Old BE lost sight of this.Having great Basketball is sweet, however nobody cares when conference realignment occurs. BCS was all about Football. Aresco gets it. Get on board it's all about football...

I'd equate football to one's job and basketball as one's investment strategy. Both are very important...and for different reasons.

(03-30-2014 09:50 AM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  Old BE lost sight of this. Having great Basketball is sweet, however nobody cares when conference realignment occurs.

Conference realignment decisions are either reactive or proactive. Reactive ones are made after a conference has been raided, and there is always a "we need a warm body" element to them so the standards are less choosy. You invite a school you would not have invited had a raid not occurred. Think ECU to the Big East.

Proactive decisions are made based on what schools are perceived to add money value to the conference. For that, you need brand-name recognition.

That's why ECU was never proactively promoted to an AQ conference. You guys had pretty good football, and very good football fan support in your stadium, but you don't move the needle in terms of brand recognition and hence brought no money to a conference.

Now take a school like Syracuse, one of the first schools to get a P5 invite during the last round of realignment. Syracuse is a decent national brand, but their national brand is due more to basketball than football. So I don't think it is fair to say that their basketball had nothing to do with their appeal to the ACC. It surely did, so basketball can sometimes be important in that regard.

Bus drivers drive the bus

(03-30-2014 09:50 AM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  Old BE lost sight of this.Having great Basketball is sweet, however nobody cares when conference realignment occurs. BCS was all about Football. Aresco gets it. Get on board it's all about football...

The old BE apparently lost fact, or failed to give credit, to the FB schools who were also carrying most of the load in BB.

The thing is, other than expanding massively west of the Rockies, there are no additions that significantly help AAC football. There are ways to help the quality of AAC basketball. Frankly, Army does nothing to help the "quality" of AAC football. That's a media value grab. Army actually weakens the SOS of the league. Boise, Fresno, and BYU are about the only 3 additions that would add to the AAC's on field football strength (as well as the media value).

Conversely, there are teams that would accept an AAC invite that upgrade the RPI of AAC basketball. So while football definitely drives the bus---there is nothing realistically we can do to improve unless the league is willing to make a massive coordinated westward all-sports move. The AAC can make much more limited moves inside its existing footprint to vastly improve an already strong basketball product. If we added UMass, VCU, and Wichita as non-football members--the AAC could become one of the most powerful, most watched basketball conferences in the nation. There is value in being such a conference and doing such does not affect our ability to grow our football product.

(03-30-2014 10:39 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 09:50 AM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  Old BE lost sight of this.Having great Basketball is sweet, however nobody cares when conference realignment occurs. BCS was all about Football. Aresco gets it. Get on board it's all about football...

The old BE apparently lost fact, or failed to give credit, to the FB schools who were also carrying most of the load in BB.

Really? How did they do that?

(03-30-2014 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The thing is, other than expanding massively west of the Rockies, there are no additions that significantly help AAC football. There are ways to help the quality of AAC basketball. Frankly, Army does nothing to help the "quality" of AAC football. That's a media value grab. Army actually weakens the SOS of the league. Boise, Fresno, and BYU are about the only 3 additions that would add to the AAC's on field football strength (as well as the media value).

Conversely, there are teams that would accept an AAC invite that upgrade the RPI of AAC basketball. So while football definitely drives the bus---there is nothing realistically we can do to improve unless the league is willing to make a massive coordinated westward all-sports move. The AAC can make much more limited moves inside its existing footprint to vastly improve an already strong basketball product. If we added UMass, VCU, and Wichita as non-football members--the AAC could become one of the most powerful, most watched basketball conferences in the nation. There is value in being such a conference and doing such does not affect our ability to grow our football product.

Boise, Fresno, and BYU should still be the AAC's top targets.

You need both. The basketball credits are a very important revenue stream. The problem with the old BE was the conflict of interest/agendas that happened between the all sport programs due to football and the hoop centric programs. Having a group with a more common set of agendas will help a lot. But you need to hitch every able horse to the wagon. Schools in the league bring different strengths, but all have the ever elusive thing called potential.

(03-30-2014 09:50 AM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  Old BE lost sight of this.Having great Basketball is sweet, however nobody cares when conference realignment occurs. BCS was all about Football. Aresco gets it. Get on board it's all about football...

You. Don't. Get. It.

The "Old BE" didn't "lose sight" of the idea that "Football drives the bus." The "Old BE" was quite literally a "Basketball Conference in which some members played Football." As a matter of fact, if you want to get technical, the "BE Football Conference" was quite literally a separate and different conference than the "Big East Conference."

To say that "the old BE lost sight of this..." would imply that the "Old BE" ever accepted it in the first place. Indeed, if you go back and look at the conversations of the non-FB schools, a whole lot of them thought the fatal flaw was that the BE sponsored FB under the conference banner in the first place and, everything following THAT decision was doomed. So, when the C7/New Big East schools split-off, from their perspective, they were the TRUE successors to the "Big East" brand and were only restoring what the BE was really about.

The fact that so many outsiders don't seem to grasp this basic idea is what leads to so much talking past each other.

Been hearing this nonsense for a decade.

Translation:... Please ignore our bad basketball

What did make Aresco pull back from Westward expansion? ESPN? After the Boise and SDSU adds, there seemed to be cooling taking place. I would still like BYU of course and AFA for football, WICHITA/VCU for Bball/Olympic plus SDSU and UNM/Fresno for all sports (not expensive trips on SouthWest Air from TX/OK/LA/MEMPHIS) if that adds to contract. I'm wondering if Boise can keep their football going at their current level.

(03-30-2014 12:00 PM)AusTxPony Wrote:  What did make Aresco pull back from Westward expansion? ESPN? After the Boise and SDSU adds, there seemed to be cooling taking place.

Boise and SDSU joined well before Aresco was hired, so the 'cooling' was done before he arrived.

But it is true that in the couple months before Rutgers was raided away, Aresco did nothing to build up a truly western (west of Rockies) wing for the conference. He was content with the membership lineup he inherited.

(03-30-2014 11:18 AM)Bambu Wrote:  Been hearing this nonsense for a decade.

Translation:... Please ignore our bad basketball

Why not...everyone ignores your bad football.. Allignment is all about Football don't kid yourself.. SEC didn't get A&M for basketball..

I thought Willie drove the bus?

(03-30-2014 12:13 PM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:18 AM)Bambu Wrote:  Been hearing this nonsense for a decade.

Translation:... Please ignore our bad basketball

Why not...everyone ignores your bad football.. Allignment is all about Football don't kid yourself.. SEC didn't get A&M for basketball..

Our bad football isn't ignored here, it's been a pretty hot topic for a while.

(03-30-2014 12:13 PM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:18 AM)Bambu Wrote:  Been hearing this nonsense for a decade.

Translation:... Please ignore our bad basketball

Why not...everyone ignores your bad football.. Allignment is all about Football don't kid yourself.. SEC didn't get A&M for basketball..

Realignment is about making more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

(03-30-2014 12:17 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 12:13 PM)Pirateoracle Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 11:18 AM)Bambu Wrote:  Been hearing this nonsense for a decade.

Translation:... Please ignore our bad basketball

Why not...everyone ignores your bad football.. Allignment is all about Football don't kid yourself.. SEC didn't get A&M for basketball..

Realignment is about making more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Yep, bad Memphis football was chosen before the mighty ECU program.

Just sayin,

(03-30-2014 10:41 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The thing is, other than expanding massively west of the Rockies, there are no additions that significantly help AAC football. There are ways to help the quality of AAC basketball. Frankly, Army does nothing to help the "quality" of AAC football. That's a media value grab. Army actually weakens the SOS of the league. Boise, Fresno, and BYU are about the only 3 additions that would add to the AAC's on field football strength (as well as the media value).

Conversely, there are teams that would accept an AAC invite that upgrade the RPI of AAC basketball. So while football definitely drives the bus---there is nothing realistically we can do to improve unless the league is willing to make a massive coordinated westward all-sports move. The AAC can make much more limited moves inside its existing footprint to vastly improve an already strong basketball product. If we added UMass, VCU, and Wichita as non-football members--the AAC could become one of the most powerful, most watched basketball conferences in the nation. There is value in being such a conference and doing such does not affect our ability to grow our football product.

That model just failed..BE is dead...