They'll play in Foxboro... two hours from their campus.
I'm not saying you're wrong but where did you see that the home games will be played in Foxboro? That makes no sense to me.
I saw that too. However, it may only be a temporary thing, before they work on their own on-campus facillity.
One moar team to beat up on CAW!
but wtf is going on in your avatar? Please tell me its not real...
East:
UConn, UMass, Rutgers, Temple (all sports, not just football like last time), South Florida, Central Florida
West:
Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia, TCU
I think the basketball-centric schools in the Big East will try like hell to stick together in the same conference. A new Big East would most likely still contain Providece, Seton Hall, St. John's, Nova, Georgetown, Marquette, DePaul, etc. The other schools that actually try to have a competitive football program (Cuse, Rutgers, UConn, WVU, Pitt) will be absorbed into other conferences.
I need to get this straight.
TCU to the Big East.
Nevada, Boise State, and Fresno State to the are going to the MWC.
Nebraska obviously to B1G
Utah and Colorado to the PAC10
BYU to go independent
UMASS to MAC football only
and the WAC picked up Texas San Antonio and Texas Southern. Is all of this right??
Hawaii to MWC.
The times they are a-changin'.
No doubt times are changing.. It's going to be one hell of a year for college football.
it's Texas State (University at San Marcos) that joined the WAC. Not Texas Southern
Denver join a D1-A conference?
EDIT: Nvm that is for everything but football.
If their results against us are any indication, they'll be in the top half of the conference standings from the get-go.
By that metric Toledo should be wrecking the MAC every year.
13 teams in MAC now right? It will be interesting to see how that works.
There were 7 teams in the East and six in the West.
I looked up details on the divisions in the MAC to make sure it was 12, but the way Wiki lays out this information is a little wierd. Sorry about that.
Ohh well the MAC will go back to being uninteresting.
13 teams in MAC now right? It will be interesting to see how that works.
Umass has a student pop of almost 30 thousand. While they don't have a big stadium or other facilities, I don't see how they won't overtake Boston College(a small private school) if things grow right, and become at least on par with Rutgers and Uconn. Not to mention they're pretty near both Boston and New York.
Yeah, besides facilities, tradition, academics, location, and conference affliation, BC has nothing on UMass.
On that note, I wonder if one of the SUNYs will someday become an athletic power. You've got to figure there are some alumni hungry for big-time sports.
April 19th, 2011 at 10:45 PM ^
Yeah, but what kills SUNY is that the 10 million'ish New Yorkers don't have space for football fields. Without football, the rest of the sports are difficult to fund at top levels.
It's almost like they're living in Nebraska or Oklahoma as far as football playing population goes--but without tradition and the proximity of Texas.
April 20th, 2011 at 10:46 AM ^
There aren't any SUNYs in NYC, at least, not the major ones. The major SUNYs are Buffalo, Albany, Binghamton, and Stony Brook, and most play D-I football but Buffalo is the only one to play I-A football and they're decidedly mid-major.
I wonder if Buffalo really has the potential to be a good D1 team. They're pretty much located in Canada.
Now Stony Brook, on the other hand may have potential I think. Close to New York, large student population, and good academic credentials. Now all they need is money. Lots and lots of money... which doesnt grow on trees last I checked.
They definately have potential. Large number of students, good academics, huge media market. And with all their alumni, there should be someone willing to donate have a billion or so to get some decent facilities.
I used to work in college football and we played UMass every other year. I hope they upgrade their facilities. What a dump! only worse place was Northeastern.
Texas is in the East, Massachusetts is in Mid-America, and Colorado is a Pacific state. Got it.
Yes, I hate what modern-day dynamics are doing to conference affiliations. Surprised the WAC didn't try for UMass.
Texas is in the East? In what sport?
April 20th, 2011 at 10:40 AM ^
Sorry, oblique reference to Texas Christian.
Even with adding TCU, the Big East still has a smaller footprint than the Pac-10.
First of all, why are you getting defensive? I know you're a loud and proud Big East apologist, but really, an e-peen contest over whether your favorite conference is less geographically fucked up than the Pac-12 is stretching it. I did mention Colorado and the Pacific, after all.
Second (as I take the bait anyway), there's no way what you claim is even true, since the furthest distance between Pac-12 schools is just under 1,000 miles between Washington and either USC or Colorado, and it's 1,200 miles from Syracuse to Fort Worth and from Fort Worth to Tampa, and 1,500 from Fort Worth to Providence. I suppose it's all in how you measure "footprint" but the way I see it, the Big East is the worst offender when it comes to geography. At least every state in the Pac-12 can claim to be "western" if not exactly "Pacific."
Good for them. I wonder if we'll see other FCS schools make the jump (not to open up old wounds, but Appalachian State comes to mind)/if we'll see some teams drop out of the FBS ranks in the coming years (EMU?). There have even been rumblings of Terry Bowden's Northa Alabama squad jumping up from D-II to D-I (although to the FCS level, I'd assume). Definitely a crazy time in college football.