Big East Expansion Redux
So it seems the Sooner Schooner has tipped the first domino that will set off this latest round of expansion, and now speculation is running rampant about implications for the Big East. I wrote about this a couple months ago (before bringing in teams from the Big 12 was the cool thing to do, mind you) but, having since done some reading on the potential blockbuster Big East TV deal, I've modified my views. Here's what I think:
I was wrong in my assessment that expansion is a necessity.
It's not. Don't forget that. Two things keep conferences going - automatic BCS bids & TV deals. As long as the Big East can retain it's BCS auto-bid (and I haven't seen any real indication that the bid is in danger), it stays in good position to finalize that TV deal, and it could be a doozy. If those two things are in order, there is no real reason to expand. End of story. Don't get caught up in expansion fever and make a move just to make a move. Remember, every time you add a team, that's another mouth to feed. That annual BCS money is a lump sum that goes to the conference based on how many teams qualify - more teams equals a smaller share - right ACC? Unless you're talking about bringing someone with a REAL chance of locking up and at-large bid (TCU) you're just reducing that amount.
I realize this is completely opposite to what I said in the above post, but this much seems clear to me: In order to maintain the conference's value in preparation for that new TV deal, THERE CAN BE NO BASKETBALL SPLIT. For better or worse, from Notre Dame to Georgetown and Villanova, the non-football members represent brand names in big cities. It's that simple. In a league where the basketball rights carry as much (if not more) value than the football, those are valuable commodities that you can't simply cut loose. The conference has demonstrated it can function quite well with 16 members, so there's really no reason to feel the need to dip below that. Having said that......
DON'T BE AFRAID TO CULL THE HERD. While we can agree that 16 members is manageable, 17 (with the 2012 addition of TCU) is getting a little awkward, and 20 (if you go to 12 football members) is just plain silly. But this doesn't mean you have to split altogether - just trim a little off the top. Or bottom. DePaul, pack your stuff. Seton Hall, it's been fun but so long. Providence goodbye. Yes I realize this would mean bagging a team from the conference home office city in the Friars, but the results have spoken. None of the above teams have even sniffed relevance in over a decade. The most recent Sweet 16 among the group was Seton Hall's trip in 2000. Before that Providence in 1997. DePaul hasn't sniffed the tourney's second weekend since 1979. This is what is referred to as dead weight. And just like the SEC is the top to bottom toughest football conference in America, the Big East can do the same on the basketball side. Trim the fat and make your 16 REALLY count.
Don't be fooled by popular notions of "superconferences" to think that the Big East must go big or go home. Certainly there could be valuable properties available in teams like Kansas (and to a lesser extent Kansas State) and if that is the case John Marinatto would be foolish not to jump. But in making those moves, the conference shouldn't lose sight of what it is. True value is found in leveraging one's assets to the maximum. Right now the Big East has as many of those assets on the hardwood as the gridiron.
It has been said that many successful people watch the crowd and then go the other way. It's a maxim the Big East would do well to remember amid the rush to consolidate. Watch 'em run, watch 'em clamor. Then do what's smart.
follow me on Twitter: @abpriddy
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Fully onboard, except...
Providence isn’t leaving this league unless it fails to exist anymore. I wish it weren’t true, but with the league offices in Rhode Island’s capital, it’s not going to happen. As for Seton Hall, while I’d also support their expulsion, Rutgers won’t let their in-state rival be kicked out. I’m pretty sure we’re all on the same page for DePaul — boot them immediately. ND delivers the Chicago market anyway, so they’re redundant (and less relevant).
Ideally, if we’re doing right by the basketball side, then removing those three AND adding KU, KSU (maybe Mizzou) is what’s best for the league on both ends. I think waiting took us to the brink of extinction once already. Adding those teams strengthens the brand for all sports and adds more television sets, thus more dollars in the new media deal.
Have you heard? The Big East is overrated. And doesn't deserve a BCS bid. And is too bloated in basketball.
by JohnCassillo on Sep 14, 2025 1:41 AM EDT reply actions
Plus have you seen Providence's recruiting lately?
Ed Cooley is doing amazing stuff there.
The Hall may be on the verge of righting that ship too: new AD finally, new coach, possibly about to sign Kyle Anderson. (I do not get the impression that Rutgers would stop them from getting thrown out (not that anyone’s getting thrown out.) The opposite, in fact.)
by justinslot on Sep 14, 2025 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem with the idea of
removing teams is that there is no mechanism by which the conference can do it. There’s no way to boot teams that play by the rules and meet the minimums.
by Mengus22 on Sep 14, 2025 5:49 PM EDT reply actions
Well what are the minimums?
Performance-wise, DePaul has to be close to the line, right? Even if we just dropped one team, I think it would be worth it to improve the overall quality of the league.
Have you heard? The Big East is overrated. And doesn't deserve a BCS bid. And is too bloated in basketball.
by JohnCassillo on Sep 14, 2025 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes there is
A vote. It takes 3/4 to make it happen which means 4 bball only schools would have to sign off on it. Not gonna happen. But we can take the back door to the same result. Follow me.
Break away and add KU, K St and Temple. KU brings national hoops cred and, along with K St, be a bridge to TCU. Temple could seemlessly replace Nova in the Philly market but, on a full time basis with their improving football fortunes. That would send ND straight to the B1G, taking Mizzou with them, and leave the football schools in the majority. That’s important because it means the conference naming rights and NCAA auto bid would be theirs.
With that leverage, go back and offer SJU, GTown, Nova and Marqutte. There may be some hard feeling at first, but I am sure they would come aboard. And this is why. Money. Without the football schools, they stand to lose lots of it. From tv contracts, their post season tourney and from the gate. I don’t think they are in a hurry to be in the A 10.
by YankeeMePleeze on Sep 15, 2025 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Dead weight?
What about Rutgers and South Florida? They are not dead weight? Someone has to finish in the bottom of the league. Rutgers has not been to the NCAA in twenty years. I’m not sure about South Florida, if at all. No one is getting thrown out anytime soon.
by redmen9194 on Sep 14, 2025 8:33 PM EDT reply actions
Realistically, no one’s going to get tossed. But if moves to that effect were made, the schools that also play football would be completely safe, regardless of how poorly they perform on the basketball court.
Have you heard? The Big East is overrated. And doesn't deserve a BCS bid. And is too bloated in basketball.
by JohnCassillo on Sep 14, 2025 9:21 PM EDT via iPhone app up reply actions
Don't drop USF
USF isn’t “dead weight” in football, with victories over Notre Dame Auburn, Clemson, FSU, and the U (of Miami). USF is also in a prime location for football recruits. We could reasonably expect to beat middle-tier SEC teams and most of the ACC teams. I think our competitiveness in football compensates for our struggles in basketball, as the former entails more revenue potential.
by Green Bull on Sep 14, 2025 11:15 PM EDT via iPhone app up reply actions
Can't drop any football members
No reason to drop any of the football playing members, least of all Rutgers with their location relative to NYC & South Florida in the hottest football recruiting region in America. Both programs have tons of potential based on their respective areas, and have enjoyed greater football success more recently than any of the 3 bball teams I list. The notion of dropping anyone would only apply to basketball schools, which exist in abundance.
I’m not saying it’s fair or even right. Seton Hall and Provy are charter members of the conference. (DePaul is just awful, though. No way around it.) I just think, if you have to choose between a 20 team bball league, a complete split or dropping 3 basketball members, the latter is the best option. It preserves the most valuable bball members of the conference while adding members to increase football viability.
Brandon
by Abpriddy on Sep 15, 2025 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Nobody's getting dropped.
LEAST of all USF, who’s one of our best football programs and have been on the cusp of greatness in the past. I just hope you guys can keep Holtz for awhile (though I fear he’s going to subject himself to the coach-killers at Notre Dame at some point.)
But no, nobody’s getting dropped. It’s only together, football schools and non-football schools, that we have maximal value.
by justinslot on Sep 15, 2025 2:22 AM EDT reply actions
we dont need a football split
we need a “get rid of the basketball only schools who consistently suck” split. I have no problem with keeping Notre Dame, Villanova, Georgetown, and Marquette. I love playing them in basketball and I get pumped for the games. But keeping Providence, Depaul, and Seton Hall around does not help our conference. I’m still debating on St. Johns right now since they look like they actually might be trending upwards. Getting rid of those four and then adding three football schools would give us 12 and 16 and I personally think it would save our conference. I love the Big East, but I want my team to do what is best for itself.
by Dwalk1217 on Sep 15, 2025 7:36 PM EDT reply actions
St. Johns
SJ=NYC. A valuable commodity when they’re good. No reason to dip below 16. That’s been shown to work.
Brandon
by Abpriddy on Sep 15, 2025 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Is the big east primarily a football or basketball conference?
by fracas on Sep 26, 2025 8:09 PM EDT reply actions
basketball, duh
- The Big East was founded in 1979. It didn’t sponsor football until 1991 (and didn’t play a conference football schedule until 1993).
- It had football-only members until Temple left at the same time as the ACC raid, and the last of the football members the Big East wasn’t intending to kick out didn’t join for all sports until 2003 (Virginia Tech).
- A majority of conference members (excluding those who have announced plans to leave) do not play Big East football (of those, one plays an FBS independent, one plays scholarship FCS football, and one plays non-scholarship FCS football)
by drothgery on Sep 27, 2025 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
DePaul
It is incorrect that DePaul hasn’t been to the tournament’s second round since 1979, thy made it to the field of 32 in the 2003-2004 academic year.
by Timothy Brian Padden on Oct 4, 2025 10:15 PM EDT reply actions














