The Big East Died on Tuesday

[44PRIDE]

So that means that all of college football died - other than the five conferences?

I think that's a bit alarmist.

If the conference plays better it will get a bowl tie-in.

It might be. But there is a grain of truth in it...for Big East schools anyways.

Think of UConn and Rutgers position for a minute. They've spent millions updating their facilities with the thought of being a major player in FCS football. Now they've been relegated to nothing more than an afterthought that no one wants. The only school with any hope for optimism is Louisville.

Say what you will, but for this handful of schools it may seem as though college football has indeed died.

 

[billsin01]

While I rarely say never, I don't see the ACC having any defections over the next 5 years. And I only see them expanding if ND wants to join, which isn't likely in that time frame either.

Cheers,
Neil

I'm not doubting you b/c you seem to have a good handle on this stuff, but they almost had two defections a couple months ago. If a nice deal comes along who's to say that won't happen?

 

[NKR1978]

I'm not doubting you b/c you seem to have a good handle on this stuff, but they almost had two defections a couple months ago. If a nice deal comes along who's to say that won't happen?

The ACC could certainly have some defections. But it has two years to right the ship and change perception before the playoff begins. FSU, Clemson, VT and GT are all going to be ranked. If one of them can make it through the season with one loss and an Orange Bowl win, that will go a long way changing the perception of the ACC. If any of those teams can have an even better 2013 season and go into the 2014 season with hype and momentum, then the ACC will be fine, and in a really strong position heading into the 5 year look in.

And the biggest thing keeping the ACC safe is the Pac-12. It has nowhere to go to expand except to the Big 12. If laymen know that, then I would imagine that the BOT's at Clemson and FSU know that.

 

[HOFCeluck]

I'm not doubting you b/c you seem to have a good handle on this stuff, but they almost had two defections a couple months ago. If a nice deal comes along who's to say that won't happen?

No...it only seems that way because of idiot bloggers and message boarders.

 

[KaiserUEO]

So that means that all of college football died - other than the five conferences?

I think that's a bit alarmist.

If the conference plays better it will get a bowl tie-in.

no, it means the bigeast died.

in order to die, one must live.

the only conf that had a free ride to the bcs that no longer has one, is the bigeast.

theyre dead.

uconn...dead.

rut......dead.

lville......dead.

cincy...dead.

nobody else warrants a dead line.

 

[Scooch]

I'm not doubting you b/c you seem to have a good handle on this stuff, but they almost had two defections a couple months ago. If a nice deal comes along who's to say that won't happen?

They did?

If you're someone who doesn't obsessively read boards and Twitter, would you even be aware about the FSU and Clemson rumors?

 

[BORZAK]

So that means that all of college football died - other than the five conferences?

I think that's a bit alarmist.

If the conference plays better it will get a bowl tie-in.

The 5 majors will leave the NCAA. It's business.

 

[Scooch]

Yup, a couple points should be mentioned while everyone expresses how much UConn and RU blow:

-- Does anyone really think the ACC will look the same 5 years from now as it does today? Really? No defections? No expansion?

-- Remember when BC left and there were doomsday predictions all over the place about how they were going to thrive? Well, they now suck at hoops and football. Is it really crazy to think that UConn and RU still -- despite the conference set-up -- have better football teams than we do for the next five years? And while we're at it, we still have a ways to go to catch l'ville and usf.

-- I don't get fans here -- you do realize that the vitriol expressed for UConn and RU here is a good thing, right? I mean, it's fun to have a regional rival. The best case scenario for northeast football as a whole is to have legit programs around. I mean, we didn't develop a huge rivalry with g'town and uconn and nova in hoops b/c they sucked. It's b/c it was a big, meaningful game with a team in relative proximity to the dome.

I don't know. I get where people are coming from but I do think it's naive to think we're suddenly a "have" in college football (as I've seen expressed here often).

A couple things...

I think it's more likely the ACC looks the same 5 years from now than different.

BC had a really nice run in the ACC until last year. We'd kill to have two ACC champ game appearances in 5 years, no? Obviously conference affiliation doesnt necessarily make us better, nor RU & UC worse. But I'd sure rather be us than them.

We have three regional rivals in the ACC that we will play every single season: BC, Pitt and Maryland. I'll take them over RU & UC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

[HOFCeluck]

The 5 majors will leave the NCAA. It's business.

o rly

 

[OrangeMaNPD]

UConn
View attachment 949

Only better pic would have been Chunk at the arcade in the opening scenes from The Goonies when he splashes his shake on the glass.

 

[OrangePA]

no, it means the bigeast died.

in order to die, one must live.

the only conf that had a free ride to the bcs that no longer has one, is the bigeast.

theyre dead.

uconn...dead.

rut......dead.

lville......dead.

cincy...dead.

nobody else warrants a dead line.

A couple of things.

First you left out Boise State, University of Houston and SMU.

You believe that those schools are dead?

Second your proposition necessarily means that any team that is not in the Pac 12, Big XII, Big Ten, ACC or SEC or is not ND, is dead, right?

That leaves more than one-half of the rest of the 117 college football teams that are dead.

I think that's incorrect.

 

[KaiserUEO]

A couple of things.

First you left out Boise State, University of Houston and SMU.

You believe that those schools are dead?

Second your proposition necessarily means that any team that is not in the Pac 12, Big XII, Big Ten, ACC or SEC or is not ND, is dead, right?

That leaves more than one-half of the rest of the 117 college football teams that are dead.

I think that's incorrect.

boise...dead (barely had a pulse to start with)

houston....who? the oilers??...dead. the texans??...overrated and dead.

smu...ah yes, theyre good. Eric Dickerson might win the heismann this year.
wait, that was 30years ago...and they were killed by the ncaa already?? ok...dead

if you are not in the 5, you are......DEAD.

 

[All4SU]

It might be. But there is a grain of truth in it...for Big East schools anyways.

Think of UConn and Rutgers position for a minute. They've spent millions updating their facilities with the thought of being a major player in FCS football. Now they've been relegated to nothing more than an afterthought that no one wants. The only school with any hope for optimism is Louisville.

Say what you will, but for this handful of schools it may seem as though college football has indeed died.

I really think USF will find a spot someplace. Big school, Florida. I could see the B12 deciding they can't get FSU, but they can get USF.

 

[All4SU]

We have three regional rivals in the ACC that we will play every single season: BC, Pitt and Maryland. I'll take them over RU & UC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

^^^This X 100.

 

[rrlbees]

We have three regional rivals in the ACC that we will play every single season: BC, Pitt and Maryland. I'll take them over RU & UC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Yeppers.


Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Chip]

We have three regional rivals in the ACC that we will play every single season: BC, Pitt and Maryland. I'll take them over RU & UC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

For me, I especially agree with this because I've said a million times that I don't think SU, RU, UConn can coexist successfully. There's just not enough regional talent to sustain it. And no documented history of all 3 being good at the same time. Hard enough to find when SU and Pitt were good at the same time.

I hope they stay out, not because of how much I dislike them, but because of how much I want us to be back to our 90's level of play, when those programs either didn't exist or didn't exist.

 

[Chip]

A couple of things.

First you left out Boise State, University of Houston and SMU.

You believe that those schools are dead?

Second your proposition necessarily means that any team that is not in the Pac 12, Big XII, Big Ten, ACC or SEC or is not ND, is dead, right?

That leaves more than one-half of the rest of the 117 college football teams that are dead.

I think that's incorrect.

I can see why you bring up Boise, but I think you're riding those Houston and SMU horses much further than anyone else would. I think you'll find yourself surprised at how quickly the sports world forgets about those programs (assuming they still remember).

 

[OrangePA]

I can see why you bring up Boise, but I think you're riding those Houston and SMU horses much further than anyone else would. I think you'll find yourself surprised at how quickly the sports world forgets about those programs (assuming they still remember).

Wow

June Jones has done a great job.

The Mustangs are tough and will be better and better.

Really disagree.

 

[texasorange]

Wow

June Jones has done a great job.

The Mustangs are tough and will be better and better.

Really disagree.

But how much longer will jones be there? Remember he was all but gone to Arizona State, to the point he recalled all his assistants off the recruiting trails. He would have gone then, but for some strange reason ASU pulled the offer.

 

[Chip]

Wow

June Jones has done a great job.

The Mustangs are tough and will be better and better.

Really disagree.

I think June Jones is great. As is Kevin Sumlin, who just left Houston. But both of those schools are almost always going to be the 5th or 6th story in their own state (even if their record is better than some of the others) much less what the country cares about. If they were bigger brand names they would already be in the Big 12, a league that is still 2 teams short of the number that their conference is named after.

I guess it will mostly depend on the ultimate revenue sharing agreement and how it impacts those outside the top 5 conferences.

 

[Stern]

But wait, OPA has been saying for months the Big East is going to get that HUGE TV contract with all the networks fighting over them...ha ha ha ha ha!! Yeah, think OPA had a swing and miss on that one!

The Big East died LONG before Tuesday. The day they started adding San Diego St, Boise, SMU, and Houston is the day the conference officially died because they were a joke of a conference and adding those 4 they became a national laughingstock. The conference "unofficially" died the day Pitt and SU left.

UCONN and Rutgers can die a fast death football wise and being stuck in that god for saken conference they will. The sooner they die the more it helps SU. No two ways about it.

 

[billsin01]

A couple things...

I think it's more likely the ACC looks the same 5 years from now than different.

BC had a really nice run in the ACC until last year. We'd kill to have two ACC champ game appearances in 5 years, no? Obviously conference affiliation doesnt necessarily make us better, nor RU & UC worse. But I'd sure rather be us than them.

We have three regional rivals in the ACC that we will play every single season: BC, Pitt and Maryland. I'll take them over RU & UC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

These are all fair points. I'm not sure that I disagree with any. I think my larger points were these:

-- Conference expansion has been short-sighted and purely financially driven. That hardly breeds conference loyalty and I'd say we're far from done in this whole thing.

-- Your point on BC is valid and I'd absolutely kill for their success the last five years. But they hardly put themselves in any better spot than RU or Uconn in the region and while they've been waaaaaaayyy better than SU, I really don't think their move to the ACC had as much to do with it as our ineptitude.

-- It's nice that we've appeared to find higher ground in this whole mess but I'm just not sure I personally take that much pride in it. I mean, we still are nowhere near WVU as a football program and, to be honest, we still have quite a ways to go to catch UConn. RU might be close but we still need to prove it the next couple years. I just think people here tend to think we're going to be FSU because of this move.

 

[44PRIDE]

I mean, we still are nowhere near WVU as a football program and, to be honest, we still have quite a ways to go to catch UConn. RU might be close but we still need to prove it the next couple years.

DERP

 

[Scooch]

These are all fair points. I'm not sure that I disagree with any. I think my larger points were these:

-- Conference expansion has been short-sighted and purely financially driven. That hardly breeds conference loyalty and I'd say we're far from done in this whole thing.

-- Your point on BC is valid and I'd absolutely kill for their success the last five years. But they hardly put themselves in any better spot than RU or Uconn in the region and while they've been waaaaaaayyy better than SU, I really don't think their move to the ACC had as much to do with it as our ineptitude.

-- It's nice that we've appeared to find higher ground in this whole mess but I'm just not sure I personally take that much pride in it. I mean, we still are nowhere near WVU as a football program and, to be honest, we still have quite a ways to go to catch UConn. RU might be close but we still need to prove it the next couple years. I just think people here tend to think we're going to be FSU because of this move.

On your first point, I'd argue that conference affiliations have always been financially driven, and there has never been stability, generally speaking. So your prediction is a safe one, but that's not unique to today.

And honestly I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're arguing. We're not supposed to be happy we're going to the ACC? Why are we comparing SU to WVU? Quite a ways to catch UConn? I'm pretty bearish on the current state of SU football, and even I wouldn't say that.

 

[billsin01]

On your first point, I'd argue that conference affiliations have always been financially driven, and there has never been stability, generally speaking. So your prediction is a safe one, but that's not unique to today.

And honestly I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're arguing. We're not supposed to be happy we're going to the ACC? Why are we comparing SU to WVU? Quite a ways to catch UConn? I'm pretty bearish on the current state of SU football, and even I wouldn't say that.

My point is that we didn't magically become a good football program with this move -- a point I'm sure you understand but I"m not sure others do.

How are you figuring UConn hasn't been significantly better than us for a good five years? We've lost five in row -- most in ugly fashion -- and they've been far more productive in terms of producing NFL talent on draft day. I mean, I guess facilities and reputation and everything else may be fairly equal, but they've generally dwarfed our on-field accomplishments for five years (even including their crappy 5-7 year in '11). As for RU, I know everyone loves to point out that they play no one, but that criticism will sound much less hollow when we are actually winning a few games. Playing better teams and losing proves nothing. As it stands, they had been to something like five straight bowls prior to last season and produced a fair amount of NFL talent.

It's fine to be excited about the ACC move -- I'm not simply b/c I don't really get that jazzed about playing UMD as opposed to RU. My point was simply that I think the fact that people hate RU and UConn is actually a good thing for a conference. I also think people drastically overrate how good this program is compared to those two.