What the hell is goin on if this goes down what will happen to uconn, usf, and cincy? what happens to the 8 schools they added from all over the place? what happens to the teams that moved to fill those teams place in CUSA? Im soooo confused Why cant things go back to 2003
Big East 7 Catholic Schools Can Dissolve League
This new round or transition started because of Rutgers and Maryland. That makes things even more exasperating.
Yes and no. The ACC was, and still is, a house of cards. Remember May, when we all expected FSU and Clemson to leave? There was almost certainly smoke to that, which is why it's still coming up. Somebody had to make the first move.
It seems highly probable that before all is said and done that the ACC will lose 6 more members. We wanted to get in on that action early (probably a long game geared toward landing UNC or ND), so we made sure we moved in first.
Is ND getting hosed with their BS move to the ACC, playing 5 annual games with ACC members and cutting our rivalry conveniently after we have to play in South Bend.
Eff you ND, I hope you circle the drain in a bad, bad way....should have joined the B1G a long time ago, but you thought you were too cool, yeah right.
How is ND getting hosed by the Big East dissolving? It sounds like their timing in leaving the Big East was awfully good. I don't get how this means the end of the ACC. I know one poster here thinks it's going to happen. That's not enough for me to accept it as a fact.
Notre Dame effectively killed the Big East themselves. They convinced them to pass on a big TV deal from ESPN in favor of one from NBC when their ESPN deal expired, then they bolted and the NBC offer never materialized.
Now ESPN is slowly killing the Big East by lowballing them and then offering the Catholic 7 a better deal away from the football schools.
What about Virginia? Very good academics, public, flagship, prominence in the NYC / DC / East Coast corridor, good football recruiting state, good athletics (outside of football). I'd be very happy with the additions of Virginia and UNC, but would've been happiest had Delaney forgone his NYC idiocy and gotten any of (in order of preference) UVa, UNC, ND, VT, GT, Pittsburgh, or Maryland. Adding any four of those schools would certainly have been enough to "push the NYC cable-carriers over the edge" on the BTN issue. Moreover, everyone states what a player Fox (or whoever owns YES/BTN) in the NYC area is, why not just blackmail the NYC carriers to take BTN without adding Rutgers? You don't want BTN... you don't get the Yankees.
I hate Rutgers. Truly an embarrassing addition to the Big Ten.
This Catholic school thing has been in the works for a while now. Rutgers leaving the conference had nothing to do with it. In fact it was the first round of realignment bonanza that "caused" this.
them from creating a new conference? MAC South?
They could, but the key thing there is that they lose all their BCS/bowl tie-ins.
after this year anyway.
Delany be all like, "I can has Cincy, USF, and Uconn?"
Why doesnt GTOWN and NOVA move up from FCS level?
Because their football programs are god-awful.
I haven't paid attention this season but I recall 'Nova being in the FCS playoffs recently.
Edit: Never mind, translator82 said this already, and in a much better way.
Villanova did win an FCS title a couple years ago, so they're not that bad, but sure as heck wouldn't be anywhere near bowl-worthy competition in FBS. Also: Their stadium seats only 12,000.
Georgetown? They have the smallest D-I football stadium in the country (seats 2,500!) and football has been an afterthought there for a long while (last year was the Hoyas first season finishing above .500 in who knows how long). Also: They don't give away football scholarships as members of the Patriot League. So there's that too.
Georgetown football is only D-1 because the NCAA passed a regulation about 20 years demanding that all D-1 schools have all of their programs in D-1. Otherwise, they'd still be D-3.
Also, if you've noticed, the schools that have been adding big-time football are those universities which need the exposure to establish themselves as "real schools". Not that universities without football are lesser in quality as a general rule, but that to be known nationally, a school needs a way to get their name out there. Honestly, that is one of the main reasons I support a university having sports and one that is pushed to the side so that the "student-athletic" mantra can be shoved down our throats. Think how much more well known say, Kent State is nationally vs. Kenyon College or Dennison. Or Rice vs. University of Washington in St. Louis. Or Eastern Michigan vs. Wayne State.
Georgetown and Villanova are already nationally recognized as top academic schools and have traditional success in basketball to get their name out there (notably, it is much easier for a small school to gain prominence nationally in basketball not only because of lower costs, but because it is much easier to "hide" 10-15 student athletes who are not... academic stars.... than it is to hide 75-80 in a school which has classes of ~1,000-2,000 students).
There is no real incentive for Georgetown to add football. How could they benefit? Bring in better students? No, if anything, to remain competetive their standards would have to drop slightly. To add to the endowment? Possibly, but I'd wager that Georgetown is doing quite well for themselves. To be more well-known? I'd think not.
More likely than not, the football program could serve as a detriment to the schools name. Does the University of Miami's football program add to your view of the school? Of course not, if anything, it has been a black eye on the university as a whole. Using Miami as an example, city schools typically have trouble drawing in fans, both due to poor stadium planning and competing with NFL teams. Moreover, it seems to me that players at city schools typically run into more legal trouble, be it because the police aren't catering to the school or because they have more opportunity to get out from the eyes of the athletic department. Look at the University of Pittsburgh and Miami, both have trouble drawing fans and have player discipline issues. I would guess that Georgetown would face similar issues.
Not sure how much credence I give to your examples, Herm. Washington-St. Louis has an excellent academic reputation, as does Wayne State along with increased notoriety; much better than the schools you used as comparisons. Both include upper-mid medical schools and law schools. You can also cite renown and prestigious urban-area schools without D1 football to disprove your examples, including John Hopkins, Thomas Jefferson, Univ of Chicago, Depaul, William & Mary, NYU. Or any of the numerous urban programs that do very well for themselves in an city setting including; USC, Washington, Minnesota, Georgia Tech, and Cal-Berkeley is very urban, right next to Oakland.
I think Herm (whoever he may be) makes some pretty valid points. I would have to assume that people outside our region are much more familiar with a Kent State or Bowling Green than an OWU.
athletically. The schools you named are more niche than mainstream. You are dealing with as many people under 30 as you are over it. Do you think many people outside of the midwest have ever heard of Wayne State? I live in Virginia and I have yet to meet anyone who knows that UD is an actual school. W&M is nowhere near an urban area btw. I think you bring up good exceptions, but you seem to be basing you disagreement on the exception rather than the rule. Generally speaking, I would agree with Herm.
You know people that don’t think Depaul is an actual school? Seriously? What do they do during basketball season? I really find that hard to believe.
If it is solely athletic notoriety that’s to be justified, isn’t that argument rather redundant? Of course athletic notoriety is higher at schools with more popular or higher echelon athletics. Just like musical notoriety is greater at school with better music programs, or medical schools, or business programs. (Dartmouth is a lousy football team, but they have some pretty killer academics.) Yet, I believe a school’s notoriety and acumen isn’t solely tied to what division they participate in football. Anyone in a HR or other hiring position knows the value of a specific institution’s degree in his or her field. I submit to you that someone holding a degree from Washington-STL, Wayne State, Depaul, TJU, UnivChi or JohnsHopkins will garner greater prestige at hiring time than the other div 1 programs mentioned, including most of the MAC, ConfUSA, and many others in most areas of study. (Of course, none come close in agriculture, horticulture, or packaging to MSU. /s)
Yes, I listed W&M in error as an urban, and meant it as a smaller, academically prestigious institution. (Wife went there.) However, Washington-STL is also in a more suburban area of ST Louis, much like UCLA in Westwood.)
Whew. Talk about your potential earthquakes. I wonder how Temple has voting rights for everything but league dissolution. A weird setup. I wonder also what the "multiple legal entanglements" are that complicate things.
I know who's going DO IT DO IT DO IT right now, though: CUSA. They stand to lose no fewer than six of their current members, and have seven replacements lined up, most of which are not as appealing as the potential losses. Now they can pitch themselves as a landing spot for the three potentially orphaned Big East football schools. That would make a monstrously-sized 22-team league if they let all the replacements in and the Big East departers also stayed. I wouldn't put it past 'em to say "that's cool."
How about the WAC? I wonder if it would reform to some degree if BigEast folds. Probably not. Its too late for them.
There have been persistent rumors throughout the day that ESPN is pressuring the ACC to add two teams in a preemptive move (ie. UConn and Cincy) to secure the amount of content the conference can provide them. UConn and Cincy have allegedly committed to voting to dissolve the Big East if the ACC is willing to invite them.
I'd imagine the new BEast schools would simply form a new conference (except Boise and SDSU, who are welcome in the MTW).sucks to be South Florida, the only Big East football school that won't be thrown a power 5 preserver (until the ACC loses ~6 schools and they and Temple inevitably join).
South Florida can bite it. The only reason they're Big East in the first place is because the conference wanted to maintain a Florida presence after Miami left. There's little else to recommend them as a program deserving of a life preserver.
If those rumors are true, the ACC ought to fight back at ESPN and say "we'll add those schools only if you give us enough money to be competitive with the Big Ten." If that money isn't forthcoming there's no reason to do that.
The problem is, the ACC has no leverage. There's nothing better waiting for them if they tell ESPN to fuck off, ESPN will just help facilitate the defections to their other TV partners and then void the ACC's deal when they don't have enough teams to provide the agreed amount of content.
Unless a Festivus miracle occurs and some ADs hearts grow three sizes, at some point the ACC will be raided again. For two members at the very least, though that would probably lead to 4 more eventually joining them. And as we've all seen, nobody just accepts a defection. Cincinnati and UConn are probably safe in the warming glow of an Orange Bowl tie in and $24 million annually regardless of what the ACC says to ESPN.
I just don't see this adding up, though. ESPN knows full well the dynamics behind this. They didn't exactly miss the fact that Maryland left for more money in the Big Ten. They know if they don't provide enough money, the ACC will break up. And if UConn and Cincy are so important to ESPN, surely they can get their content cheaper if they were in Conference USA or some bastardized ex-Big East hangout.
The answer to that is clearly that UConn and Cincy provide valuable content....if attached to the ACC. It's not Cincy and UConn per se that are valuable, it's the idea of a yearly UConn-UNC basketball matchup, yes? So in that case, what incentive would ESPN have to see the ACC broken up? I don't think it's plausible that ESPN would be taken by surprise to see the ACC fall apart if they cheaped out on their offer.
So to really get on board with the rumors plus the conclusion you're proposing, I feel like the rumors are asking us to believe that ESPN is actively working to break up the ACC. The ACC's leverage is that if ESPN lowballs them, the conference falls apart and UConn and Cincy are once again adrift - so why would ESPN pressure the conference to take UConn and Cincy and then not pay them accordingly?
The conference is falling apart one way or another because ESPN isn't going to pay B1G rates for what the ACC provides. ESPN is trying to get the ACC to shore itself up to justify what they are spending, which is still much more than any of the group of 5 conferences make. It's not about UConn and Cincy per se, except that they're the only "attractive" options left for anyone to take.
The idea is that we all know the ACC's current 14 team alignment will not last. I don't think either of us are under that illusion though you've been quite vocal about how badly you want it to. ESPN would like to see the ACC preemptively replace two potential defections for the sake of their own content. It's not really complex.
The ACC isn't getting Big10 money or anything close to it. That isn't happening. ESPN has the leverage not the ACC. If the Catholic 7 leave the Big East they would also be forfitting any exit fees they would have received from Rutgers and Louisville, which is significant.
It may not be complex, but it still doesn't add up. If the ACC is doomed to lose six schools as you claim, then again: ESPN has no leverage on the ACC, because the ACC is made up of its member schools. And the ones whose opinions count are the ones who you believe will take off, so what leverage does ESPN have on them? If ESPN says "take it or leave it" then they'll be just fine with leaving it. It takes a three-quarters vote to expand the league, which means four schools can block it with a no vote, and if ESPN says "add these schools" and those schools dilute the payments, they'll say no.
If ESPN is trying to protect their content, then ESPN has a stake in the ACC and by definition, that gives the ACC some amount of leverage. That's only logical.
The ACC will always be on shaky ground now as they got caught napping when the music started without a strong dance partner. They now find themselves the “fifth wheel” or solo single friend at a couple’s party.
At one time several years ago, I seriously thought the Big12 would be the next to go “boom”. However, they pulled off the greatest coup pairing up with SEC in the SEC-Big12 game. That ensures their survival and firmly established them as “one of the 4 pre-superconferences”. ACC will now always be on the outside looking in; subject to break-up talk and continued departures until “super-conference equilibrium” is met.
There's no gravitational force pushing everything towards an equilibrium. That's asking for harmony and perfection to appear out of chaos. Doesn't work that way. Order leads to disorder.
Sure there is a force, its called money.
Big conferences lock up more television markets = bigger TV/Internet/Mobile demand = Bigger negotiation power = Greater Brand = Recruiting advantages = More Money/conference member.
Yes, and as soon as that money pushes conferences into something roughly resembling someone's idea of equilibrium, it will push the conferences right back out again. For example, I see no reason why, if the Big Ten were to add two more teams to make 16 (which is where so many people assume everything will settle) they wouldn't add two more after that to make 18, if it were monetarily advantageous.
But "Why do they care if the ACC breaks up?" ESPN wants the teams on one way or another, but the ACC isn't value added. Maybe they have better deals with Super Conferences and less groups to negotiate with, and not as many contracts to "one up."
Where exactly is the ACC going to go for a TV deal other than the ESPN? Fox already has the Pac12 and Big12. CBS has the SEC. The ACC has way more to lose than ESPN does. If the ACC doesn't add any of those schools and those schools end up in the Big12 or some other conference where does the ACC go when they lose more schools to the Big10, SEC, and the Big12, because everyone knows that is going to happen.
dude.... "festivus miracle" ... "grew three sizes" ... that's an impressive conflagration of Seinfeld and the Grinch. All the Internets points to you!
On an unrelated note -- is it really true that Larry David was involved in a TV show before Curb your Enthusiasm?
I remember when the conference realignment stuff first came up, there was talk about how ADs and conference commissioners around the country were trying to predict how the dominoes would fall the rest of the way. I can't imagine that any of them predicted the specifics all that well. This stuff continues to blow my mind.
I love USF because they are my "home team" down here, but they shouldn't be in a major conference for basketball or football. They have mid-major resources and are trying to compete with the "big boys."
Sometimes, a school has to stop blaming coaches and players and face the reality that they aren't a "destination school" for athletes.
Bug Ten might flirt with the idea of adding Uconn. Excellent basketball and academic school. Would continue the eastward expansion. Football program isnt a great fit tho...
Remember that this is about television sets to the Big Ten. What would UConn bring that Rutgers & Maryland won't?
If we keep growing, I'd imagine that it'll be to new markets. Georgia Tech (Atlanta), BC (Boston), the North Carolina schools, etc. would make more sense from that perspective.
I still say we take UVA before either of those. The conference bylaws demand the league be contiguous and while those can be easily altered, I don't think taking two second rate schools is worth it nor would they help to land UNC (the only bball school worth having and the biggest prize anyone could score from this round)
BC didnt come to mind originally but adding them and Uconn would give the Big Ten a monopoly in theNew England market (save Syracuse). I just dont see GTech happening
For whatever reason, BC hates the idea of being in the same conference as UConn. You can be sure that when FSU and Clemson were pushing for Louisville over UConn, BC was right there with 'em. Possibly because right now they're the only power-conference school in New England and want to keep it that way.
A monopoly on College Sports in New England still isn't all that valuable. Ratings/interest are very low compared to most everywhere else in the country.
So? If you have it, of course, you want to protect it no matter the size. Doesn’t matter if its an earthworm farm by a remote fishing lake in Medicine Hat, Alberta or supplying hot women to a brothel. If you have the monopoly, you do your best to keep it.
I assume of the BigEast is dissolved then none of the schools will have to pay buyouts.
Mike Aresco, the Big East's commissioner, could probably use a hug right now...
They haven't been a real football conference in my eyes for years.
Depending on how things shake out, there's a good chance this would doom the B1G/ACC Challenge?
That might just be the new B1G division names.
ah yes, the famous Big 6.02×1023
Reading other stories on this subject, the interesting thing regarding the dissolution vote is that it allows schools to potentially avoid the exit fee but still pursue having their tournament at Madison Square Garden as always and still get what might be owed them by whatever remains in the Big East treasury. Others also point out that the "Seven", if you will, would indeed have to vote as a bloc or this does not happen. If it did, it might even give these school just enough breathing room to make a go of being a conference (if they could get some other basketball schools on board), complete with a modest but workable media deal. If it went in that direction, they will have achieved something that the Big East has had the gravest difficulty achieving - a TV deal.
Give me UConn & Cincy.
Nah, if they're going to steal anybody I'd rather them steal Virginia Tech and North Carolina. Then at least all of the teams state would still touching in the conference. Still the only conference that can say that.
For the B1G, my bet is still on UVa, and if they can swing it around some possible “contiguous” rule GaTech. Can’t see Delaney letting those markets get away from him, plus they are both AAU members. (UNC would be nice but they are too tied to Duke to be solo and too tied to ACC to jump ship if it isn’t totally sinking.)
Why does everyone want UVA? The football team is irrelevant, the basketball program can't seem to beat teams that are clearly inferior in talent and chokes when it matters.
What do they add? Academics? That's great and all, but if you want to add schools only based on academics, you're gonna have some problems.
Might I ask what the fuck you think you are talking about?
Virginia Football has had a winning record once out of the last 5 years, and basketball has been more than one game over .500 once in 7 years, twice in 9. So they don't add anything at all to the conference athletically, only academically.
Once in seven years? Are we talking about the same program? I'll tell you what, my friend, UVA has been to the tournament in that time the exact same number of times as Cincinnati, and UConn's hoops program is the SEC of men's basketball, so there's little to speak for them there. I'd really more curious to know where UVA got Devotee's one-man reputation for constantly losing to teams of inferior talent. The real bottom line is, I question the judgment of someone who pisses on UVa but thinks it'd be a great idea to add UConn and UC to the Big Ten.
I agree 100% with your last sentence. Both UC's will never be great in football and that's what really matters. Both UC's combined may never approach the academic prestige and wealth/influence of the alumni base of UVA. I think these are the traits the BIG is looking for.
But before that-
And really recent times have been kind. Historically they don't come close in basketball. In any category. The Bearcats are a has-been, but the Cavs are a never were. And their football has been a lot better recently than Virginia. In the Big Ten they could be MSU to Ohio State's Michigan. And Speaking of OSU the Big Ten has no problem with their shadiness so I don't know that they'd freak out about U-Conn. They've had great success that may be in decline.
Neither of those will happen because their academics suck (though truth be told it's because their tv markets are worthless or redundant). Virginia would add a great school. Academically. And maybe market wise. Athletically they are well in there with Rutgers and Maryland as a waste of space.
Well, you could've looked up the gap before assuming. It's just as bad to say UVA is a "never-were" - another assumption made without the benefit of a cursory look-up. You want the real definition of a never-were (since we're comparing to UC and UConn here) try a quick look at UConn's football history. All twelve years of it. Or even that of UC before they took advantage of a rapidly thinning Big East with coaches that spent only enough time at the school to establish a reputation before moving on ASAP to better pastures.
Don't you think it is a little early in the morning to be drinking, Bub? Cincinnati would add what exactly? Piss poor academic school, marginal basketball with players who brawl, and their football team had a few decent years in the God-awful Big East. I'd rather add Temple for God's sake.
And UConn? I guess their women's basketball is popular. That is about the only advantage is can see going for them. Do they have a hockey team? Hell, what town is UConn even in?
Has a lot of ganstas if i recall from that one guys interview
Cincy, when you look at their grad programs and research budget plus the fact that they're supposedly not far off an AAU invite, are arguably better than Nebraska
The B1G added maryland and rutgers. I think Cincinnati & UConn bring a hell of a lot more to the table than maryland and freaking RUTGERS.
I interned for a major conference when one of their teams was going through major sanctions and that was an absolute pain in the ass. So, I can't even imagine the hell that the employees of the Big East HQ are going through. They're just people who want to go to work and do a good job. Teams just keep leaving their league and they didn't do anything wrong. I remember my boss at the time talking to one of their friends on the phone that work for the Big 12 Conference and how concerned they were when they were on the verge of dissolving. Scary times.
So who gets the Big East name? The Basketball schools? If they do break off into an entirely new conference that would be one less at large bid for the NCAA tournament. Does the football Big East just rename themselves?
As I understand it, they vote to dissolve the Big East and then immediately form a new conference called the "Big East," only with just those seven schools. I think of it sort of like GM's bankruptcy. GM is technically not the same GM that was founded 100 years ago; the old GM shedded the unwanted parts, and started a new GM. The Big East would cease to exist for about five minutes. Thus they get to keep the value associated with the name, which is why they didn't all just leave four years ago.
So you're saying, I can start a company called "Pan Am" or "Bell System"?
I don't think its that easy. When a company or organization dissolves or goes Chapter 7 in bankruptcy, I don't think the trademark or service mark just enters the mainstream for the first guy to grab it. I think its an asset that has to be purchased or assigned. The football schools would have as much right to it as the Catholic 7.
Besides, Marquette, St. Louis, and DePaul -- almost half of the 7 -- might want to revisit whether they are truly in the "Big East."
As a Catholic myself, I think they should do some marketing. Call it -- "Big John 3:16."
Well, that's true about bankruptcy court. We need some fancypants lawyer for this really, but I think the reason a trademark always survives bankruptcy court is because it usually has some value, and even if that value is only $10, someone snaps it up. The only way they wouldn't is if the trademark is so poisonous nobody would want it. The reason you can't start an airline called Pan Am is because someone decided they wanted the trademark and paid the highest price for it. How it works in the voluntary dissolution of a conference, I don't know exactly, but I believe the intent of the Catholic 7 is to keep the name if they can.
(St. Louis isn't part of the 7, BTW. Marquette and DePaul are, but of the other five, the furthest west is Georgetown.)
Could Cincy, Uconn, Memphis etc try to claim the name first after its disolved?
At best only Cincy, UConn, and USF will be in the room. I don't know if those three could try and jump in on the name first. Maybe they could. I suspect part of the delay is the Catholic 7 trying to figure out how to keep them from doing that. It'll all be very carefully orchestrated.
Simply amazing. Back when the BCS was set up, the Big East consisted of BC (consistently pretty good), Syracuse (ditto), Pittsburg (ditto), YTM (powerhouse program), VaTech (ditto), Rutgers, WVA, and Temple (all meh). That used to be a pretty good conference! Through a combination of departures of all the major powers and teams like BC and Ptt throwing themselves in a tire fire, the league is now on the verge of collapse.
At first, I was like what school starts with a "Y" other than Yale?
the famous Youngstown Technical Missionary-School, of course.
That's where Jim Tressel started out doncha know
The Big East's crazy georgraphy will have nothing on the Catholic 7's proposed new conference. They are talking about including Gonzaga and Saint Marys.
There was talk of joining the A-10 for a 21-team league. Somehow they were thinking of having two 10-team divisions, but no one mentions who they'd leave out.
It now looks as though the Catholic 7 can't up and dissolve the league after all. They're still taking off though. Newest developments:
-- It takes the vote of two football and two non-football schools, plus two-thirds overall, to dissolve the league.
-- A league clause allows the 7 schools to leave as a group without paying the exit fee, but it would take the full 27 months. They might negotiate a buyout of that.
-- They'll try and take the "Big East" name with them, but might not be able to.
-- Rutgers and Louisville will stay put for one more year, and leave in 2014.
This makes me really sad for some reason
College football sucks right now. :/