When the BE started in 1991

[kingottoiii]

Their future teams were the following:

Big East- Rutgers
SWC- Houston, SMU
WAC- SD St
Indy- Navy, Louisville, Cincy, Memphis
1AA- UConn, Boise St, UCF
Did not exist- USF

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I feel like the Big East has really diluted the BCS brand.

 

[Orangello]

Their future teams were the following:

Big East- Rutgers
SWC- Houston, SMU
WAC- SD St
Indy- Navy, Louisville, Cincy, Memphis
1AA- UConn, Boise St, UCF
Did not exist- USF

I want my money back !

 

[rrlbees]

Their future teams were the following:

Big East- Rutgers
SWC- Houston, SMU
WAC- SD St
Indy- Navy, Louisville, Cincy, Memphis
1AA- UConn, Boise St, UCF
Did not exist- USF

Since you put it that way. Yuck.

Sent from my DROIDX

 

[Noexcuse]

Their future teams were the following:

Big East- Rutgers
SWC- Houston, SMU
WAC- SD St
Indy- Navy, Louisville, Cincy, Memphis
1AA- UConn, Boise St, UCF
Did not exist- USF

Are you sure? Temple, Tulane, ECU and others are looking farther ahead.

 

[OrangePA]

I feel like the Big East has really diluted the BCS brand.

Yeah, University of Houston, Boise State really offer dilution.

I think the two teams won what, 23 games this year, total?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Yeah, University of Houston, Boise State really offer dilution.

I think the two teams won what, 23 games this year, total?

Your response makes zero sense to me.

Are you just messing with me because of our history of messing with each other?

Are you still loyal to the Big East for some reason?

Really, I'm confused.

Let me put it another way - there's really only one conference that has brought more teams in under the BCS umbrella. In order to make the argument that this action has not diluted the BCS brand, you have to make the argument that the teams brought in under the BCS umbrella really belonged there all along.

Is that the argument you're making?

The Big East diluted its own brand, and as a consequence has in turn diluted the BCS brand.

 

[OrangePA]

Your response makes zero sense to me.

Are you just messing with me because of our history of messing with each other?

Are you still loyal to the Big East for some reason?

Really, I'm confused.

Let me put it another way - there's really only one conference that has brought more teams in under the BCS umbrella. In order to make the argument that this action has not diluted the BCS brand, you have to make the argument that the teams brought in under the BCS umbrella really belonged there all along.

Is that the argument you're making?

The Big East diluted its own brand, and as a consequence has in turn diluted the BCS brand.

First, I have no real recollection of debating you.

So, I can assure you that I'm not messing with you now.

I am a Syracuse University Football fan.

But that doesn't mean that I must trash our soon-to-be old football conference. And it doesn't mean that I am obligated to join the very interesting "group think" that seems to regularly develope on this board. I think it's a fascinating dynamic. The group think is formed on a subject e.g. Rutgers sucks, the BE sucks, Pasqualoni or Robinson or Hackett suck, etc, and anybody who offers a different point of view is seen almost as a traitor to the Orange cause.

You may have noticed two weeks ago when I said somthing positive about Rutgers'recruiting success and my feeling that the conference affiliation will not hurt the Knights' program. One poster here became so upset with my observation that he accused me of becoming a Rutgers fan.

So, it is, to me a very interesting dynamic that flows from our small electronic SU Football society.

In this instance, contrary to the group think that has formed about the BE, I happen to believe that the conference has done a good job of enhancing its football stature over the last two months or so. I believe that adding high quality programs like Boise State, University of Houston, and programs that are on their way like SMU and other solid programs like San Diego State and UCF, does not dilute the product but enhances it.

That's all I'm saying. Nothing beyond that.

That doesn't mean that I am not thrilled that SU is going to the ACC or that I no longer fully support the Orange.

 

[Chip]

Yeah, University of Houston, Boise State really offer dilution.

I think the two teams won what, 23 games this year, total?

I will be interested to see how both of those teams do in 2012.

Houston loses its head coach, record setting QB, top 3 WRs.

Boise loses its record setting QB, 2 top rushers, top WR.

I know more parts make up a good team than what I listed, but still... Houston seems more poised to come back to earth, while Boise has been good for quite some time. But that QB spent 4 good long years there on the field. Big East has a lot riding on them retaining their success.

 

[Moontan]

Boise State also lost their OC.

 

[Moontan]

Their future teams were the following:

Big East- Rutgers
SWC- Houston, SMU
WAC- SD St
Indy- Navy, Louisville, Cincy, Memphis
1AA- UConn, Boise St, UCF
Did not exist- USF

Don't forget that the BE also got TCU into the club.

I don't have problems with the ex-SWC members. Boise State has earned it. Louisville, Yukon, Navy & USF are bubble teams in my book. The rest should be on the outside looking in.

If the BCS continues and relegates the BE to MWC & C-USA level, I wouldn't lose any sleep.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

But that doesn't mean that I must trash our soon-to-be old football conference.

I don't consider my statement that the Big East has diluted the BCS brand to be a statement trashing the conference. Trashing the conference would imply to me a baseless argument.

It's not a baseless argument though. The number of teams that will be recognized as belonging to a BCS conference has increased. It seems pretty simple to me that if you're increasing the number of teams in the BCS, and those teams weren't thought to be deserving of BCS status at the formation of the BCS, you have diluted the BCS just by natural consequence. The Big East has been and is the prime offender in increasing the number of teams in the BCS.

If it was just that, maybe the argument isn't so strong. But look at some of the teams now in the BCS - UCONN. New program. South Florida. New program. Cincinnati. Middling program. SMU. Previously dead program. Navy. A service academy (I mean, really?). Memphis. Middling program. Louisville. Only recently a respectable program

Boise State outweighs that? Houston coming off a great year outweighs that?

Conclusion - the Big East has diluted the BCS.

 

[rrlbees]

Yeah, University of Houston, Boise State really offer dilution.

I think the two teams won what, 23 games this year, total?

It's not just wins and losses. Houston and BSU don't add anything to the brand. Neither does Memphis or Navy. It's a mish mash is all trying to keep a certain number of teams. The BE is nothing now. Read the thread that Mark started with the article about TV contracts. One TV exec thinks the increase in value of the ACC due to adding SU and Pitt may be more than the value of the BE TV contract soon to be re-negotiated. I bet you won't hear TV execs saying "We have to pay big to get the BE, they have Boise now." Remember, the ESPN offer was $111M per year that the BE turned down. That as with SU, Pitt, WVU. Lets see what the new TV deal will be with Boise, Houston, Memphis, Navy, CFU, etc.

 

[SmilinBob]

What Houston, SMU and Memphis do bring is a long history of being on probation. The constant changing the big east has had makes it difficult to invest in especially for any established sports program. The instability alone gives it no name recognition, no constant that goes with what a conference should be about. There is no doubt that Boise and Houston have had better seasons than SU or Pitt in football but once/if the BCS falls apart the big east will, football wise, as well.

 

[Moontan]

To be fair, the dilution is a direct consequence of greed by the other BCS conferences. If they're concerned about the BCS brand, they've got nobody to blame but themselves. The only way to avoid it would've been to suck in Syracuse, Pitt, WVU in 2003... or have the ACC agree to the original ACC-BE football confederation proposal.

 

[OrangePA]

It's not just wins and losses. Houston and BSU don't add anything to the brand. Neither does Memphis or Navy. It's a mish mash is all trying to keep a certain number of teams. The BE is nothing now. Read the thread that Mark started with the article about TV contracts. One TV exec thinks the increase in value of the ACC due to adding SU and Pitt may be more than the value of the BE TV contract soon to be re-negotiated. I bet you won't hear TV execs saying "We have to pay big to get the BE, they have Boise now." Remember, the ESPN offer was $111M per year that the BE turned down. That as with SU, Pitt, WVU. Lets see what the new TV deal will be with Boise, Houston, Memphis, Navy, CFU, etc.

It's eyeballs Bees! Eyeballs!

Now the BE will attract Eyeballs in each time zone during every fall Saturday and during the week as well.

I don't know all that much about TV, but a friend who is in the informercial business tells me all the time - it's about Eyeballs.

The fact is that Colorado does not fit in the Pac 12 brand and WVU does not fit in the Big 12 brand and Nebraskas arguably does not fit in the Big Ten brand.

But all of the moves extend the coverage and increase the number of Eyeballs.

So, you may be right, but I wouldn't be so quick to declare the BE "brand" (whatever that is or has been) to have been "diluted."

 

[rrlbees]

It's eyeballs Bees! Eyeballs!

Now the BE will attract Eyeballs in each time zone during every fall Saturday and during the week as well.

I don't know all that much about TV, but a friend who is in the informercial business tells me all the time - it's about Eyeballs.

The fact is that Colorado does not fit in the Pac 12 brand and WVU does not fit in the Big 12 brand and Nebraskas arguably does not fit in the Big Ten brand.

But all of the moves extend the coverage and increase the number of Eyeballs.

So, you may be right, but I wouldn't be so quick to declare the BE "brand" (whatever that is or has been) to have been "diluted."

It is eyeballs which translates into $$$. Let's see if the per team amount with their new TV contract is more or less than what they were already offered when they had Pitt, WVU and SU. I'm betting on the under big time.

 

[OrangePA]

It is eyeballs which translates into $$$. Let's see if the per team amount with their new TV contract is more or less than what they were already offered when they had Pitt, WVU and SU. I'm betting on the under big time.

I don't know.

We'll see.

 

[SmilinBob]

I'd argue that Colorado fits the PAC quite well as does Nebraska to the Big 10, better imo than they did with their previous conferences. I think wv will be a bit of a square peg in the Texas circle conference but if they add Louisville it'll help.

 

[Scooch]

I don't know.

We'll see.

I know.

The BE's only hope is that there is an "irrational" bidding war. That happens sometimes.

You're right in that "we'll see" is the only correct answer now. But the BE's position is a lot weaker now than if they had retained SU, Pitt and WVU, that is undeniable.

The BE did the best they could in pilfering the best programs from the C-USA and MWC. But there was a reason why those conferences had the deals they did. I'm not sure the new whole is going to be greater than the sum of its parts.

But we'll see.

 

[OrangePA]

I will be interested to see how both of those teams do in 2012.

Houston loses its head coach, record setting QB, top 3 WRs.

Boise loses its record setting QB, 2 top rushers, top WR.

I know more parts make up a good team than what I listed, but still... Houston seems more poised to come back to earth, while Boise has been good for quite some time. But that QB spent 4 good long years there on the field. Big East has a lot riding on them retaining their success.

And before him there was Kevin Kolb.

University of Houston has produced a number of pretty decent QBs over the years.

We will see.

 

[OrangePA]

I'd argue that Colorado fits the PAC quite well as does Nebraska to the Big 10, better imo than they did with their previous conferences. I think wv will be a bit of a square peg in the Texas circle conference but if they add Louisville it'll help.

I guess I don't think of Colorado as a west coast school.

I don't see that Colorado has any connection to USC, UCLA, AZ or Oregon.

I think Nebraska is much more Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri etc than Indiana, Northwestern or Ohio State.

I went to IU and I can tell you that nobody I know is particularly happy that the Cornhuskers are now part of the Big Ten.

But none of that matters anymore in today's TV/money dominated conference re-alignment era.

 

[SU2NASA]

I'm really looking forward to that UConn-San Diego State matchup.