Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Scooch, post: 192441, member: 628"]
OPA, that was the most coherent response I've read from you on this topic. Sorry, don't mean to sound patronizing, but I've never been able to quite figure out what you mean when we've had these discussions. Now I do.
 
What I'll say is that I wouldn't necessarily call this a "new strategy", rather it's a continuum of what the BE started in 2004. Back then I was told, by someone's who opinion is important, that in adding UL, Cincy, USF, DePaul & Marquette the BE did "the best they could". They grabbed the best available teams and expanded into new markets. And I'd argue that what they've done the past few months is similarly the best they could.
 
My personal issue with the BE is that they have never done quite enough proactively. This latest round is clearly reactive. Getting TCU was proactive, but in typical BE style they didn't go far enough. They couldn't snatch away Kansas & Kansas State from the B12 (I know [I]why [/I]they couldn't[I],[/I] but they still couldn't), they didn't have the foresight to offer Boise State a football-only membership [I]then[/I], when they could have increased the value of the media offer they were getting. Etc.
 
But we agree that the BE will survive. I don't necessarily think they'll "thrive" but they'll muddle along OK enough.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?