with a finite lifespan and generally even shorter useful working life to adjust. A university is essentially immortal unless the money runs out and no one wants the campus. Their capacity to adjust is much greater and those who fail to adjust get left out.

At one time West Texas A&M played in the big time. So did The Citadel. Why should I feel bad about them evolving to a new existence that is different and better aligned to who they are?

If Washington State were to stun us and join Big Sky, I am fine with that.

I would clarify that by "deserve" that meant how they spent as an athletic department. I totally get that embarrassing span of football and men's basketball performance in the 90's and early 00's. By merit, I don't disagree that there were others perhaps more deserving (I don't agree about Boise State, though; not for a whole athletic department). UH still spent to keep up. They weren't like other non-majors at the time.

It wasn't a surprise when UH was tapped to join the Big East in 2011. Then AQ/power status dropped out from under them. When the Big XII toyed with expansion some years back (2016) and Houston was one of the likely choices, it wasn't a surprise, either. Schools like UH and BYU just looked out of place; adults amongst kids.

(08-18-2023 04:13 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(08-16-2023 08:49 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  We can agree Had the C7 not pulled off the crap they did in pulling out and taking the BE name with it, the AAC likely could have added a few more schools and with the Big East name possibly had a chance at P6. But when the C7 sank that ship it was done

Absolutely not. The Big East lost their TV value when 50% of the football members left for the ACC/B12 (and took Notre Dame with them).

And the idea that the C7 "pulled off the crap" is only the view of someone who was a later addition and spent the previous two decades mostly outside the Big East.

Everyone had known for DECADES that Syracuse was the lynchpin of the old Big East. The assumption that the Big East would eventually split on football lines was long-held. But the OLD OLD Big East lasted so long and was able to survive the first ACC raid because there NEVER WAS a "C5 vs Football" situation...

Notre Dame private and Catholic like them, but wanted a Power Football conference in non-football sports.
Syracuse, Boston College and Miami were private schools WITH football.
Pitt, West Virginia, Va Tech and Rutgers were Public schools with football
UConn was a public school without FBS football and committed to basketball.

On any given issue of Big East discussion, the C5 had Syracuse, UConn, Pitt and Notre Dame thinking the same about basketball, and Syracuse, Notre Dame, BC and Miami thinking the same on Public vs Private matters. The C5 GAVE the conference the right to add schools unilaterally for football BECAUSE they trusted the decisions of Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College and Miami with regard to not harming the basketball league and not tilting the balance of power too far in terms of public/private or hoops/football..

But with the trusted schools gone, and the remaining football schools (all public) now had that power to make decisions WITHOUT the inclusion of the C7. Which really was the reason they left. It was less about "you added Tulane and East Carolina" and more about "we're not even CONSULTED and find out ECU and Tulane are joining our conference via Twitter."

The C7 had been a BE pain in the a$$ ever since the league started football.

And these "trusted" schools that you speak of are the ones that put the knives in everyone's back and bolted.

And if it were the departures of the "trusted" schools that was their motivation then why did they wait until Tulane and ECU were added to... pull their crap.