West Virginia is the Top Big XII Expansion Target
by Patrick_the_Ruminator on Oct 23, 2011 3:10 PM EDT
in The Big East Falls Apart
Email
Print
BYU fans won't like this: "two high-level" Big XII officials told the Austin American-Statesman that West Virginia is the top candidate to replace Missouri. Louisville is the second candidate. West Virginia is seen as an upgrade over Missouri anyway.
West Virginia has better football than Missouri, better basketball than Missouri, a better budget than Missouri and more passion among its fans than Missouri. They’re better, anyway you turn ‘em. The travel’s not good (to Morgantown, W. Va) but that’s it.
Louisville is the second candidate because of their football team. Missouri is expected to be in the Big XII next season.
After we posted on the 32-team conference idea that was reported on, Pete Thamel said the Big East hadn't even seen it. If the plan is still for the Big East to go to 12, they will need to pull out one of their backup invite schools if West Virginia is really gone, or Louisville if somehow they get bumped up in the Big XII's selection process.
70 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I have to say, I don't understand all of the Mizzou talk
Although my team looked awful this weekend. Hopefully we can come back and beat Rutgers, or else everything is going to go to shit.
One thing they left out
24 Rhodes Scholars (#30 all time, T9 most among public state universities)
West Virginia fans hate everybody. They remember every snub and joke and bit of snark. And they never forgive, and they never, ever forget. In other words, they're a lot like West Virginians in general.
Correction: 25 Rhodes Scholars
http://about.wvu.edu/recognition
West Virginia fans hate everybody. They remember every snub and joke and bit of snark. And they never forgive, and they never, ever forget. In other words, they're a lot like West Virginians in general.
Aren't we forgetting something ?
You do recall the 27 month departure rule don’t you ? Neither team will be in the Big 9 anytime soon ! Try 2014 on for size !
by Lancaster O's Fan on Oct 23, 2011 4:14 PM EDT reply actions
Exactly
The big 9 even with 3 promises for 2014 will be too vulnerable in 2012 and 2013. They should not and cannot rest as is and will go Big 14 (which they already own the rights to). Campaign will be Big 14 in 2014!
That is why I believe they need at least one for 2012/2013 and then another one in 2013 or 2014. BYU is what they are working on for 2012. Question is who will be #14. The chatter is for a southeastern team to weaken the SEC some. I have seen tulane, but I guess USF and southern Mississippi might be options?
by fracas on Oct 23, 2011 4:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Does anything but courtesy stop Syracuse, Pitt from voting in Big East meetings?
Because if West Virginia, Louisville go, that’s four votes out of 16. If they show up and vote “No” on everything, you need a unanimous vote to do anything. If the Big 12 takes Cincinatti as well, that’s five votes.
I have to believe
there is a contract clause which prevents ‘Cuse and Pitt from voting on strategic matters, post-relocation decision. Big money involved, can’t leave it to courtesy and a handshake.
Its called...
Major lawsuit. And the ACC wants no part of it. Besides the ACC said they can wait.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Lawsuit on what grounds?
Syracuse is a member of the Big East until the 27 months is up.
Bylaws say that members can vote.
Syracuse votes. Where’s the tort?
(Not picking on SU for any reason—it only works if 25%+ are doing it.)
As an ACC member,
Syracuse would have a conflict of interest. Would you completely trust a woman, if she were divorcing you for another man?
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 7:06 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
No--which would be a reason to speed up the divorce.
I don’t know much about divorce law, but I don’t think that you can both drag out the divorce, AND make moves to protect assets at the same time.
The Big East needs at least eight football teams,
To be allowed as a conference. At least until enough confirmed replacements are found, now is not the time for the Big East to cut its nose to spite its face.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 7:32 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
It's reasonable to hold schools to a 12-month notice.
No one is leaving the Big East for the 2012 football season, or trying (I think). If the Big East can’t put together 8 all-sports schools for the 2013 season without the lame ducks, they probably can’t do so for 2014 either.
I think you both hit on something.
I know WVU fans will just say I am being Mr. Big East for the sake of my Bulls but one must be honest when looking at this situation. If Missouri leaves next year as speculated that would that leave the Big 12 with nine teams. It is my understanding that the Big 12 would need a 10th team right away because their TV contract requires 10 teams. If that is the case I would think any BE team is out of the running and BYU is the choice to go with. BYU is the choice because there would be no messy entanglements and they can scoot right into the conference. Also, one needs to consider the scheduling issue. I think Oklahoma has publicly stated it is having scheduling issues because of the departures and if Mizzu left they would really have a problem. The solution would be to pull in a team right away.
Now if the Big 12 wants to go to 12 that is another story as they can pull in BYU and wait on the BE teams. However that seems unlikely if the Texas rumors are correct. I think that this might be a ploy to get BYU to bend on some of their issues. My understanding is that the BYU fans are not happy with the independence deal as they see no avenue to an AQ bowl.
Again this could all change tomorrow. Remember that BYU was once a shoe in for the Big 12, Then Louisville, and now WVU. Just keep in mind the two year waiting period.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions
That's all true
My understanding is that it is getting late in the day for Mizzou to make the jump to the SEC for the coming school year, and that the SEC has worked out a schedule for 13 next season. If in fact that is the case, the Big X would still have 10 for the 2012 season. Contracts are modified all the time, and if the Big X has a clear path to at least 10 for 2014, then a 9 school configuration may not cause a problem.
It’s entirely possible that if the Big East football side implodes, that the 2 year wait becomes moot, as long as the buyout is paid.
West Virginia fans hate everybody. They remember every snub and joke and bit of snark. And they never forgive, and they never, ever forget. In other words, they're a lot like West Virginians in general.
by Kid Tenderloin on Oct 23, 2011 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions
A big 9 would be vulnerable to poaching
even with the promised addition on 3+ schools for 2014. A promise to join is not enough for security and stability (tcu?).
That is why the big 12 should act to secure at least one mote school for 2012 or 13 regardless of what mizzou does. If not BYU then it will be a CUSA or MWC team.
I believe
C-USA teams would have a waiting period for leaving too.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 7:34 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
But it is not 27 months
I think they can all join after 2012 season. The BE would hold schools until 2013. So the extra year is an effective deal especially if you are looking to fill a spot ASAP.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Who would still be shopping?
Saying a Big 12 with 9 would be vulnerable, who exactly is raiding?
The Pac-12 could come back with the Pac-16 plan, but after not getting it done in 2010 and 2011, I don’t think that the Big 12 needs to worry in 2012 or 2013.
The SEC could come after Texas and Oklahoma, I guess. That would leave 7 teams for 2012-13, and 10 in 2014. Fox Sports would not be happy, but I don’t think signing BYU would fix that.
C-USA have a one-year notice requirement. MWC has one year for cheap, or no notice for not-cheap. (A formula depending on your conference revenues that year. Air Force would pay $5M, Boise State would pay $22M if they go to a BCS bowl and leave.
I agree the Big 10
The Big 10 might look to add two. I know Rutgers is often mentioned along with UConn. However, if a school from the Big 12 gets an invite they will leave. Maybe a Kansas or Kansas State? Possibly even a Texas school. Also the PAC 12 could be open to just Oklahoma/Oklahoma State.
Remember while the BE is really vulnerable so is the Big 12. The Big 12 has had (or will soon have) just as many schools leave in a huff because of Texas.
I am reminded of the old saying “what is the definition of insanity?” Answer: “doing the same thing and expecting a different result.” Schools going to the Big 12 (or BE) might expect the same grief they are looking to run from.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Staying in the Big East because of Big 12 instability
is like staying in a house that’s on fire because the other house is structurally unsound.
Big 10 isn’t going for anyone in the Big 12 except maybe Texas. Think about who they’ve brought in—Penn State. Nebraska. If Larry Scott takes over the Big 10, maybe they strike to control the Northeast with Syracuse, Maryland, Rutgers and UConn. They’re not going to expand to pick up Kansas.
Pac 12 just turned down OU-OSU as a package, I doubt that just OU and 13 teams interests them at all. And the PAC-10/12 and Texas have just failed to reach a deal for two years straight.
The Big 12’s biggest vulnerability is now Texas, and Texas has nowhere to go for a while.
Texas could afford independence,
But I think they prefer the convenience of being in a conference. You are probably right.
But imagine the irony of Texas joining a disgruntled Texas A&M to the SEC!
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 9:54 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
All you are doing is....
providing temporary security. Put the fire out and work on the present house. Again, this is all speculation on all of our part. Next week we will hear that the PAC 12 and Big East are merging. That is how unpredictable this all is.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
And the Big East and the PAC 12 merging
Would make more sense than C-USA and MWC merging. The former pair is more homogeneous/compatible, and at least it would be half the length-by excluding Hawaii.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 11:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
True...
But I don’t see it imploding right away. Unless the BE votes to dissolve.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
This could all be a smokescreen to pressure BYU, the #1 Big 12 target
To put pressure on BYU to make concessions on BYUtv, maybe on Sunday athletics.
When the Big 12 replaced A&M, BYU got beat out by TCU, allegedly because of Fox Sports concerns about BYUtv and Sunday athletics (Mormon schools don’t play Sunday. Apparently it’s only OK if you go pro.)
So now, BYU is behind West Virginia and Louisville. Either the issues with BYU are just too major for the Big 12 to bother with, or the Big 12 is pressuring BYU.
I don't know
the same reporter who put up this WVU story also tweeted this "Hear the Big 12 backed off BYU, spoke of BYU’s “different culture,” whatever that means."
by Patrick_the_Ruminator on Oct 23, 2011 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I lived in Texas for four years. I believe it.
I’ve been joking that the Big 12 didn’t need two schools who believed they had God’s favorite football team. A guy I taught with took off a Friday at the beginning of the season to go hunting—he put it down as a religious holiday.
I could see Texas folk (not just UT) and BYU Mormons not being as good a fit as you’d think.
THe BYU issues
probably could be ironed out, but probably not quick enough for the time table the Big 12 and its TV partners want. That’s the concern.
BYU has their own TV network, also
Quite likely the Big 12 does not want another Longhorn Network headache to deal with.
West Virginia fans hate everybody. They remember every snub and joke and bit of snark. And they never forgive, and they never, ever forget. In other words, they're a lot like West Virginians in general.
They shouldn't,
WVU is a better pick than BYU, for athletics. You guys are also more stable as conference mates. BYU apparently wants to be the priviledged Notre Dame of the West.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 5:02 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
If WVU, Louisville, and Cincinnati choose to leave for the Big 12
there will not be a 27 month waiting period. The Big East will be dead and UCONN and Rutgers will pursue the ACC and Big Ten respectively. If 5 of the 8 teams accept bids to another conference, do you really think the league has any chance of surviving in football? There would be no point in adding teams. USF and anyone else would probably go to the Conference USA, although they deserve to be in a BCS conference like the other Big East schools.
If the ACC wants them...
They need to be invited and the ACC is in no hurry to do so.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 23, 2011 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly.
Rutgers and UConn are stuck in a difficult spot. It’s not impossible for the ACC to take UConn. I’m sure some of the basketball coaches want them in. And they bring something to the table (quality school, good athletic, good geography). However, it appears the ACC only wants UConn if Notre Dame is involved. And unless poaching Uconn helps force Notre’s Dame hand (unlikely) – it’ll be a tough sell.
The B1G seems in no hurry to add teams. Rutgers alone seems to give them very little
This is just a thought experiment, but...
If WVU leaves the Big East, Boise State probably won’t come in, because, really, why trade one MWC for another MWC that’s a whole lot further away? That creates somewhat of an interesting scenario for the Big XII. What if, and this is just a what if, the Big XII invites WVU, Louisville, and Boise State? The Big XII would gain programs that have the potential to become perennial top-25 schools, Boise State would get a guaranteed BCS conference (which would help with its rankings), and WVU would get out of the sinking ship.
Plus, the Big XII would get a clear path to expand to 14 with BYU and Cincy still out there. USF would be the big looser, but they could go C-USA and dominate that conference like Boise State dominated the MWC, so it wouldn’t be a total loss.
Like I just said, it’s just a thought experiment.
Boise State will never go to the Big 12,
Conferences are a little stubborn about academic compatibility. Boise State’s academic profile is supposed to be worse than some community colleges.
And no, it will not be a football only member in the Big 12. Only the Big East permits partial membership in a BCS AQ conference.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 10:50 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Agree
About the academics
That is why tulane has been mentioned but not Boise State.
Big 12 can take a weak football as it’s AQ status is nowhere in jeopardy
by fracas on Oct 23, 2011 11:20 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Tulane still shouldn't join,
But they are better for the Big 12 than Boise State is. They offer academics, a significant television market, and a solid southeast recruiting base.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 11:27 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I am sure
That Texas find playing in and recruiting SEC footprint amusing.
by fracas on Oct 23, 2011 11:43 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
After the SEC took Texas A&M,
Fair is fair.
by Green Bull on Oct 23, 2011 11:51 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I can see
Taking quality big east programs for their competiveness, as well as proximity to the B1G (especially Cincinnati)
And southeastern programs to undermine the SEC. If the big 12 look at USF then you know this is exactly what is going on.
by fracas on Oct 23, 2011 11:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I like it.
Sounds like a smart strategy.
by Green Bull on Oct 24, 2011 12:11 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Like I said, it’s only a hypothetical. I never understood why conferences care all that much about academic prestige. Firstly, it’s not like academics make a quality football team. Look at Duke. Second, most in academia know that pretty much every college ranking is aggregate statistical bullshit that Universities lie about on a regular basis. Villanova (the college I’m attending now) getting caught fudging the numbers for law rankings doesn’t show that Villanova in particular is dishonest, it’s pretty much the norm with these things. I understand that there is a recruiting angle, but college sports is entertainment and a business, so why care that Boise State offers the academics of a community college – I can tell you from experience that community colleges offer just as good of an education as the ‘prestigious’ schools.
This doesn’t make you any less right though – BS’s academics will likely hold it back.
by Scott Piazza on Oct 24, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Conferences are also academic alliances.
They share resources and collaborate on research projects. They don’t want other universities watering down their progress. Admitting an academically inferior university does have consequences.
by Green Bull on Oct 24, 2011 1:10 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I can appreciate that, but...
Like I said, everyone (or, mostly everyone) in academia knows that academic rankings are bullshit. I would understand if the recruiting angle was the number one concern, because recruits do look at those bullshit rankings, but in terms of research et. al. rankings mean a whole lot less than the strengths of the individual departments and, more particularly, the researchers in those departments.
Though again, like I said before, that doesn’t make you any less right about what will happen, I just don’t necessarily feel that it SHOULD be that way.
by Scott Piazza on Oct 24, 2011 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree...
Its not like all the schools we are talking about are the University of Phoenix. Also, if this was all about academics I think we would be talking about the BE trying to get Yale to join the BE. :-)
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I am not talking about the subjective US News & World
Undergraduate (?) rankings. I am talking about actual research projects. Duke and Wake Forest are not going to waste their time sharing research project resources with an academically poor institution.
by Green Bull on Oct 24, 2011 10:56 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I am not talking about the subjective US
by Green Bull on Oct 24, 2011 10:52 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I understand that....
Some schools are bigger research schools than others. However academics are overblown when we are talking about public schools. Case in point USF is always cited as being a weak academic institution but it is classified as a Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching University. The University of Cincinnati has several top academic departments including the department of criminology which is ranked third in terms or research. All of these schools are top research institutions and I agree that they are important.
However, the bigger concern when citing academics has more to do with the students graduation rate, than the level of research the school is doing. Boise State for example has a graduation of under 10 percent which hurts. USF suffered similar issues with its lower graduation rates. That was because USF was viewed as the college of last resort 20 years ago. Now its almost as difficult to get into USF as it is FSU. (UF is still way higher). End result, better students come to the university and those students are more likely to graduate.
So as I babble I don’t disagree with the academic argument but I think it is rather a false flag in terms of needing to feed the pig (college football).
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
You can measure a school's academics a lot of ways
AAU, Rhodes Scholars, research, graduation rates.
Different schools have different missions. Relying on one measurement is a fool’s game.
West Virginia fans hate everybody. They remember every snub and joke and bit of snark. And they never forgive, and they never, ever forget. In other words, they're a lot like West Virginians in general.
by Kid Tenderloin on Oct 24, 2011 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Academic research matters.
Schools can’t sacrifice their projects just to play ’fantasy football" with the conferences. Boise State makes sense only for football, and I am not aware of any AQ conferences other than Big East open to partial members. Keeping that in mind, Boise is not a BCS AQ-level research institution. I doubt it even has the potential for such.
If you like Boise State football for a particular AQ conference other than the Big East, just say it. But without a ‘football only’ membership on the table, there is no need to play “fantasy football” with the conferences, when other sports and academics are a bad fit for Boise State.
by Green Bull on Oct 24, 2011 11:58 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Here's how I see it
Missouri to the SEC is as done a deal as you get. Doesn’t mean something could get screwed up before all the i’s are dotted and t’s crossed, but it would take something spectacular at this stage to stop it.
This leads to the Big 12 needing to add at least 1 team, preferably for 2012. It’s not that the Big East teams can’t be that, but they’ll make whichever school pay to leave prior to 2014 (or whenever the 27 months is up). BYU slots in the easiest, but I’m not really sure why the conference doesn’t go 12. The added revenue and footprint of schools like BYU, Lousiville, and West Virginia seem like an all around win.
But let’s be honest, no one’s really going to poach the remaining Big 12 schools. Other than Texas and Oklahoma, none of the remaining schools are all that desirable. And Oklahoma has tried to go Pac-12 twice and failed (mainly because of Texas). I don’t see that changing. And I don’t see anyone else going for them.
Where does this leave the Big East? Not sure. If West Virginia goes – the football conference is basically dead. It will retain a BCS birth throughout the contract as long as teams still play, but there’s nothing to keep a BCS birth for the next contract. What happens to these teams is anyone’s guess. And a watered down football conference does not seem to benefit much of anything. Not sure why Boise State would join if the Con-USA/Mountain West conglomerate has all the same quality football schools. The Big East would have to make it financially worthwhile.
What I find funny
is that I have read many times that “if West Virginia leaves, the conference is dead”. Why? Here’s likely going to be what happens:
-Mizzou leaves for SEC beginning play in 2012-they NEED and WANT to get to 10 immediately.
—WVU leaves for Big XII beginning play in 2012 (and will pay departure fees, etc.)
—PITT and Syracuse depart for the ACC after the 27 month wait period-they DONT need to get to 14 in next 27 months.
—This allows the Big East to extend inivites to Boise, et al and regroup w/ a 12 team football conference.
The Big East will be fine, in my opinion, especially if Boise St enters the conference.
by WVUColumbus on Oct 24, 2011 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions
disregard
the strike-thrus…didn’t do that
by WVUColumbus on Oct 24, 2011 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Why do you...
Have WVU playing in the Big 12 next year? They would have to wait 27 months just like Pitt and Syracuse. The 27 month waiting period was not waived recently and it is unlikely that it will be. After all if the 27 months is waived for WVU then the BE will need to do the same for Pitt and Syracuse.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Two Points
1) Not directed at anyone in particular, but let’s face it…the 27 month notice period is pure negotiation tactics. Yes, the Big East can hold teams to the waiting (“lame duck”) period. Infact, the Big East has specifically stated it intends to hold teams to the 27 months. However, what it really wants is to get paid. There’s some dollar figure that will allow teams to leave early. That is IF they pay enough. Of course what is enought? And what is the Big Easts needs those teams to field a viable conference? Thos factors may make the exit fee much higher than anyone is willing to pay.
2) I’d say the Big East is in trouble if West Virginia leaves because it’s a weak conference. The original Big East football conference was considered pretty weak back when it had “name” programs like Miami and Virginia Tech. If WVU leaves, only Rutgers remains from that 8-team group. And no one cares about Rutgers. Without at least one name program, the conference has nothing worthwhile to offer the BCS.
Of course, Boise State could be that “name” team. But the question remains, why would Boise State join this hypothetical version of the Big East? Without West Virginia, the remaining Big East schools seem as good as the current Mountain West schools (like Air Force, Nevada, Hawaii, etc..). Not to mention, the Moutain West will join with Con-Usa (with Houston, Central Florida, etc…). The “expanded” Big East would be made mainly of these schools anyway. And Boise State doesn’t have to worry about finding a new home for its other sports and doesn’t have to travel cross-county for every away game. Stay where they are, steal the BCS bid away from the Big East. Not sure it will happen, but it must make some sense.
The Big East has to offer something that Boise State does not already have. And maybe the Big East comes up with something, but I’m not sure.
The Big East would offer
A BCS AQ tag immediately, and with them certainly. Being in the Big East conference- with fewer members than the merged two-also ensures a less diluted stream of revenue ad access to the valuable northeast media markets (which increases exposure and enhances National prestige).
by Green Bull on Oct 24, 2011 3:26 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think you make some good points.
And I agree it is about money, but this is more about keeping the conference together until 2013 until all the new members can join. Remember if another school decides to leave for the Big 12 that would leave three out of eight schools left making the the other five very vulnerable. Now if they could get a decent number of schools to join for 2012 then they might be willing to let them go for more money.
With that being said the 27 month waiting period can be a powerful deterrent that the BE might not want to compromise on. If they can get the exit fee over the $10 million, which they might soon coupled with the 27 month waiting period that might create some long term stability. Might is a big word however :-)
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Found this article
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/watch/2011/10/poach-or-not-poach-big-12-s-dilemma
Says that there is no clear cut decision on who to add. Also, there are concerns about being labeled the conference that killed another conference. I remember reading that this was a concern as well after the ACC took Pitt and Syracuse. Interesting thoughts.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 12:46 PM EDT reply actions
That's never stopped the ACC from poaching
Survival will trump everything. Right now the Big 12 looks like the stronger conference. The Big East has carried the seeds of its own destruction since the Penn State vote.
West Virginia fans hate everybody. They remember every snub and joke and bit of snark. And they never forgive, and they never, ever forget. In other words, they're a lot like West Virginians in general.
by Kid Tenderloin on Oct 24, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe, Maybe not but I will say...
the ACC has an interest in killing the Big East Conference. Outside of the BE, the ACC really is just as much a B-Ball Conference. Because of that there would be a greater benefit to see the death of the BE conference. The statement of having the ACC tournament in New York was telling. The Big 12 is a different beast. The BE is not so much of a threat to the conference but you never know what could happen. But even if the conference were in survival mode they need to fill a spot for 2012 season. Knowing this we know the BE will hold any BE school to the conference until the end of 2013. So that means that no school from the BE will be able to play in the Big 12 until 2014 unless they get a waiver from the BE, which they will not. Why? Because if they granted such a waiver they would need to do so with Syracuse and Pitt. After that the conference is dead, which many people want, but the commissioner is duty bound to prevent.
Now if the Big 12 decides to go to 12 then they are free to invite two schools from the BE to join in 2014 so long as they get another school to join for 2012. The only school that I think can do that is BYU as it is an independent. However, I think it would be possible for a Mountain West or Conference USA school to leave and play in 2012. So honestly I agree survival trumps being nice to another conference. However, I think FOX requires the Big 12 to have 10 teams and if Missouri splits they will not get a BE team until 2014.
Good points
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
If this happens what happens to Uconn/Rutgers?
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Writer/Editor for Pinstripe Alley, Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
I think UConn has some issues...
I know that USF is often talked about being left out in the cold if the BE goes away, but I feel UConn really has the most to lose. After all the AD from BC has publicly stated that in no way does he want UConn in the ACC. That could change but look at what Nova did to Temple. Sometimes its politics and that is what matters more.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point, I’m more worried about Rutgers, though. I fear Rutgers/UConn could become a package deal.
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Writer/Editor for Pinstripe Alley, Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
I think that could happen.
Also there is the Big 10 which is in the foot print and would look to expand into New York and New England. I think it all depends on the Big 10 however. If they are cool with 12 schools than that is that. Also, if ND goes to the Big 10 that would leave one school out in the cold. I would think that UConn is attractive because of its B-Ball program.
by Vinnie Giordano on Oct 24, 2011 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions
It really doesn't matter what BC thinks
BC was able to block UConn in this round because they were on the expansion committee and the ACC wanted to move fast. If the ACC goes 16 (or the SEC surprises everyone and gets an ACC school), then UConn’s going ACC whether BC likes it or not. The idea that there’s any significant market overlap between UConn and BC is merely a delusion of their AD and some of their fans, and not one that is shared by anyone else (UConn’s market is Connecticut; BC’s market is Boston; anyone who thinks they’re both competing in some generic New England college sports has rather unrealistic notions of the size of one or both schools’ fan bases).
UConn, BC separate markets. True today, tomorrow ????
If the Big East implodes and UConn doesn’t land in a BCS conference, then BC has a big recruiting advantage over UConn in football, even in Connecticut. (Think a Philadelphia recruit wouldn’t be tempted by Big East Rutgers over hometown MAC Temple?)
Over time, if BC football is ACC competitive, and if the ACC stays close to the Tier One conferences, they would gain some traction in Connecticut over a C-USA or MAC-level UConn.
Yeah, I know. If, if, if. But those “ifs” improves Rutgers ACC chances compared to UConn. Of course, the ACC could overrule BC, arguing that 4 NC, 2 Virginia and 2 Florida schools, and Clemson-SC add up to UConn-BC being a money rivalry.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
