Yes, I'm convinced they are false, which is why I haven't bothered to respond in the other thread.
First, I don't know if it would be allowed anymore. As per the NCAA own by-laws, effective next August:
"20.02.6 Division I-A Conference Effective Date: Aug 01, 2005
A conference classified as a Division I-A conference shall be comprised of at least eight full Division I-A members that satisfy all Division I-A requirements. An institution shall be included as one of the eight Division I-A full members only if the institution participates in the conference schedule in at least six men's and eight women's conference-sponsored sports, including men's basketball and football and three women's team sports including women's basketball. A conference-sponsored sport shall be a sport in which regular season and/or championship opportunities are provided, consistent with the minimum standards identified by the applicable NCAA sport committee for automatic qualification. (Adopted: 10/31/02 effective 8/1/05)"
Now, I suppose, it's possible that the above criteria only means that a minimum of 8 out of 'x' number of members must meet this criteria, but it does seem to me that 'football only' members defies the stated rationale for this by-law being implemented:
"Rationale: The Division I-A conference classification shall be established to identify those conferences that demonstrate integration of athletics programs in a broad cross section of sports. It is anticipated that the establishment of such standards will have a direct impact on the conference's position and privileges within the Division I governance structure."
If however, it does only mean a minimum of 8 and the BE were to go for a football-only member, Navy and Army would be the natural ones to ask first. Yet Navy seems very happy being an indy and Army wants to go the Navy route having not had any success in C-USA.
And yet, supposedly, ND has softened its position on scheduling BE teams in the near future. It's hard to imagine this being the case unless the BE were about to announce something in terms of Navy at least. Perhaps Navy doesn't want to lose its AD and HC and are fearful of SU possibly 'stealing' them? If they want to keep both, they may capitulate and decide being in the BE would be in their best interests overall if it allows them to keep both their AD and HC for a while longer. If Navy does join under these circumstances, I suspect Army would as well. Army's recent long-term deal with BC would mean continued exposure for the BE in the Boston market. Navy gives the Big East a foothold in the Baltimore and Washington, D.C. markets.
ND already plays Navy and has a long term deal now with Pitt. So it then doesn't become too much of a strain in a 12-game season to add two or three more BE teams to their schedule (although having BC still would make this even more attractive).
ND is into playing in particular arenas and areas. Cincinnati's large Catholic population and Paul Brown stadium might appeal to them. Playing Army in Giants Stadium might as well. Not sure about the Tampa area in terms of Catholic population, but who wouldn't love playing in that stadium?
Now, looking at all of this, what does ECU provide? A slightly better program than Army, but not as good as Navy. There simply are no major markets in their vicinity. If this were the mid-90s to 2000 they would be considered a program on the rise, but they aren't now.
Tranghese said that no other members would be added unless they offered something to the BE. And I simply don't see ECU, at the present moment, making the grade. Not to say that they can't turn it around in both fb (perhaps getting Zook) and bb (Charlotte has a great team, they may want to consider stealing Bobby Lutz), but until they do turn it around, I'd say they are off the table.
Cheers,
Neil
|