|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Feb 22, 2012 17:30:43 GMT -5
Are you evicting Nova and Marquette? Ha. No, apparently I just can't count to 18. 'Nova would go in the NE division, MU in the SW.
|
|
|
Post by mikeylikesit on Feb 22, 2012 17:42:35 GMT -5
There is a seriously legit 12 team conference hidden within this behemoth, especially if St. John's, and even Seton Hall and/or Providence, become more prominent again.
Gtown, Nova, Marquette, UConn, Notre Dame, Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Temple, St. John's, Seton Hall looks nice to me.
Unfortunately, the bottom part is going to be a bit of a wet blanket on the league as a whole. DePaul, UCF, Houston, USF, SMU...meh.
|
|
mfk24
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by mfk24 on Feb 22, 2012 17:56:45 GMT -5
I'd give Houston and USF a couple of years. If USF makes the tourney they'll have something to build off of and they're building a pretty stellar new facility. Houston has 2 top 100 recruits coming in, including Danuel House who is ranked 17th overall.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,436
|
Post by lichoya68 on Feb 22, 2012 21:44:41 GMT -5
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,436
|
Post by lichoya68 on Feb 22, 2012 22:52:51 GMT -5
Yup in si article on temple beating lasalle in ot tonite there is mention at the end it may be the last game for temple in the atlantic and there are talks of temple joining the big east for all sports as early as next year. sooo.. i put this here so it dont get lost in the boise state 99 page big east posts. go hoyas BEAT NOVA TEMPLE ?
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Feb 23, 2012 1:12:21 GMT -5
Decent chance that, before the 18 team hoops league will ever play a game, Louisville, Cincinnati, ND, and UConn will be gone.
It's impossible to maintain a broken system in the long-term when underlying schools do not have aligned interests.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,843
|
Post by thebin on Feb 23, 2012 9:39:43 GMT -5
Ranch- Where is Cinci going? And ND all of the sudden wants a league for football? If ND goes, that leaves Uconn without any possible option. Try not to actively root against our league just because you would prefer much less money and a basketball-only mid-major. I shared many of your concerns when Cuse and Pitt dropped the bomb several months ago. But it seems to me the league is doing the best they possibly could to keep schools like ours a seat at the big boys table- which you must know by now is not just or even largely driven by basketball greatness. If it falls apart, we pick up the pieces from there. But it doesn't have to fall apart. Obviously we are adding enough members so that we don't die if we lose one or two. It is time to notice that there really are not many big time football schools left to be poached, that we may be in line for a very good pay day with a tv contract, and that leaving the league costs a lot more now than it did in the past.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,436
|
Post by lichoya68 on Feb 23, 2012 9:44:34 GMT -5
the phoenix AGAIN slowly and patiently arising out of the ashes. the league started by dave gavitt rip and the godfather and the st johns ad IS STILL ALIVE and temple would help bball yup bye bye pitt cuse and west va especially go hoyas ;D
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,351
|
Post by calhoya on Feb 23, 2012 10:18:31 GMT -5
I think that the Big East has emerged in relatively good shape with the recent moves. Could care less about football and for that reason still hate the moves to add SDSU and BSU. I know BSU is a strong program, but it smacks of a desperate and temporary arrangement. Somehow, I just don't see the rivalry between Rutgers and BSU or SDSU ever developing. In contrast, I believe that Temple and Memphis provide instant rivalries in all sports. In any event, it is nice to see that the Big East has emerged in good position to remain the top basketball conference in the nation.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Feb 23, 2012 10:48:00 GMT -5
Decent chance that, before the 18 team hoops league will ever play a game, Louisville, Cincinnati, ND, and UConn will be gone. It's impossible to maintain a broken system in the long-term when underlying schools do not have aligned interests. I might suggest that we wait and see what the next TV contract is before droning on with the same old tune. Anything is possible at this point. We traded one good football program and 2 crappy ones for one good program(Boise), 2 or 3 decent ones (Navy, Houston, possibly SD State), and we lost a little in our bball strength but added some market share, as well as some schools with growth potential. UConn has been passed over, and Cincy ain't going anywhere; as for Louisville, again, let's see where the money ends up. I know that you desperately, desperately want a bball-driven conference, but that means less money, and probably less exposure, than the next contract for the Big East will bring.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,923
|
Post by NCHoya on Feb 23, 2012 10:59:04 GMT -5
Decent chance that, before the 18 team hoops league will ever play a game, Louisville, Cincinnati, ND, and UConn will be gone. It's impossible to maintain a broken system in the long-term when underlying schools do not have aligned interests. I disagree. UL is gone that is a given by the time Navy joins in 2015. However, Cincy has no where to go. Their stadium for football makes them extremely unattractive as long as BYU is available for the Big 12. ND would have to change its philosophy completely and no conference is willing to take them on as a part-time member except the Big 12 but with a fairly big requirment to play at minimum 4 FB games with members. Also, moving its program away from its huge alumni base in the Northeast is an issue I do not think they are taking lightly. UConn was passed over once already and BC is not losing clout in the ACC anytime soon. Also, with the NCAA sanctions against the program for academic failings and recruiting violations combined with Calhoun's pending retirement that program does not look so great anymore if you are the ACC. I think BC is telling everyone "I told you so" right now in the ACC office. So I think perhaps one other program besides UL gets plucked away from the conference but it will not be drastic. If needed, the Big East will add East Carolina for football purposes and that is the extent of it.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,466
|
Post by DanMcQ on Mar 4, 2012 20:02:45 GMT -5
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 4, 2012 21:09:46 GMT -5
Wow, is that Mike Tranghese's rehab piece? The whole piece is clearly a mouthpiece for Tranghese to say for the first time--hey, not only is this not my fault, but if all of the members had just listened to me all along, we'd be in great shape now.
Yeah, I'm sure if we'd just added Penn State in 1993, all would be well. Please. PSU would have joined the Big Ten 2 years ago, if not sooner.
The minute a league was built with non-football schools as prominent members, it was going to be destroyed in a world where football became king. Period. End of story.
And enough about who's leaving. There's a pretty good basketball group sticking around here, especially at a time when it has become clear that being a historical or big state power doesn't mean much in hoops.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,436
|
Post by lichoya68 on Mar 5, 2012 13:18:13 GMT -5
THATS ALL MY QUESTION is temple in or not
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 5, 2012 15:16:43 GMT -5
The minute a league was built with non-football schools as prominent members, it was going to be destroyed in a world where football became king. Period. End of story. That's nonsense. The non-football members have next to no effect on the football side of things and are a big plus otherwise. The only real detriment to the Big East's special arrangement is that it may have stalled the league's addition of more football members. But that would have been a correctable problem if the product on the field were any good. The problem, plainly, was (and remains) that the the Big East is selling a Edited product when it comes to football. Period. End of Story. So you're saying the basketball-only members negatively impacted the growth of football. I'm not sure how that's disagreeing with me. I didn't say it was going to be destroyed immediately. The point is that you have irreconcilable interests.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,696
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 5, 2012 16:15:46 GMT -5
Pash is right; if Big East football had ever been any good, everything would have been fine. But they weren't. So they were all looking for a better deal.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 5, 2012 16:34:04 GMT -5
My point is that the differing interests of the football-playing and football-not-playing members isn't the core problem. Yes, there have been tensions between the two factions, and the football-not-playing members did keep out Penn State twenty-five years ago. But that's a red herring. The main reason Big East football is still a house of cards is that Big East football still doesn't make any money, and the reasons for that have nothing to do with the schools that don't play football and everything to do with the schools that do play football. The fact is, the Big East's core football schools have never put out a product that's competitive with their "peers" in the other major conferences. Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, et al. couldn't make Big East football work because their product has been garbage, not because they compete with Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, et al. in basketball and other sports. Interesting. You seem to believe that a potential universe existed in which the Big East had good football despite having non-football members. I just don't think you can pretend that having non-football members has nothing to do with why the football that existed turned out to be terrible. BECAUSE the conference was built around basketball, it was never going to succeed at becoming a football powerhouse. Pitt and Syracuse and BC football used to be good, but once football conference play became the norm, those schools had no chance, because they didn't have enough partners. To try to correct that, they had to add less-than-amazing other programs. But those additions only furthered the imbalance. There just isn't a scenario where Cuse and Pitt and BC maintain football success while playing in the original Big East, because of the way the original Big East was constituted.
|
|
hoyabinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,043
|
Post by hoyabinx on Mar 7, 2012 11:11:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 7, 2012 12:39:54 GMT -5
My point is that the differing interests of the football-playing and football-not-playing members isn't the core problem. Yes, there have been tensions between the two factions, and the football-not-playing members did keep out Penn State twenty-five years ago. But that's a red herring. The main reason Big East football is still a house of cards is that Big East football still doesn't make any money, and the reasons for that have nothing to do with the schools that don't play football and everything to do with the schools that do play football. The fact is, the Big East's core football schools have never put out a product that's competitive with their "peers" in the other major conferences. Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, et al. couldn't make Big East football work because their product has been garbage, not because they compete with Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, et al. in basketball and other sports. Interesting. You seem to believe that a potential universe existed in which the Big East had good football despite having non-football members. I just don't think you can pretend that having non-football members has nothing to do with why the football that existed turned out to be terrible. BECAUSE the conference was built around basketball, it was never going to succeed at becoming a football powerhouse. Pitt and Syracuse and BC football used to be good, but once football conference play became the norm, those schools had no chance, because they didn't have enough partners. To try to correct that, they had to add less-than-amazing other programs. But those additions only furthered the imbalance. There just isn't a scenario where Cuse and Pitt and BC maintain football success while playing in the original Big East, because of the way the original Big East was constituted. Pitt football has been extremely mediocre for many years other than a blip here and there. BC was actually much better in the Big East with its non-football members than it has been in the ACC - it is pitiful now. Syracuse was a very successful Big East program until they axed Pasqualoni, so there recent suckage has nothing to do with the conference. While Big East football certainly has its own unique set of issues, I don't really think the non-basketball involvement can be blamed for the weakness of the football side of the conference.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Mar 7, 2012 12:52:22 GMT -5
Interesting. You seem to believe that a potential universe existed in which the Big East had good football despite having non-football members. I just don't think you can pretend that having non-football members has nothing to do with why the football that existed turned out to be terrible. BECAUSE the conference was built around basketball, it was never going to succeed at becoming a football powerhouse. Pitt and Syracuse and BC football used to be good, but once football conference play became the norm, those schools had no chance, because they didn't have enough partners. To try to correct that, they had to add less-than-amazing other programs. But those additions only furthered the imbalance. There just isn't a scenario where Cuse and Pitt and BC maintain football success while playing in the original Big East, because of the way the original Big East was constituted. Pitt football has been extremely mediocre for many years other than a blip here and there. BC was actually much better in the Big East with its non-football members than it has been in the ACC - it is pitiful now. Syracuse was a very successful Big East program until they axed Pasqualoni, so there recent suckage has nothing to do with the conference. While Big East football certainly has its own unique set of issues, I don't really think the non-basketball involvement can be blamed for the weakness of the football side of the conference. Don't forget that Miami and Virginia Tech won a few national titles / played in national title games while in the Big East.
|
|