Big Ten Armespansion: Will the Big East Adapt or Die?
Part I: Survival of the Fittest in the Big East
Six months into the Expansion debate one truth seems to have emerged no matter who you talk to: The Big East will not survive Big Ten Expansion. Of course nothing's happened yet and no one knows who, if anyone, will be invited to the expansion party. But the Big Ten clearly wants a piece of the New York media market, and the only way to get it is to include schools from the Big East. If that happens, it seems to be a foregone conclusion that the Big East will dissolve (at least as a football conference).
Many of the Big East's current problems stem from the first round of expansion back in 2003. Prior to that, the Big East was a legitimate powerhouse in college football. Boasting such successful, historic, and capable programs like Pitt, Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College and (to a lesser historic extent) West Virginia. Even so, the Big East was a relative newborn in the College Football world. The conference was founded in 1979 as a basketball conference and didn't begin playing football until 1991 when Miami joined the league. Despite being a founding member of the BCS, and thus damned to an eternity of listening to the musak version of "Sound of Silence" in a small elevator to nowhere, the league lasted only 12 years in its original football form.
Seeking greener pastures, Miami and originally Syracuse were set to depart for the ACC in 2003. That is until the governor of Virginia screwed everything up and forced the conference to take Virginia Tech instead of Syracuse. The result was Miami and Virginia Tech leaving the conference in 2004 with Boston College saying adieu in 2005, all heading to the ACC. And frankly, the conference has never recovered on the football field.
This is not to say the conference is devoid of legitimate assets. Syracuse has a history of successful football (just none recently). Connecticut has grown into a decent football program from humble and recent beginnings. West Virginia has become one of the premier football programs on the east coast over the past 15 years. Then there's Pitt, with a history of Heisman trophy winners and long term success. Perhaps more importantly, the Big East boasts a number of powerful names in men's college basketball: 'Cuse, UConn, Villanova, Marquette, Georgetown, Cincinnati, Louisville, etc.
Despite this, the conference ranks dead last in overall television revenues taking in just $33 Million to feed a conference with 8 football schools and 16 basketball schools. The conference distributes just $2 Million per year to it's basketball schools ($32 Million total), with a weighted distribution for the conference's 8 football schools as additional revenue. West Virginia reported a take home of $3.5 Million as of February 2010, making a total conference haul of $5.5 Million. And that's for a team that made the Final Four. And a Bowl Game! I don't care about your allegiances, that is a totally unsustainable business model and one that has made the conference ripe for poaching.
The result of this is at least five teams in the Big East that are easy pickins' for any conference that comes calling. The most obvious departures are Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Connecticut, and (somehow) Rutgers. Hidden in the weeds is the prospect of West Virginia heading else where and perhaps down-on-its-football-luck Louisville searching for a better fit. But regardless of whether WVU or Louisville actually depart, it's perfectly clear that at least two Big East teams are under serious consideration as additions to the Big Ten.
The consensus view seems to be that if some two to three team combination of Pitt, 'Cuse and/or Rutgers and/or UConn join the Big Ten or leave the conference for new digs, the Big East is finished. To an extent, that consensus may be justified. If the Conference were to lose two football revenue producing members, I think it's logical that Big East football would disappear into the history books. However, when it comes to the Conference disappearing, I'm not so sure.
Of the Football assets discussed (Pitt, Rutgers, and Syracuse), the loss of two of those teams would make keeping the Big East as a viable football league nearly impossible. It's worth noting at this point that UConn seems to be less of a possible candidate after the Big Ten let people know about it's demographic shift mentality to it's pending expansion. Also, the meager 325,440 TVs in the state won't do them any favors unless NYC comes with the deal (which I think is unlikely). Assuming that two of those schools, let's say Pitt and Rutgers, leave for the Big Ten it's make or break time for the conference.
The Departed
If you have to choose between Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse, the final expansion decision will come down to money. Of the group, only Pitt will be competitive on the gridiron and hardwood, but the Panthers can't deliver any new cable territory to the Big Ten. That is not true, however, for the ACC. In the event the Big Ten does not pick up the Panthers, the Pennsylvania television market would be a huge get for the ACC. Despite the pessimism and declining population of the Pittsburgh/Pennsylvania area, I have to think there's still a chance that Pitt will end up in the Big Ten.
Then there's Syracuse, who's long term basketball prowess and former football glory make it a good fit for the conference, despite Jim Boeheim's protestations. Syracuse does offer some access to the closed New York state media market and delivers a number of newhomes. And for the rabid 'Cuse fans, don't act so appalled by the notion of switch conferences. You've danced with the Devil in the pale moon light once before, and God knows you'll put on that pretty red dress and do it again so long as your dance partner's got a big wallet and will pay for steady diet of pills and wine coolers. If the call comes, we know you'll dance with us or the ACC.
Rutgers will be the least athletically competitive of the group, but they offer the biggest potential payoff based on their proximity to New York. Despite all the hoopla, there's no guarantee that Rutgers can deliver that market. And for some reason Teddy Greenstein thinks Rutgers will deliver Philadelphia,
Rutgers is also an hour from Philadelphia and its 2.95 million households
Not to point out the obvious, but Philly was already delivered by a school called Penn State. 20 years ago. You know, when the conference first expanded? Regardless, Rutgers' $50 Million in athletic revenue is relatively attractive and at the least, Rutgers would add the 2.3 Million households in New Jersey that the Conference doesn't have (Semi-correction, apparently there are 3.4 Million total households in Jesery, but I can't find a link - Ed.). there's also the possibility that Rutgers (as well as Syracuse) would provide an entree into the New York market and after a few years of selling their product at a loss, the BTN and Big Ten would finally gain access to that market (though likely at a reduced rate). There are benefits there in the long term, so it is more than conceivable that the Big Ten adds Pitt for geographic/athletic reasons and Rutgers/Syracuse for financial ones.
What that leaves is a six team football conference and a 14 team basketball conference. So what happens to the Football teams?
The End of Big East Football
At six teams (Louisville, UConn, West Virginia, University of South Florida, Syracuse/Rutgers, and Cincinnati) the conference would immediately lose it's BCS autobid. There is no way I, or anybody on the outside, can see the BCS delivering an autobid to a Six team conference. And it's not like the Big East can add new teams that will help them maintain their bid, the pickins' are really, really slim. Memphis isn't going to cut it, nor is adding UCF. Football in the Big East is dead, and that means WVU and Cincinnati (at a minimum) are looking for new homes.
The Quick
West Virginia is an interesting question. The Mountaineers have become an enormously successful althetic school, and would immediately be competitive in the ACC, SEC or Big Ten as an upper middle tier program. The main drawback, at least to the Big Ten, is academics. On the other hand, the ACC might not be a bad fit for the 'Eers. WVU has a nasty, nasty rivalry with Maryland that I've witness first hand and I can't imagine that WVU would have much trouble developing rivalries with it's Virginia cousins in Blacksburg and Charlottesville. When the ACC expands in response to the Big Ten, WVU has to be a prime consideration.
UConn, likewise makes for an interesting ACC addition. Just south of Boston College, UConn would bridge the gap between the ACC's northernmost school and help to balance out the coming expansion. Also, like WVU, the Huskies' long time hardwood success will be a welcome addition to the ACC. Even though Connecticut is a relative newcomer to the D1A football ranks, the Huskies' athletic department has dumped too much cash into the program (with even more committed) to allow the program to be an independent. So irrespective of the school's long standing ties to the conference for basketball, the prospect of playing an ACC schedule, getting ACC TV money, and offering the ACC a crack at the New York TV market could be a perfect fit.
Between Rutgers and 'Cuse, my guess is that one of them ends up in the cold after the Big Ten expands. At this point I'm guessing it's Syracuse. But either way, both schools would likely find a home in the ACC based on geographic location, prior flirtation ('Cuse), television revenues, and non-threatening football programs. Both schools have been remarkably profitable despite being in the Big East, so the ACC wouldn't exactly be bailing out the Greek economy. I think it's a logical fit, though that doesn't mean it'll happen.
And the Dead
Cincinnati is in a difficult position. After two straight conference crowns and two BCS bowls, the Bearcats may be settling back down to earth this year. The departure of Brian Kelly to Notre Dame likely means the Bearcats will take a significant step backwards in 2010 and the years to come. And don't think that won't occur to anyone discussing expansion in the major conferences. Had Brian Kelly remained at Cinci, I think it's conceivable that the SEC might have come sniffing around (despite Kentucky's likely objections [proximity to Cinci]). But with the basketball program in a weakened state and the football program losing its leader, the best bet for Cinci is a move to the Mountain West. Cinci would add credibility to the MWC's move to take the Big East's autobid, and would also benefit the Bearcats on the hardwood. Cinci's a good school, but I can't see them landing in a major conference when the Big East breaks up.
Sadly, I've got to say the same about Louisville. The Cardinals have a soft spot in my heart from a trip I took back in college, but I'm struggling with where they'd end up. You don't go from CUSA to the Big East to the SEC/ACC/Big 8 when your football program goes from No. 3 in the country in '05 to Kragthorpe'd by the end of the decade. It hasn't been a good couple of years. Like Cinci, Louisville suffers from proximity to the University of Kentucky who will undoubtedly do everything in their power to block the addition of the Cardinals to the SEC. There's just too much on the line in terms of recruiting and ratings for the two schools to exist in the same conference. I see Louisville and Cinci moving to the Mountain West, or one of its eventual breakoffs when the final Big Ten expansion bomb goes off.
USF, on the other hand, is screwed. There's no way that USF ends up in the ACC unless the SEC pillages Miami and FSU. Even then I think that's a LONG shot. The constant string of reports involving sketchy academic practices, Jim Leavitt's departure, and the assorted bad press have made it doubtful that a major conference will extend an invite to the Bulls. Can you see Duke or Virginia voting them into the ACC? The most logical place for USF is in a revamped and expanded Conference USA. It's a step down for the Bulls, but it's the only step I can see them taking if they want to maintain their football program.
So the Big East is Dead, Right?
Actually... No. The conference traces it's roots back to the hardwood. That's what it was founded on and that's what gives it its identity. This football thing has never been a big deal to schools like Marquette, Georgetown, DePaul, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Providence, and Villanova. It's just not important to them. That gives you seven schools with which to keep a basketball and non-revenue sports conference alive. And one wildcard.
Notre Dame.
In a way, the demise of Big East football might actually help the Irish remain independent. At eight teams, the Big East can remain a viable basketball conference, and might actually add a school or two from the A-10. that allows Notre Dame to remain in the conference as a basketball and non-revenue sports member of the conference without the pressure to join the conference's beleaguered football conference. Now this may be a bit of a stretch to say that Notre Dame will go this route. The Irish would be looking a diminished level of play in it's non-revenue sports and could also have issues if the remaining conference members don't fund the same number of programs as Notre Dame does. There's also the money issue. A conference like this would like be a financial drain on the Irish and it's likely this type of arrangement both financially and appearance wise, would be a deal breaker. But it's possible.
Evolution
In the end, I think the Big East survives. But it survives in a much, much different format than we know it today. With football gone the Big East will remain a viable, yet diminished, athletic conference. On the hardwood, the Big East will likely remain one of the better basketball conferences in the country, especially after they pillage schools like Richmond and Dayton. There's also the outside chance that Football could find its way back into the Big East if, over time, schools like Georgetown, Villanova, Richmond, et al decide that it's worth promoting their d1AA/D2 programs.
Minus between two to five programs, the Big East's days on BCS competition are over. But it's far too early to read the Conference it's last rights.
As usual, you can follow our continuing snarky coverage of Big Ten Expansion here.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
UCF
UCF is a great program who’s recruiting gets better and better every year, and our location and school size is prime. The Big East wouldn’t be dead, it was 5 yrs ago when they added Louisville & South Florida, and USF has done well recently (#2 rating in the nation 2 yrs ago if I remember correctly) and Louisville was good a couple of yrs ago, maybe better now with Charlie Strong. I am sure if all of this expansion junk works out and UCF ends up in the Big East, they will be successful. Also I would love to play USF every yr, I realize UCF has gone 0-4 vs them, but I know it is a fun rivalry and easy for away fans to attend the game. It would have way bigger implications if we were both Big East teams. Also I believe our recruiting would be better, which is already pretty damn good for a C-USA team.
Corrections
A couple of corrections
You only included the NYC metro NJ households. But there are another 700,000 or so households in South Jersey.
Also – your claim that RU isn’t athletically competitive with Pitt or Syracuse is really not factual. In FB RU is the equal of Pitt (better over the past five years,) and much better than Syracuse. In other sports the schools are all more or less equal. What I think you meant to say is that RU doesn’t have a good basketball program.
Anyway – just throwing those things in.
in response
Your point on the numebr of TV households has been noted and changed. I think the number is 3.4 million households. the only issue is finding a link to support it. Thus far I haven’t had any luck, but if you have a link I’ll gladly put it up. Thanks for noting that.
With regard to who is better at what, from the Mid-West, my perception is that Pitt is a far better athletic school. In terms of the Big Two (Basketball and Football), Rutgers isn’t even close to Pitt. there’s also the historical aspect of Heisman winners and national championships. While RU has made strides under Schiano, it’s still a relatively nacent program that only became a D1 program about 25 years ago. With regard to ’Cuse, historically the Orange are a sucessful football program and a rediculously good basketball program. On the basis of that, I think those schools get the nod athletically over Rutgers.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on May 20, 2010 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not sure you understand the culture of the ACC.
Your assumption that the ACC would have fewer issues with admitting WVU than South Florida (and fewer issues than the Big Ten would) is, I think, misguided. The Eers would bring more athletic success to the table, but that’s it. Remember that UNC and Duke were dead-set against bringing even Virginia Tech in during the 03/04 round, despite VT’s location in the geographic heart of the conference and several pre-existing academic joint ventures with ACC schools. Now take all of the cultural prejudices that fed that, and add that WVU is a Tier 3 academic school per USNews (they’d be the only public school in the conference not ranked in the Top Public National Universities list) with a high-profile recent case of apparent corruption in degree conferral. The SEC may put up with universities whose political/financial environment risks inquiries into their accreditation. The ACC won’t.
All that said, I still believe WVU would have been a much better pick than Boston College. (Nobody in the ACC gives a crap about BC, and vice versa.) Virginia Tech and WVU already have a long-running rivalry that was put on hiatus after some of the extremely heated rhetoric post-03/04 and fears of the stadium environment getting out of hand.
One thing to remember about that 03/04 round and “the governor of Virginia screwing everything up”: you may care to look at the conditions of Virginia Tech’s Big East membership. VT was rejected for all-sports BE membership in 1994, and only invited to join the non-football BE in 2000-01 after the 1999 ACC expansion rumor round of Miami, SU and VT. Under the terms of that invitation, this coming season would have been the first year VT would receive a full share of Big East non-football revenue (five years of zero, five years of half-share). Expecting VT to have held any loyalty to the Big East under those conditions, rather than pouring its efforts into joining a conference full of its historic peers that it sits slam in the middle of, is a bit much.
All said, I think it takes a couple of highly doubtful things happening for the ACC to consider going past 12 anyway: (a) the SEC raiding its southern tier for (pick two: FSU/GT/Clem/UM), and (b) the BCS bid becoming at risk. The new ESPN contract turned out pretty decent, and the basketball side of the conference (which, as long as Duke-UNC is a valuable TV property, still matters) still hates even the compromises of a 12-team schedule. We’ll muddle along just fine where we are otherwise, and maybe FSU and Miami will get their programs up off the mat soon.
That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.
I don't the problem was adding BC
It was adding BC without SU. Given 20/20 hindsight, when it became clear the ACC couldn’t get two of the northeastern Big East schools along with Miami (at least, not without going past 12), and that they’d have to add VT if they added anyone, they should have added only Virginia Tech and called it a day.
Get WVU facts straight!!!
Why the constant knock or misunderstanding of WVU sports and in particular football …. your following sentence just totally frosts me…" Prior to that, the Big East was a legitimate powerhouse in college football. Boasting such successful, historic, and capable programs like Pitt, Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College and (to a lesser historic extent) West Virginia."
A LESSER HISTORICAL EXTENT , WEST VIRGINIA !!!
Interesting also that you mention Va. Tech as a historically good program so I will use them for some comparisons to WVU. Here are some facts:
Did you not know that (not taking into account teams that have won national championships) That WVU is the winningest football program in NCAA history?
WVU is ranked 26th in most ncaa bowl appearances (VT 38th)
WVU is ranked 24th in most ncaa bowl wins (VT 51st)
WVU is ranked 21st in ncaa bowl games winning percentage (VT 44th)
Keep in mind also many of WVU’s bowl appearances were in the days a bowl game meant something and less than 25 teams received invites … not the have a 50/50 season and half of all teams go to a bowl game like it is today.
WVU 28-22-1 vs VT, 13 conf. championships compared to 7 for VT and 5 Big East titles to 3 competing head to head in Big East. WVU has also won to BCS Bowl Games which is twice as many as the entire ACC combined in the last decade. There isn’t a team in the ACC that can Match that record. WHERE DO YOU GET OFF TRIVIALIZING THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF WVU’S FOOTBALL PROGRAM ???
Karl
Uh... Dude....
This sentence alone should tell you something:
Did you not know that (not taking into account teams that have won national championships) That WVU is the winningest football program in NCAA history?
My memory is not as good as yours with regard to the mountaineer’s historic success, but reviewing the school’s football history and its time in the southern conference it’s not jumping off the page. I don’t have a clue why you’re so upset that I compared VT to WVU, but I’ll plead ignorance to any rivalry. What I also don’t get, is I say nice things about WVU in this piece:
The Mountaineers have become an enormously successful althetic school, and would immediately be competitive in the ACC, SEC or Big Ten as an upper middle tier program.
So. Yeah. In response to your last question: here’s your answer.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on May 20, 2010 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions
Dont get me wrong ..
No … I do appreciate the good things you said. Only used VT as a comparison since I know it so well and you referenced VT as a historically good school. My kids went to VT and it is an excellent school. If you are going to mention VT as a historically good school don’t mention WVU as an afterthought. Just trying to point out that WVU does have a wonderful history in ncaa football. Overall, I really did like your article.
Karl
Cool
Yeah, I really didn’t mean a slight in there when I put that in. It’s just my perception from reading the histories. Take it FWIW.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on May 20, 2010 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions
This is crazy to say but
I’d love it if Marquette University apply a defribillator to their long lost college football program ( RIP 1960) to “help out” the Big East (I know, that’s weak), as well as give Wisconsin a run for their money in two sports. Yeah, crazy man.
Go Blue!
Questioning WVU academics!?!
Just to respond also to “not understanding the culture of the ACC”, in regards to acdemics and his knock of WVU, “WVU is a Tier 3 academic school per USNews (they’d be the only public school in the conference not ranked in the Top Public National Universities list)” That concept needs to be blown out of the water also. I will start by saying that my son is a graduate from the school of architecture at VA Tech so I am not bashing VT. HOWEVER, WVU is an excellent academic university. To respond to WVU being a tier 3 university, does the poster know what that means? I didn’t think so. Tier 3 has nothing to do with the quality of academics or programs, only with the amount of funding the university gets. WVU gets less research dollars and that is it!
Did you know that WVU has produced 25 Rhodes Scholars (VT 2) in the top 5% of public universities. WVU has 21 Truman Scholars (VT 3). WVU has 6 Boren Scholars (VT 0),. WVU has 33 Marshall Scholars (VT 33 also). WVU has produced 6 first team All Academic All Americans and 11 honorees (VT 5 and 0 honorees).
That WVU was recently recognized as having one of the top ten Medical Schools in the country in rural healthcare. They were recently recognized as having one of the top ten safest campuses in the United States (despite all of the couch burning!). Were recently recognized as being in the top 10% of schools that graduate their athletes. I could go on and on about the engineering and ather programs, but my point is that it is an excellent academic university. It’s just when you hear “it’s a tier 3 university,” and you really need to look at the US News reports with a jaundiced eye …unless you know what tier 3 refers to (money alone) you get the wrong perspective on academics. There is so much innacurate information about WVU that is constantly perpetuated by folks that just don’t know it becomes very difficult to put up with at times.
Karl
Actually, I do understand what the USNews rankings mean.
You picked out a substantial number of excellent individual WVU students, and good on them. USNews is based on aggregates (class size, selectivity) and money, though, and WVU gets dragged down by (undoubtedly political) attempts to do more than it really can with the state’s small population and financial resources. And the governor trying to order up an MBA for his daughter just makes it worse.
Is that unfair, particularly to those excellent individual students? Yep. Several large components of the ranking are grossly irrelevant to undergraduate student experience. But it’s a reality that public-relations-focused people will consider, and it’s not something that would help you guys out when, as I said, a fair number of the ACC’s decision makers already have cultural prejudices that damn near kept us out, let alone you guys.
That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.
And, by the way...
…you’re right to be aggravated about the football comparison in historic terms. Pre-1990, WVU had a good argument to be considered a football peer to Penn State as a major Eastern independent. It’s why WVU faced no obstacles getting into the Big East first for football, then all-sports in ’94.
VT, on the other hand, only won its first bowl game in 1986, and had to fire the coach/AD for recruiting violations and general budgetary incompetence immediately after. We were only included in the BEFC as a punching bag (like Temple) to get the conference up to the NCAA-required 8 members. It’s one of the reasons we’re so proud of where we are now — we got there from nothing.
That 17-year-old Hokie sitting in the rafters in Greensboro didn't see any of this coming.
I think I read the same article as Karl
I’m pretty good at reading comprehension too. I’m not reading a bashing of WVU here at all. Any reference to WVU here is in the context of college football, not academics.
But hey, like many Michigan fans, I really enjoy knowing more about WVU and their history – mainly because there are a lot of ties to both from a historical standpoint that few people ever talk about. As for WVU’s winning tradition, Bowden kicked things off with a .617 winning pct, but it was a Michigan Man who really put WVU football back on the map nationally. 149-93-4 (4 bowl wins, 9 bowl losses). And about all of those bowl losses, well, all I can say is that Michigan fans make excellent drinking partners on that subject.
Go Blue!
USF Is On The Rise
Let’s see. 5 NFL draft choices, more then any Florida school but UF. That ties the two top schools for the ACC and beats all the rest and all the Big East schools.
USF’s Men’s basketball team picked to represent the U.S. in the Pan Am University Games.
It is one of the top 60 public research universities in the U.S. and is designated Research One by the State University System of Florida, ranking second in toal research dollars among the 10 SUS universities in Florida. USF’s reputation as a superior academic institution was formally acknowledged by the Carnegie Foundation, which announced it will place USF among the nation’s top research institutions in the Doctoral/Research Universities-Extensive category. 2008/2009 FY USF was awarded almost $400 million in research funding,
Tampa/St. Pete is #14 in TV markets.
With Skip Holtz at the helm many predict USF’s football program is getting ready to take off, avoiding the mid season slump.
USF already has 4 more years with Miami on the schedule as well as another FSU game coming up in 2012.
USF plays in an NFL stadiums.
USF women’s BB won the NIT last year.
Leavitt is gone. One of Holtz’s first moves was to kick their best RB off the team. Another RB left this week because of academic reasons. As Skip put it, they are not going to get all excited about how someone is playing this time of year if we can’t have them in the fall because of academic issues. USF has rejected recruits that meet NCAA recruiting clearing house academic standards, but not USF’s.
USF is screwed? Hardly. We beat Florida this year, we might end up in the SEC.
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 20, 2010 2:39 PM CDT reply actions
Well, confidence is certainly not a problem
USF is screwed? Hardly. We beat Florida this year, we might end up in the SEC.
I wish you guys luck, but I just don’t see USF getting another invite to a major conference.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on May 20, 2010 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Too Big Not to Go BCS
I don’t think you all realize how big USF and how much money and how many people are behind it. They had an NFL HOF on board when they started the program. But anyway, after Congress abolishes the BCS system for violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, getting into a bowl with a huge payoff will be a matter of how well you play, not which conference you are in.
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 20, 2010 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions
A bit delusional
First if the BCS violated the Sherman Anti-Trust Act then it would have been defeated in court by the office of one Attorney General or another. Second the future isn’t about how much money a school is willing to spend, or anyone could take out a massive loan to get into a BCS conference. It is about what kind of numbers you draw on television. Playing in the #14 market doesn’t mean much if you can’t deliver the market. If UF v Tenn, FSU v Clemson, Miami v Ga Tech and USF v Cincy are all on at the same time in what order do you think those teams rank in viewers? And not only in Tampa but the entire state and Southeast. Not trying to flame or hijack the topic but lets be real here.
by osceolafan850 on May 22, 2010 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Billions of dollars are involved in college football. The BCS is an exclusive club of haves with lots of have-nots looking in. Obama has said it. Congressional committees are looking at it. Google it.
ESPN must like USF ratings numbers for some reason. I don’t know how many Thursday night games USF have been in the past few years. USF Auburn game sticks out in my mind as well as several WVU games. USF WVU will be on this year on a Thursday on ESPN again. For a team that is less then 15 years old, to have 4-5 nationally televised games a season for several years now on ABC/ESPN, someone must think USF can deliver a market.
Jimmy Hyams of WNML-AM 990 in Knoxville reporting yesterday that sources close to CBS have said that the SEC has informed them that is going to expand to 16 teams. Target wishlist schools include Texas, Texas A&M and 2 ACC teams out of FSU, Miami, Georgia Tech and Clemson. That makes USF even more of a shoe-in for the ACC.
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 22, 2010 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Forgot, USF has been on Friday night football too. Thought that win against #5 WVU was on Thursday night.
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 22, 2010 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Hyams is a radio jockey, not a legit reporter
It took less than 2 hours for the SEC to say the talks never happened. And for the SEC payout to increase by just 3 million a team if they go to 16 teams their current contract has to be ripped up and replaced by one with an increase of 1.8 BILLION dollars. In this economy that isn’t happening, especially since ESPN has already locked up the ACC. It is in ESPN’s best interests for the SEC and ACC both to be strong.
As for viewers, Thursday games run without competition and major programs have to be begged to take them. FSU generally has to be begged to play them and refuses to play them at home. Florida just refuses to play them all together. Most of the teams that play during the week are WAC teams, that tells you about the competition of a Thursday game. 4-5 nationally televised games is also not a big deal. If the worse season in 30 years FSU had every game but one or two on nationwide. UF and UM had all of their games on nationally, as did OSU, USC, Alabama, Texas and OU.
As for the BCS, people may not like it but it is the free market at its best/worst. It isn’t an anti-trust case because the BCS isn’t stopping smaller schools from doing anything. The problem for smaller schools is their product is generally unwanted. Networks and bowls all lined up in hopes of pulling the glamor teams from the BCS, and those schools can not be blamed for the lack on interest in the WAC or C-USA.
by osceolafan850 on May 24, 2010 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Lets Go Back To Delusional Again
First off. Until a formal conference agreement is made, NO ONE is going to come out and say, oh yeah, we are moving to so and so. Its never happened before prior to the moves because there are clauses for leaving, etc.. Doesn’t mean its not true at all.
And how delusional was the Supreme Court today? Wow. The NFL is not a single entity? Companies can not have exclusive contracts with the NFL. Now the NFL is a group of privately owned teams in a league. If you don’t think that the Justice Department is going to get around to breaking up conferences of mostly public schools in contracts with lucrative bowl games that exclude by association other pubic schools you are the delusional one. Its not a matter of if, but when. The exclusive Reebok contract with the NFL which spurred the lawsuit has been running for years, about the same time as the current BCS (formed in 1998) system that controls the major bowl system. It just took someone to come forward and prove it was a monopoly. IT IS NOT FREE MARKET when an unbeaten team is not allowed to play in the NC because its not a member. The anti-BCS movement has members of the Senate and Congress.
Let’s look at the Thursday night Prime Time theory of yours. First off, can you tell me the last game Florida had west of the Mississippi? They are babies about their schedule. Lots of safe games, not a lot of travel. They are very image conscious and won’t even risk coming to Tampa and lose so there is no reciprocal game with USF. So using Florida, the Prima Donna of Football as an example is not a great one. Second, FSU (and Miami) fill their stadiums about once a season, if that. I mean they don’t even sell out until the last minute playing Florida! So those are poor examples of teams not wanting home games because if they can’t fill a stadium on Saturday afternoon, well…. And just because you don’t see Big 10 playing on Prime Time Thursday, doesn’t mean the best teams in college don’t want to play on Thursday night . Its not mostly WAC or C-USA., who play some games on Friday, along with Big East, Big 12 and SEC. But check your thoughts against facts of Thursday night games. Auburn, Miss. St., Miami, Ok St., Nebraska, Kansas St., USC, UCLA, Cincy, Pitt, Oregon, FSU, GA Tech, Virginia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M along with UConn, Rutgers, NC State, WVU and USF are playing Thursday night games this year. In other words, about 1/3 of the post 2009 season top 25 teams will be playing on Thursday Night in 2010. Big 10, with their own network is limited and can’t. Doesn’t mean teams need to be begged to play the game because the Big 10 can’t.
FSU. UF, UM, OSU, USC, Alabama, Texas and OU have had football teams from 50-100 years. USF has had a team less then 15. Name a team that young who has 4-5 nationally televised games a year and ranked as high as #2 in their short history. Well you can’t because USF holds that NCAA record. If USF eliminates the mid season slump, which the head coaching change may do, this team this team can write its own ticket. Our schedule already includes Florida this season, Notre Dame as our OPENER next season, FSU in Tampa the year after that, and Miami on Thanksgiving weekend, nationally televised for several years. And in 2013 and I think 2015, Mich St.. But I would love a game against Rich Rod up there, USF trashed him on a regular basis in the Big East, both home and away.
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 24, 2010 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Well Sorry I Missed The News On Michigan
Talk about EPIC Fail. WOW. I take that back, USF doesn’t want to play Michigan. The NCAA hasn’t chimed in on what they are going to do to them.
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 26, 2010 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions
A few weeks ago I would have been on board with this idea
But with the ACC’s decision to sign on with ESPN instead of attempting a network expansion doesn’t have the same allure. Unless ESPN was willing to open up the contract and renegotiate, which I doubt, adding more teams would only decrease the ACC per school payout dropping into an even deeper hole against the SEC and Big 10. Same goes for the SEC actually in regard to their tv payout. So instead of exploding the Big East will be forced to find new teams and lose their BCS status.
The teams stuck there will have to find a way to hold on for the life of the ACC and SEC contracts despite the money difference and hope expansion is on the table in the 20s. I don’t know if it will be possible though because Big East football is about to run the risk of completely disappearing from television. The best they can hope for is the Big 10 only takes Rutgers as was rumored by the station in Missouri, letting them only bring in one non BCS team and continuing the slow bleed.
Question on coach Rod
Maize n Brew Dave …
How are you with coach Rod now at Michigan?
In one way I hated it because I think he did a great job elevating the Mountaineer program. Shame at what happened, but I think at WVU he was and wanted to be bigger than the school itself. It all became about Rod at WVU and fortunately athletic director and those around the program would not let that happen. At Michigan, he can never be bigger than the school itself either or even approach that. Wondering if his bruised ego is taking a little beating. Also, I believe he can coach as long as he has the time to get the players that fit his program. Will he get the time?
Karl
Honestly, Karl, we'll have to see.
I’m a big Rodriguez fan. I think he’s a good coach and, having met him a few times, a good person. I’d really like to see him succeed at Michigan. Unfortunately there’s a contingent of fans who just don’t like the guy. I think a lot of things will be cured by winning, but he needs to produce this year to keep it from being a issue.
I think he gets another year regardless of this season, but that’s based on some interactions I’ve had with “people in the know.” But public opinion is a nasty, powerful thing, so we’ll have to wait and see.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on May 20, 2010 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions
The Real Reason He Left
He was tired of USF knocking his teams out of NC games and his players out of Heisman contention. ;-D
by Bill S in Atlanta on May 24, 2010 11:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Looking forward to Part II
Well written and may be looked back on as relatively accurate, it certainly read that way to me. As soon as I read the " and (to a lesser historic extent) West Virginia" comment I knew you’d take some heat. They were named one of the Top 50 programs in college football history (I think by ESPN if anyone wants to look it up) and some of the other ones you mentioned were not. VT was mentioned specifically but we all know they’re a fine institution that has been every bit as good as WVU over the past few decades of modern college football history. Rivalry may have fueled the heat you received a bit as well. Moving on: overall you gave a fair dose of reality to all of the schools written about here. I hope the Big East lives on as a strong basketball conference no matter how this all shakes out. The schools that are new on the block of major conference sports will have a tough time as each schools’ value and worthiness for lack of a better word is critically evaluated from every angle. Most of the top schools mentioned will be fine in the long run but a few are certainly going to end up Templed (again for lack of a better term, most of you know what I mean).
by Allcollegesports on May 20, 2010 6:27 PM CDT reply actions
BOOM
Temple’d. You’ve crowned a phrase.
Appreciate the kind words.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on May 21, 2010 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions
Not to nit-pick
(which is sort of my calling card), but none of the remaining Big East schools could end up like Temple because there wouldn’t be a conference left to be kicked out of i.e. it’s not as though if South Florida was the only school left after the football side of the league collapses that they’ll stubbornly hang onto their conference affiliation.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on May 21, 2010 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions

by 



















