goodknightfl Wrote:wins n losses and strenghth of teams and conf vary year to year. The ACC has been down but wont stay there.. the BE has been up but wont stay there. Generally speaking you can look at the top 15 to 20 programs in the country.. and they will have down spells but wont stay there long .. USC had it a few years back and now are back to elite status.. UF went thru a few years right at the end of spurrier time and 2 years under zookers.. and now are back.. Mich has been down but RR like him or not will bring them back to the top.. OK has been a bit off.. UM, and FSU has been down.. sadly for the ACC it happened at the same time for both programs. They will not stay down. You have a 2nd tier group of 15 to 20 schools that are decent most of the time but put together good 2 to 5 year runs.. the BE has been fortunate in having a couple of those schools do it at the right time. Can they maintain that?? I don't think so. Louisville people got upset when I and others said they were not elite.. but just on a great run.. Those of us who called it were right. WV is on one of those runs.. will they stay good ?? I think so.. will they stay great?? I don't think so. question is will other BE programs have the same type of great runs at the right time. Who knows.

That’s an excellent point. To add to it, absolutely NO ONE is immune to down cycles. Other notable schools that have been down at some point over the past 15 years:

Texas (before Mackovic/Brown)
Oklahoma (Gary Gibbs?)
Ohio State (Cooper was Michigan’s beyotch)
Notre Dame (Been generally down pretty much since Holtz left)
Nebraska (pretty much since Osbourne hung ‘em up)

But, the BE will have someone to replace WVU, if they step back, guaranteed. Come 2009, USF and Pitt likely will be chomping at the bit after White moves on. I’d say one of those two teams, or whoever wins the BE, will be in the NC mix in the foreseeable future. We lose a LOT after this season, but I wouldn’t even count us out of the mix in the future, as recruiting at UC is picking up steam on a yearly basis. Shiano’s pulling in talent yearly that will make Rutgers a factor. I can go on and on. Point is, the BE’s future as a major conference is secure.

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:

goodknightfl Wrote:wins n losses and strenghth of teams and conf vary year to year. The ACC has been down but wont stay there.. the BE has been up but wont stay there. Generally speaking you can look at the top 15 to 20 programs in the country.. and they will have down spells but wont stay there long .. USC had it a few years back and now are back to elite status.. UF went thru a few years right at the end of spurrier time and 2 years under zookers.. and now are back.. Mich has been down but RR like him or not will bring them back to the top.. OK has been a bit off.. UM, and FSU has been down.. sadly for the ACC it happened at the same time for both programs. They will not stay down. You have a 2nd tier group of 15 to 20 schools that are decent most of the time but put together good 2 to 5 year runs.. the BE has been fortunate in having a couple of those schools do it at the right time. Can they maintain that?? I don't think so. Louisville people got upset when I and others said they were not elite.. but just on a great run.. Those of us who called it were right. WV is on one of those runs.. will they stay good ?? I think so.. will they stay great?? I don't think so. question is will other BE programs have the same type of great runs at the right time. Who knows.

That’s an excellent point. To add to it, absolutely NO ONE is immune to down cycles. Other notable schools that have been down at some point over the past 15 years:

Texas (before Mackovic/Brown)
Oklahoma (Gary Gibbs?)
Ohio State (Cooper was Michigan’s beyotch)
Notre Dame (Been generally down pretty much since Holtz left)
Nebraska (pretty much since Osbourne hung ‘em up)

But, the BE will have someone to replace WVU, if they step back, guaranteed. Come 2009, USF and Pitt likely will be chomping at the bit after White moves on. I’d say one of those two teams, or whoever wins the BE, will be in the NC mix in the foreseeable future. We lose a LOT after this season, but I wouldn’t even count us out of the mix in the future, as recruiting at UC is picking up steam on a yearly basis. Shiano’s pulling in talent yearly that will make Rutgers a factor. I can go on and on. Point is, the BE’s future as a major conference is secure.

You are right Jose - the teams you mentioned, as well as any team, will have down cycles. That is just the way it is.

However, the "big boys" will not have to hear about it, years later from the media, after they have started doing good again.

I swear to Buddha - if ESPN mentions our record from 3-5 years ago during one of our football games this year (like they did last year), I am going to go ape sh^t. Their bias is ridiculous.

You Big East guys know what I am talking about!

I am starting to think the only way the BE splits is if Syracuse or Rutgers is invited to the Big 10, and they jump ship. Then the Northeastern fball schools would be out of the majority because Pitt/WVU are pretty much swing votes either way.

I don't think the BE has any top 15 type elite programs.. I would go with the following

UM, UF, Fsu, USC, Oh state, Texas, Ok, Mich, LSU, ND, and then there is another just a bit behind group.. Tenn, Ala, Neb, Penn State, Ga, maybe a auburn, wisc.. though they are a stretch..

behind them is a group of 20 to 30 that are historically solid programs though not elite..
VT, Clemson, WV, Pitt, ark, oregon, and another 15 or so that could be included.. the diff between the these 2 groups.. is the first group historically will be very good then have a couple of off years where they need to retool... the 2nd group is decent to pretty good with ocassional runs of 2 or 3 years of being quality wise the equals of the first group.. a lot of things go into what helps schools fit in both groups.. history, location, school size, and $$$. schools in the 1st group work to stay there.. schools in the 2nd strive to join the 1st. it happens though not often. and the rest of us struggle to get in the 2nd group.

GKF, money has a lot to do with it, but IMO none of the other factors apply. If history had anything to do with it, Army and Navy would still be in the mix for championships. I believe Ole Miss was once one of the juggernauts of the SEC. Pellini at NU is in for a rude awakening if all he thinks he needs to do is return to the option and figure the Huskers will all the sudden be back.

School size? Well, you have Miami and ND on your “elite list”, and fact is, neither of those schools are particularly large.

Location? I can see that as a factor, as FLA, OH, PA, Tex, and CA have plenty of talent. But then again, Neb is in the middle of nowhere.

As for the BE, the right things are happening all around. USF and WVU draw 50+. UL and RU are both expanding their houses to that range. Pitt has a capacity to draw big. Whoever wins the BE will always be in the hunt nationally. No way all the programs in the league will have down periods in unison.

Interesting a lot has to do with perception. I went back to the final AP poll in 2000 and the last one this past year and gave each team points for their finish 25 for #1, 1 for #25.
When you add all the points this decade so far, here are the results.
1. Oklahoma 149
2.Texas 143
3.USC 141
4.LSU 125
5.Ohio state 120
6.Miami 118
7.Georgia 114
8.Michigan 96
9.Virginia Tech 95
10.Auburn 84
11.Florida 83
12.FSU 66
13.Tennesse 61
14.Oregon 59
15.West Virginia 58
16.Boise 56
16.Louisville 56
18.Iowa 54
19.Washington State 49
20.kansas State 48
21.Notre Dame 46
22.Nebraska 45
23.Wisconsin 44
24.Boston College 40
25.Maryland 37

Cubanbull Wrote:Interesting a lot has to do with perception. I went back to the final AP poll in 2000 and the last one this past year and gave each team points for their finish 25 for #1, 1 for #25.
When you add all the points this decade so far, here are the results.
1. Oklahoma 149
2.Texas 143
3.USC 141
4.LSU 125
5.Ohio state 120
6.Miami 118
7.Georgia 114
8.Michigan 96
9.Virginia Tech 95
10.Auburn 84
11.Florida 83
12.FSU 66
13.Tennesse 61
14.Oregon 59
15.West Virginia 58
16.Boise 56
16.Louisville 56
18.Iowa 54
19.Washington State 49
20.kansas State 48
21.Notre Dame 46
22.Nebraska 45
23.Wisconsin 44
24.Boston College 40
25.Maryland 37

So the ACC/SEC each have five schools in there, so much for the ACC sucks theory.

esayem Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:Interesting a lot has to do with perception. I went back to the final AP poll in 2000 and the last one this past year and gave each team points for their finish 25 for #1, 1 for #25.
When you add all the points this decade so far, here are the results.
1. Oklahoma 149
2.Texas 143
3.USC 141
4.LSU 125
5.Ohio state 120
6.Miami 118
7.Georgia 114
8.Michigan 96
9.Virginia Tech 95
10.Auburn 84
11.Florida 83
12.FSU 66
13.Tennesse 61
14.Oregon 59
15.West Virginia 58
16.Boise 56
16.Louisville 56
18.Iowa 54
19.Washington State 49
20.kansas State 48
21.Notre Dame 46
22.Nebraska 45
23.Wisconsin 44
24.Boston College 40
25.Maryland 37

So the ACC/SEC each have five schools in there, so much for the ACC sucks theory.

Yep, but keep in mind that three of those 5 are former Big East teams with Miami earning the bulk of those points while in the Big East and VT and BC splitting their points between both leagues.

Shows how much better the Big East would have been had Miami listened to Tranghese's suggestion of adding Louisville and South Florida back in 2002.

But no, she didn't want anything to do with USF and wanted a 12-team football conference with a conference championship game.

C'est la vie!

Cheers,
Neil

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:GKF, money has a lot to do with it, but IMO none of the other factors apply. If history had anything to do with it, Army and Navy would still be in the mix for championships. I believe Ole Miss was once one of the juggernauts of the SEC. Pellini at NU is in for a rude awakening if all he thinks he needs to do is return to the option and figure the Huskers will all the sudden be back.

School size? Well, you have Miami and ND on your “elite list”, and fact is, neither of those schools are particularly large.

Location? I can see that as a factor, as FLA, OH, PA, Tex, and CA have plenty of talent. But then again, Neb is in the middle of nowhere.

As for the BE, the right things are happening all around. USF and WVU draw 50+. UL and RU are both expanding their houses to that range. Pitt has a capacity to draw big. Whoever wins the BE will always be in the hunt nationally. No way all the programs in the league will have down periods in unison.

Agreed. It's the same old arguments we heard after expansion. Many fans from other conferences laughed at the notion the Big East would not only survive, but thrive.

Even when Big East fans offered two hypotheses as to how it would do it - one of the programs would fill the vacuum Miami left or all of the programs would rise and fall and rise again like the 90s Pac-10.

What happened was the best of both worlds - West Virginia has filled the vacuum Miami left and all of the other programs with the exception of Syracuse have taken turns in the Top 25, like the Pac-10 of the 90s.

And this league as currently constituted has only been together for 3 years. Louisville has too much going for it not to rise again. UConn has a lot going as well. And even Syracuse will rise again sometime in the future. At the moment, USF, Rutgers, Pitt, and Cincinnati will keep rotating in and out of the Top 25 supporting West Virginia. And when the Eers falter, one of those programs will then step up and fill that vacuum.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

esayem Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:Interesting a lot has to do with perception. I went back to the final AP poll in 2000 and the last one this past year and gave each team points for their finish 25 for #1, 1 for #25.
When you add all the points this decade so far, here are the results.
1.Oklahoma 149
2.Texas 143
3.USC 141
4.LSU 125
5.Ohio State 120
6.Miami 118
7.Georgia 114
8.Michigan 96
9.Virginia Tech 95
10.Auburn 84
11.Florida 83
12.FSU 66
13.Tennesse 61
14.Oregon 59
15.West Virginia 58
16.Boise 56
16.Louisville 56
18.Iowa 54
19.Washington State 49
20.Kansas State 48
21.Notre Dame 46
22.Nebraska 45
23.Wisconsin 44
24.Boston College 40
25.Maryland 37

So the ACC/SEC each have five schools in there, so much for the ACC sucks theory.

Yep, but keep in mind that three of those 5 are former Big East teams with Miami earning the bulk of those points while in the Big East and VT and BC splitting their points between both leagues.

Shows how much better the Big East would have been had Miami listened to Tranghese's suggestion of adding Louisville and South Florida back in 2002.

But no, she didn't want anything to do with USF and wanted a 12-team football conference with a conference championship game.

ACC fans trying to take credit for accomplishments by Miami, Virginia Tech, and BC during their Big East days? What a surprise! Cubanbull's composite poll runs from the last ranking of the 2000 season to the final standing of the most recent 2007 season.

Miami and Virginia Tech were in the Big East in 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. BC was here in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004. Florida State has also faded a bit as the last eight years dragged on while Maryland cooled off considerably. That is the reality.

Krocker Krapp Wrote:Pac-10 will snub BYU, Utah
By Dick Harmon | Deseret News
Published: Monday, July 7, 2008 12:09 a.m. MDT

Longtime commissioner of the Pac-10, Tom Hansen is leaving his post, and a new face will replace him. This has brought on a debate whether the Pac-10 will once again revisit the issue of expansion.

I've had several people ship me a well-researched speculative piece on Foxsports.com by Greg Welch, making a case that BYU and Utah present excellent candidacies for membership in the Pac-10. The story chronicles and compares Pac-10, BCS and non-BCS football and basketball attendance, athletic budgets, market rankings and rivalries. It spells it out pretty well.

Yes, BYU and Utah would make great members of the Pac-10. In fact, I'd bet my most prized material possession, my golf clubs, that Utah and BYU would be better Pac-10 programs than Washington State and Oregon State.


This article appeared in the Salt Lake City Deseret News on Monday, July 7, 2008.

hopefully the guy knows that the Beavs have more wins the past two years than does Utah. I wonder why they never get respect? They have 19 wins since 2006

omnicarrier Wrote:Yep, but keep in mind that three of those 5 are former Big East teams with Miami earning the bulk of those points while in the Big East and VT and BC splitting their points between both leagues.

Shows how much better the Big East would have been had Miami listened to Tranghese's suggestion of adding Louisville and South Florida back in 2002.

But no, she didn't want anything to do with USF and wanted a 12-team football conference with a conference championship game.

C'est la vie!

Cheers,
Neil

If you snooze......you lose

XLance Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:Yep, but keep in mind that three of those 5 are former Big East teams with Miami earning the bulk of those points while in the Big East and VT and BC splitting their points between both leagues.

Shows how much better the Big East would have been had Miami listened to Tranghese's suggestion of adding Louisville and South Florida back in 2002.

But no, she didn't want anything to do with USF and wanted a 12-team football conference with a conference championship game.

C'est la vie!

Cheers,
Neil

If you snooze......you lose

True, but isnt it interesting that the alert acc took supposedly 3 of the top BE teams to make their league a better fb league, and the BE is still a better fb league at this point? Did the acc suck that badly before expansion?

cuban.. nice look up.

If I was going to pick my top 10 all time programs.. I think you would have all of them other than ND in the top 12. which kind of shows the more things change the more they stay the same. UM and FSU did so much over 20 years that they really have broken down the barrier.. I can't really say anyone else did. Its about wins n losses and history... and having great 2 or 3 year runs just doesnt break you in to that elite group. It takes multible long term runs over mutible years.

The ACC has been in a down cycle, which they should exit in 2009. That down cycle started with multiple coaching changes over the last 6-8 years and some "not-so-great" hires.. Most of those problems have been rectified and you will see a much better product on the field this year.. The 2009 season will complete the cycle.

I'm glad that Louisville is in the Big East but folks, the SEC, Big 10, PAC 10 and the ACC are considered by most as the best of the BCS. Many Cardinal fans were hoping we were asked into the ACC instead of BC. Well, we all love the Big East now, because the Big East wanted us. Nevertheless, let's all be honest with our selves, the Big East and the Big 12 both suffer from image problems. And we always will as long as we are this 16-team hybrid monstrousity! Bottom line, we need to go to a 9, 10 or 12 team allsports conference.

The Big East takes a backseat to no one in basketball in strength or image...football I agree while strength wise they aren't 6th--image wise they are.

TexanMark Wrote:The Big East takes a backseat to no one in basketball in strength or image...football I agree while strength wise they aren't 6th--image wise they are.

True, the BE rides shotgun next to us!

Krocker Krapp Wrote:Pac-10 will snub BYU, Utah
By Dick Harmon | Deseret News
Published: Monday, July 7, 2008 12:09 a.m. MDT

Longtime commissioner of the Pac-10, Tom Hansen is leaving his post, and a new face will replace him. This has brought on a debate whether the Pac-10 will once again revisit the issue of expansion.

I've had several people ship me a well-researched speculative piece on Foxsports.com by Greg Welch, making a case that BYU and Utah present excellent candidacies for membership in the Pac-10. The story chronicles and compares Pac-10, BCS and non-BCS football and basketball attendance, athletic budgets, market rankings and rivalries. It spells it out pretty well.

Yes, BYU and Utah would make great members of the Pac-10. In fact, I'd bet my most prized material possession, my golf clubs, that Utah and BYU would be better Pac-10 programs than Washington State and Oregon State.

But if it happens, it won't be any time soon. Changing commissioners won't change a general philosophy in the Pac-10 that they've got the money and the TV exposure, a gob of money and others do not. And they're not sharing.

Simple as that.

Reading this piece by Welch, the quickest reaction I had is of a wayward premise that a new commissioner might matter.

A conference commissioner like Hansen, or even Karl Benson of the WAC or the MWC's Craig Thompson, do not make such decisions.

They carry out policies decided by university presidents.

They have a staff that studies issues and makes recommendations, but they do not decide. It's akin in politics to a city manager doing the bidding of a city council and mayor.

University presidents in the Pac-10 have no desire to expand. Their conference deploys a system where every team plays one another and a true champion is crowned. It has a train-load of money from an ABC-TV contract shared with the Big Ten until 2014.

The Pac-10 has the Rose Bowl, which is exempt from the $6 million fee other BCS bowls must pay to have the BCS label by its name. It keeps Rose Bowl money and BCS coin, and it's a league that isn't going to divide it with new kids on the block.

Imagine a president at USC or chancellor at Washington sitting in his living room during the holidays, turning on the TV to watch the Rose Bowl and seeing BYU or Utah as the Pac-10 representative.

Won't happen until gasoline is back to a buck a gallon or the left coast becomes one big, long beach.

So, an otherwise excellently researched piece with fascinating figures is more fodder for discussion than staple for an actual move that has a voice of flesh and bone. The Pac-10 is set.

When Utah rattled the BCS back in 2004, native Utahn Greg Hansen, a sportswriter in Pac-10 territory, floated the idea of BYU and Utah in the Pac-10. He made a good case, working as an astute observer from the front lines in Pac-10 territory.

But this issue isn't about what makes a good brief or a solid case. It's not about what makes sense or what might be fair or is simply a good idea. It has everything to do with exclusion, money, idealism, politics and a simple better-than-you-don't-need-you attitude among these presidents.

Tom Hansen and his replacement are lap dogs with muzzled barks and appointed fire plugs to frequent — nothing more.

Greg Hansen explained the Pac-10's four-part, no-expansion platform as follows: 1. We don't want to share our TV money. 2. We don't want to split up our bowl-game money. 3. We don't want to compromise our academic standards. 4. We can't realign into divisions because no one is willing to be placed in a group that doesn't include USC and UCLA.

"The academic leaders at USC, Stanford, Cal and UCLA see themselves as a coterie of Ivy League schools, West Coast division, and as long as they live, the Pac-10 will not be taking on lowbrow academic entities, not San Diego State and especially not Fresno State or UNLV," wrote Greg Hansen.

In the above edict, you can sense the Pac-10 administrative mindset.

No matter the positives Utah and BYU might bring to the table, Pac-10 warlords can't get over their own self-interests to expand. Even if doing so would mean getting a program like BYU, which has more seasons (15) ranked in the Top 25 than half the Pac-10, higher average football attendance than six Pac-10 programs, and a basketball average attendance higher than every single Pac-10 school but Arizona.

Doesn't matter.

They're not sharing.

This article appeared in the Salt Lake City Deseret News on Monday, July 7, 2008.

WTF are they talking about...UNLV is the Harvard of the Desert!

TexanMark Wrote:The Big East takes a backseat to no one in basketball in strength or image...football I agree while strength wise they aren't 6th--image wise they are.

I was referring to football. You know basketball always takes a back seat to football in the majority of BCS conferences, except BE and ACC! However, that why the ACC raided the BE for Miami, VA Tech and BC! Football rules, dudes!