Big East: Need of Lifeline or Just Growing Time? (average, Ohio, record)

[nevergoingback]

Originally Posted by pcity

I don't think the Big East wants football-only members. And even if they did, Army and Navy are simply not top-tier teams. They would fit better in the MAC.

They seem just fine with basketball only members.

[twista6002]

I heard a rumor of Rutgers moving to the Big 10, in which case I'd be for it.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by pcity

I don't think the Big East wants football-only members. And even if they did, Army and Navy are simply not top-tier teams. They would fit better in the MAC.

is there something terribly disruptive for a conference to have a mix of members in all sports and other members who do not play football? Is it goofy to have a conference where Notre Dame is in for b'ball but not for football?

Are conferences more successful when they project solidarity, something the SEC works hard to do and does accomplish?

By having a different grouping of schools in b'ball and football, do you in fact just have a convenient set of standings in which to organize your season rather than a real conference which is built to identify with.

I'm a midwesterner (Chgo) and in our part of the nation, being a "Big Ten university" means something. The Big Ten is loaded with image and appeal. I doubt that would be the case if it had some schools playing football and others not.

ACC, Big 12, Pac Ten anyone?

[waltlantz]

There is no reason that the Big East can't step up into the nation's identity. It just reaally needs to do so within the next few years.

Take the ACC. The ACC is not just some basketball conference like some would say, it doesn't have a powerhouse bruiser of a team yet is all. I say the new and improved Hokies along with potential in GTech, Miami (a little more long term) and FSU help out the conference in terms of cred. Anyone of them can step up with all the right elements. There is depth there.

The Big East has to work to where the ACC is now. In the history citing world of college football, the best candidates to give em some credit would be Pitt, WVU (most stable and establised) and 'Cuse (6 years from now). Also provided Schiano stays on track, watch out for Rutgers in the coming years.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by waltlantz

There is no reason that the Big East can't step up into the nation's identity. It just reaally needs to do so within the next few years.

Take the ACC. The ACC is not just some basketball conference like some would say, it doesn't have a powerhouse bruiser of a team yet is all. I say the new and improved Hokies along with potential in GTech, Miami (a little more long term) and FSU help out the conference in terms of cred. Anyone of them can step up with all the right elements. There is depth there.

The Big East has to work to where the ACC is now. In the history citing world of college football, the best candidates to give em some credit would be Pitt, WVU (most stable and establised) and 'Cuse (6 years from now). Also provided Schiano stays on track, watch out for Rutgers in the coming years.

but how does the conference escape the fact that as the last region in the nation to be "conferencized", it was sort of slim picking for a great group of football schools.

Look at it this way. Of the major northeastern football schools (the ones that can make a conference work), BC fled to the ACC and PSU was already gone to the Big Ten before the Big East started.

What does that leave: Pitt, Rutgers, WVU,and Syracuse with the only real sticking power. Both service academies, Army and Navy, are questionable. Temple can't cross the threshold. UConn isn't there yet.

Let's not forget something about the northeast that differs from the rest of the country and all (ACC, SEC, B10, B12, Pac 12) other BCS conferences:

their success is built on public universities.

And there is no region in the US that is so dominated by private, not public schools than the northeast. And the really bad part for the Big East is that SUNY can not deliver up some sort of flagship institution that serves New York the way that Penn St serves Pennsylvania.

Drawing in publics from the midwest doesn't really do the trick. I doubt that the SEC would have had any desire for Louisville, nor the Big Ten for Cincinnnati.

So that is, in a nutshell, what I see in the Big East problem: few state universities available in the northeast (with the big prize, PSU, out of reach) and no public university that could represent all of NYS that could join the conference. That and a strengthened UConn and the ability to turn UMass into a major program would be the best avenues for success.

[waltlantz]

This is true, but don't feel that teh conference should be written off just because of that. That definetly hurts expansion, but unless Rutgers or Cuse gets REALLY money grubbing, jump ship and the Big East can't get sustained success between now and when the bowl contracts go up for negotiation again, then that should be BIG alarm bells.

[Toxic Toast]

Originally Posted by waltlantz

This is true, but don't feel that teh conference should be written off just because of that. That definetly hurts expansion, but unless Rutgers or Cuse gets REALLY money grubbing, jump ship and the Big East can't get sustained success between now and when the bowl contracts go up for negotiation again, then that should be BIG alarm bells.

I wouldn't put it past either of those schools. Remember, when the ACC was first trying to raid the Big East, it was Syracuse and not Boston College that originally was heading to the ACC. It was only until BC threatened legal action that the ACC invited them over Syracuse.

[cville<>centerville]

I don't understand why the Big East keeps getting knocked. Here's some simple facts about the NBE (New Big East). In the last four years...
1) The BE is 12-4 in bowl games. (big ten was 1-6 in last year alone)

2) The BE is 3-1 in BCS bowls

3) WVU is 2-0 in BCS bowls (WVU 38-35 over SEC Champ UGA in Atlanta, WVU 48-28 over #3 OK in the Fiesta after loosing their head coach)


Keep in mind, that until 2008, the ACC was 1-9 in BCS bowls (which was a win over then BE member, VT by FSU). Their most recent win came from a NBE in a down year (aka, WVU in transition) with a competitive loss by Cinci to VT.

So I pose the question.. why is there ANY talk about the BE not being able to compete when other conferences have performed much worse in recent years? How much more does the big east need to do to get rid of this nonsense? the MWC has one decent year and all of the sudden can compete with the big boys?

One more note, VT was 4th place in the BE its last 2-3 years, and has come into the ACC and dominated. Going by that barometer, which conference was/is tougher (granted, Miami has tanked, but BC has also been one of the ACC's best teams while only being in the middle of the pack in the BE)?
[/SIZE]

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by waltlantz

This is true, but don't feel that teh conference should be written off just because of that. That definetly hurts expansion, but unless Rutgers or Cuse gets REALLY money grubbing, jump ship and the Big East can't get sustained success between now and when the bowl contracts go up for negotiation again, then that should be BIG alarm bells.

fully agree. the BCS can't exist without any region, certainly not one as important as the northeast. and let's also remember nothing is etched in stone, including the posibility that Penn State might want to "come home" to its own region and the Big East if it saw it as a viable option.

As of now, with 12 being the maximum number major conferences want to go, I don't see Rutgers or Syracuse bolting as I see no spot for them...nor for Pitt, UConn, WVU. So there really aren't any of those big alarm bells a t present.

The east is an evolving region. It differed from the rest of the nation not only a smaller presence of the traditional large state university but also because its Ivy League past sucked up too much oxygen for the schools that passed the Ivy in power and strength to get the respect they would have had in other regions.

[waltlantz]

Agree with everything you said, cept for Penn State deal. It gains little from being in Big East aside from maybe television revenue. But as much as I support Big East football, few are gonna be interested in Penn State fighting anyone of ours before we have breakout, high caliber SUSTAINED success.