(05-27-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  You don't even know what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying that even if they split off they still would have left when approached by other leagues. There was zero loyalty within that group.

So, if the endgame for football was 14 and no higher, and the ACC had offered ND, Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's spots in the conference instead of simply ND, are you saying Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's would have refused out of loyalty to Providence and Seton Hall?

Cheers,
Neil

(05-27-2013 03:15 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:03 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Without VT's five appearances then other ACC teams would have went in their place those years. I'm not sure what your point is with that.

Without VT the ACC would have had to send an inferior team. It would have been like Pitt's 2005 BCS bowl game against Utah. The ACC would most likely have gone 0-5, instead of VT's 1-4...

It might also have been the ACC that lost the automatic tie-in to the Orange Bowl, instead of The BEast...

All of that is extremely unlikely. The ACC would have done fine sending two FSU teams and two Matt Ryan Boston College teams in the Hokies place. It would not have been hard to improve upon VT's 1-4 record.

(05-27-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  You don't even know what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying that even if they split off they still would have left when approached by other leagues. There was zero loyalty within that group.

None of the schools had any loyalty to one another? They wouldn't have any desire to join the ACC if the money wasn't better. If all The BEast football schools had split away and invited Louisville and Cincinnati, would the ACC's money have been better? That's debatable, and with the ACC's performance in BCS bowls I doubt they'd have been able to persuade anyone to make the jump over...

(05-27-2013 04:36 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:15 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:03 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Without VT's five appearances then other ACC teams would have went in their place those years. I'm not sure what your point is with that.

Without VT the ACC would have had to send an inferior team. It would have been like Pitt's 2005 BCS bowl game against Utah. The ACC would most likely have gone 0-5, instead of VT's 1-4...

It might also have been the ACC that lost the automatic tie-in to the Orange Bowl, instead of The BEast...

All of that is extremely unlikely. The ACC would have done fine sending two FSU teams and two Matt Ryan Boston College teams in the Hokies place. It would not have been hard to improve upon VT's 1-4 record.

But BC wouldn't have been an ACC school if all The BEast football schools had split away to form their own all sports conference. You forgot that minor detail. All the ACC would have had was FSU, with Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Clemson serving as a BCS whipping boy for a season each...

So I doubt the ACC would have improved on VT's record in the BCS with inferior teams. And with all the good football teams remaining in The BEast, would the ACC even manage to remain as good as they did? Recruits wouldn't have found the ACC quite so attractive without the new additions. So it's debatable as to whether they'd ever be able to overtake The BEast.

Also, if The BEast football schools had formed their own conference, would the ACC even be able to keep their 2 best football schools? I kind of doubt it. IMO FSU and Clemson would both have grown tired of remaining in a 2nd rate football conference, causing the programs that made the majority of their money continue to deteriorate. They'd end up jumping to the better football conference, which would have been The BEast...

(05-27-2013 05:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  You don't even know what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying that even if they split off they still would have left when approached by other leagues. There was zero loyalty within that group.

None of the schools had any loyalty to one another? They wouldn't have any desire to join the ACC if the money wasn't better. If all The BEast football schools had split away and invited Louisville and Cincinnati, would the ACC's money have been better? That's debatable, and with the ACC's performance in BCS bowls I doubt they'd have been able to persuade anyone to make the jump over...

(05-27-2013 04:36 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:15 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:03 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Without VT's five appearances then other ACC teams would have went in their place those years. I'm not sure what your point is with that.

Without VT the ACC would have had to send an inferior team. It would have been like Pitt's 2005 BCS bowl game against Utah. The ACC would most likely have gone 0-5, instead of VT's 1-4...

It might also have been the ACC that lost the automatic tie-in to the Orange Bowl, instead of The BEast...

All of that is extremely unlikely. The ACC would have done fine sending two FSU teams and two Matt Ryan Boston College teams in the Hokies place. It would not have been hard to improve upon VT's 1-4 record.

But BC wouldn't have been an ACC school if all The BEast football schools had split away to form their own all sports conference. You forgot that minor detail. All the ACC would have had was FSU, with Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Clemson serving as a BCS whipping boy for a season each...

So I doubt the ACC would have improved on VT's record in the BCS with inferior teams. And with all the good football teams remaining in The BEast, would the ACC even manage to remain as good as they did? Recruits wouldn't have found the ACC quite so attractive without the new additions. So it's debatable as to whether they'd ever be able to overtake The BEast.

Also, if The BEast football schools had formed their own conference, would the ACC even be able to keep their 2 best football schools? I kind of doubt it. IMO FSU and Clemson would both have grown tired of remaining in a 2nd rate football conference, causing the programs that made the majority of their money continue to deteriorate. They'd end up jumping to the better football conference, which would have been The BEast...

Miami was looking to get into the ACC even when the Big East was offering them more money. Thats where Miami and BC and Cuse wanted to be. Hell all the FB schools wanted to be in the ACC including your Mountaineers.

The FB schools had ZERO loyalty to each other, thats why they broke apart.

(05-27-2013 04:23 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  You don't even know what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying that even if they split off they still would have left when approached by other leagues. There was zero loyalty within that group.

So, if the endgame for football was 14 and no higher, and the ACC had offered ND, Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's spots in the conference instead of simply ND, are you saying Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's would have refused out of loyalty to Providence and Seton Hall?

Cheers,
Neil

Swing and a miss.

The FB schools had zero loyalty to each other and to suggest that if the FB schools split away from the BBall schools in the 90's and added Cincy and UofL they would all still be together today is just silly. Miami was looking out for Miami and BC was looking out for BC and Cuse was looking out for Cuse and thats the truth. Your question has ZERO BEARING on the conversation at hand.

(05-27-2013 11:02 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 10:50 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 10:35 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:58 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:26 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  They were always mid-majors clinging like leeches to the major sports programs in their conference. That's the way I viewed them in the 90's, the 2000's, and today. I expect a huge drop from those schools now that they no longer have major college programs to hold them up.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha without us you guys would be in CUSA/AAC right now. You think Vick or many of the other recruits you got over the years would have gone to VT if we didn't pick your sorry butts?

I agree Red Man. The Big East brand name was built in the 1980's when it had no football. It established itself as a power conference on the back of Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's as well as by Syracuse. They were helped by surges in the late '80's at Providence and Seton Hall.

All of the football schools were beating down the doors to become part of the Big East action and to get a piece of the Big East brand that had been developed over the course of the previous decade. This same group of football schools could not nor ever had been able to bring themselves together as a group to form an all sports conference.

The "mid majors" leeching off the football schools???

The fact is that it was the other way around. The basketball schools weren't asking to join a football conference. The football schools were asking to join them.

When the football schools finally were included for all sports, it coincided with a lull in Big East success at the Final Four level. So, did those "majors" step up and take advantage of the opportunity to assert themselves in basketball?

Nope.

In the decade after the football schools joined for all sports, the only football schools having major basketball success was Syracuse, an original Big East member, getting to the Final Four in 1996 & winning a NC in 2003. It was another original member, UConn who reestablished the league's credibility, winning 2 NC's in 1999 & 2004 before they even joined for football and while they still had no "major" status in that sport.

During the lull in Big East Final fours in the '90's, it was the basketball schools who were still getting to Elite 8's, not the "major" football schools. It was basketball schools UConn (1990, 1995, & 1998), St. John's (1991 & 1999), Seton Hall (1991), Georgetown (1996), & Providence (1997) who were getting to the Elite 8 level to keep the conference relevant. Except for Syracuse's trip to the Final Four in 1996, the only other football school to get to an Elite 8 in the 1990's was another original Big East member, BC, who got to the Elite 8 in 1994. Pitt, Miami, West Virginia, Rutgers, Virginia Tech, none of them stepped up and took it to the Elite 8 until West Virginia did in 2005, by which time the Big East reputation was back on solid footing, thanks to UConn & Syracuse with the support of all those basketball schools in the '90's.

To this day, the only football school added to the Big East prior to the ACC raid besides West Virginia to even make it to an Elite 8 has been Pitt (2009). Miami, Rutgers, and Virginia Tech have all failed to develop their programs to that level. And even West Virginia and Pitt have been johnny-come-latelies.

In contrast, every one of the original basketball-onlies has not only made it to the Elite 8 multiple times, they've all made it to a Final Four and 3 of them have won a national championship. The idea that the basketball schools are mid majors who were "leaching" on the major power football schools in the 1990's or beyond is the most bizarre reading of history imaginable.

Agreed that the Dave Gavitt Big East of the 80s built a brand name, a brand name that by the 90s was already waning and by the end of the 90s was at best the fourth rated league in terms of basketball.

None of which matters to a VT fan since VT made it's mark in the Big East football league alone which was separate from the Big East. And the TV contract that the Big East feasted on in the 90s when they were spiralling downward in reputation as a basketball league was the one negotiated on by the football schools, not Mike Tranghese.

And WVU and Rutgers being in the league were the result of that contract since the football schools who had negotiated that contract were going to split back then and add Louisville and Cincy and Tranghese worked out that compromise that resulted in the league staying together but leaving VT swinging in the breeze.

And that compromise, designed to help the basketball schools in The BEast keep their place in the college sports hierarchy (for another decade or so), ultimately resulted in the demise of the conference, and the destruction of most significant eastern football rivalries. Had the football schools gone ahead and split away, we'd probably all still be playing together...

All of that "Blame Tranghese" stuff doesn't explain why the football schools couldn't come together to form their own all sports league when they had the chance. They didn't do it in the early '80's when Paterno tried to put something together. They didn't do it in the early '90's when circumstances made it patently obvious that they needed a league for football. They didn't do it in the aftermath of the ACC raid when it was ripe for the picking. Had they broken away as they were discussing, they may well have kept BC. And they didn't do it after 2010 when they had the "Get out of jail free" card.

Four different opportunities in 30 years and there was always some excuse Were they all Tranghese's fault?

But all of them leaped at the first opportunity to join some other group. Funny thing is that in retrospect it seems that the Catholic schools were more the glue holding them together than the problem.

Why is it that they could never bring themselves to trust each other enough to put their collective fate in each others' hands and pull the trigger on a decision to break away and form their own league?

(05-27-2013 07:45 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  All of that "Blame Tranghese" stuff doesn't explain why the football schools couldn't come together to form their own all sports league when they had the chance. They didn't do it in the early '80's when Paterno tried to put something together. They didn't do it in the early '90's when circumstances made it patently obvious that they needed a league for football. They didn't do it in the aftermath of the ACC raid when it was ripe for the picking. Had they broken away as they were discussing, they may well have kept BC. And they didn't do it after 2010 when they had the "Get out of jail free" card.

Four different opportunities in 30 years and there was always some excuse Were they all Tranghese's fault?

But all of them leaped at the first opportunity to join some other group. Funny thing is that in retrospect it seems that the Catholic schools were more the glue holding them together than the problem.

Why is it that they could never bring themselves to trust each other enough to put their collective fate in each others' hands and pull the trigger on a decision to break away and form their own league?

EXACTLY!!!!!

All that went on and the BBall schools are still sticking together. Look at what happened when one of us trusted the FB schools. UConn is in no mans land right now. If they knew then what they know now they most likely don't upgrade their FB.

(05-27-2013 05:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  You don't even know what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying that even if they split off they still would have left when approached by other leagues. There was zero loyalty within that group.

None of the schools had any loyalty to one another? They wouldn't have any desire to join the ACC if the money wasn't better. If all The BEast football schools had split away and invited Louisville and Cincinnati, would the ACC's money have been better? That's debatable, and with the ACC's performance in BCS bowls I doubt they'd have been able to persuade anyone to make the jump over...

(05-27-2013 04:36 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:15 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 03:03 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Without VT's five appearances then other ACC teams would have went in their place those years. I'm not sure what your point is with that.

Without VT the ACC would have had to send an inferior team. It would have been like Pitt's 2005 BCS bowl game against Utah. The ACC would most likely have gone 0-5, instead of VT's 1-4...

It might also have been the ACC that lost the automatic tie-in to the Orange Bowl, instead of The BEast...

All of that is extremely unlikely. The ACC would have done fine sending two FSU teams and two Matt Ryan Boston College teams in the Hokies place. It would not have been hard to improve upon VT's 1-4 record.

But BC wouldn't have been an ACC school if all The BEast football schools had split away to form their own all sports conference. You forgot that minor detail. All the ACC would have had was FSU, with Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Clemson serving as a BCS whipping boy for a season each...

So I doubt the ACC would have improved on VT's record in the BCS with inferior teams. And with all the good football teams remaining in The BEast, would the ACC even manage to remain as good as they did? Recruits wouldn't have found the ACC quite so attractive without the new additions. So it's debatable as to whether they'd ever be able to overtake The BEast.

Also, if The BEast football schools had formed their own conference, would the ACC even be able to keep their 2 best football schools? I kind of doubt it. IMO FSU and Clemson would both have grown tired of remaining in a 2nd rate football conference, causing the programs that made the majority of their money continue to deteriorate. They'd end up jumping to the better football conference, which would have been The BEast...

Wake more than held it's own in our BCS game. Certainly didn't fare any worse than VT did their games. They just lucked up and drew a weaker opponent.

As for the rest of it, if it makes you feel better to believe such nonsense then there's not much reason to argue about it.

(05-27-2013 01:32 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I just have a hard time that folks seeing that the original CUSA line up as a weak basketball conference. With a merged Metro and Great midwest conferences it had Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Marquette, Depaul as well as Houston and UAB, that all had recent success then, on a national ranked scene. Only the Name CUSA was seemed weak even to conference members. The football was developing as the league grew with TCU coming in.CUSA was a big time player in those days for Basketball. Long way from the current lineup that people see.Depaul was the only school that had a serious drop off after entering the Big East.

Let's forget about what they did before they came together and simply look at what they did in the decade that the original group was together as CUSA.

In their decade (1995-2005), CUSA put 2 teams in the Final Four (Marquette '03 and Louisville '05) and 2 others in the Elite 8 (Cincinnati '96 and Louisville '97). They won no national championships and didn't put anyone in the championship game as runner up. I'm sorry, but that is not a power conference.

Based on past records, the conference may have seemed like a good idea, but the reality of Conference USA was nothing special. Good conference but not great.

(05-27-2013 08:22 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 01:32 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I just have a hard time that folks seeing that the original CUSA line up as a weak basketball conference. With a merged Metro and Great midwest conferences it had Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Marquette, Depaul as well as Houston and UAB, that all had recent success then, on a national ranked scene. Only the Name CUSA was seemed weak even to conference members. The football was developing as the league grew with TCU coming in.CUSA was a big time player in those days for Basketball. Long way from the current lineup that people see.Depaul was the only school that had a serious drop off after entering the Big East.

Let's forget about what they did before they came together and simply look at what they did in the decade that the original group was together as CUSA.

In their decade (1995-2005), CUSA put 2 teams in the Final Four (Marquette '03 and Louisville '05) and 2 others in the Elite 8 (Cincinnati '96 and Louisville '97). They won no national championships and didn't put anyone in the championship game as runner up. I'm sorry, but that is not a power conference.

Based on past records, the conference may have seemed like a good idea, but the reality of Conference USA was nothing special. Good conference but not great.

Thats all fine, but the Current AAC lineup has a Much better chance of reaching the final Four than the Current Big East lineup. The past Big East is No more. I respect that and UConn for what They were to the Big East. I do not agree with NJ that UConn made a mistake in backing Football. You Guys came a long way in short order and will continue to grow. any way I'm done with this post and the Big East will keep MSG as They own the contract and it's St. Johns floor for the event.

(05-27-2013 09:17 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 08:22 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 01:32 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I just have a hard time that folks seeing that the original CUSA line up as a weak basketball conference. With a merged Metro and Great midwest conferences it had Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Marquette, Depaul as well as Houston and UAB, that all had recent success then, on a national ranked scene. Only the Name CUSA was seemed weak even to conference members. The football was developing as the league grew with TCU coming in.CUSA was a big time player in those days for Basketball. Long way from the current lineup that people see.Depaul was the only school that had a serious drop off after entering the Big East.

Let's forget about what they did before they came together and simply look at what they did in the decade that the original group was together as CUSA.

In their decade (1995-2005), CUSA put 2 teams in the Final Four (Marquette '03 and Louisville '05) and 2 others in the Elite 8 (Cincinnati '96 and Louisville '97). They won no national championships and didn't put anyone in the championship game as runner up. I'm sorry, but that is not a power conference.

Based on past records, the conference may have seemed like a good idea, but the reality of Conference USA was nothing special. Good conference but not great.

Thats all fine, but the Current AAC lineup has a Much better chance of reaching the final Four than the Current Big East lineup. The past Big East is No more. I respect that and UConn for what They were to the Big East. I do not agree with NJ that UConn made a mistake in backing Football. You Guys came a long way in short order and will continue to grow. any way I'm done with this post and the Big East will keep MSG as They own the contract and it's St. Johns floor for the event.

How does the current AAC lineup have a better chance of reaching the Final Four???

UConn's the only AAC school that's gotten to the Final Four by legitimate means in the last 20 years.

In that same period, Big East members Butler, Villanova, Georgetown, and Marquette have all gotten there.

As for near misses, AAC schools Memphis, Temple, and Cincinnati in addition to UOnn have all gotten to the Elite 8 in that same time frame.

From the Big East, in addition to the 4 above, Xavier, St. John's, and Providence have all been to thenElite 8 in that same time.

So, Big East 4:1 advantage in FF schools and 7:4 in E8 schools. I'll take the Big East with those odds any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

(05-27-2013 08:22 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:30 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:05 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  I said it's what separated VT from ECU. They were very similar programs in the 80's.

Except VT was not in the BE in the 90's. We went to the National Championship game in 1999

Uhh . . .

You want to try that one again? The Virginia Tech team that went to the NC game and lost in 1999 went to that game after winning the Big East.

Sounds like your typical 20 something idiot VT fan that thinks they've always been a football power. VT was in the Big east thoughout almost ALL of the 1990's. In this case NJRedman is spot on, ECU and VT were virtually identical programs prior to 1990.

(05-27-2013 08:22 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:30 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:05 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  I said it's what separated VT from ECU. They were very similar programs in the 80's.

Except VT was not in the BE in the 90's. We went to the National Championship game in 1999

Uhh . . .

You want to try that one again? The Virginia Tech team that went to the NC game and lost in 1999 went to that game after winning the Big East.

Being in the BE for football had no association with the Catholic 7.

(05-27-2013 09:58 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:26 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:23 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Not really, we found the league that gave VT relevance. The Big East wasn't the Metro, it was a nationally known name and just came off an amazing decade for the league. That gave them the edge on a program like ECU.

Now for Louisville, being a member of the Big East gave them street cred in the BBall world. CUSA was a good league in the day but it wasn't considered on the level of the ACC, B1G, Pac or Big East. The ACC wouldn't have taken UofL fro CUSA but taking them from the Big East was okay to them. Not saying any one school did that for them, but the collective Big East did. Thats why I think it's funny that now all of a sudden 7 of those schools are "mid-majors".

They were always mid-majors clinging like leeches to the major sports programs in their conference. That's the way I viewed them in the 90's, the 2000's, and today. I expect a huge drop from those schools now that they no longer have major college programs to hold them up.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha without us you guys would be in CUSA/AAC right now. You think Vick or many of the other recruits you got over the years would have gone to VT if we didn't pick your sorry butts?

You didn't chose us. None of the Catholic 7 chose us. We were chosen by the BE football schools. VT owes nothing to the Catholic 7.

(05-27-2013 11:04 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 08:22 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:30 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:05 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  I said it's what separated VT from ECU. They were very similar programs in the 80's.

Except VT was not in the BE in the 90's. We went to the National Championship game in 1999

Uhh . . .

You want to try that one again? The Virginia Tech team that went to the NC game and lost in 1999 went to that game after winning the Big East.

Sounds like your typical 20 something idiot VT fan that thinks they've always been a football power. VT was in the Big east throughout almost ALL of the 1990's. In this case NJRedman is spot on, ECU and VT were virtually identical programs prior to 1990.

Except this entire discussion is about VT being lifted up by the Catholic 7. VT owes them nothing. For the entire 90's we weren't in the BE for basketball. BE football only.

My first year was 91 and I'm very familiar with how similar ECU and the Hokies were up until then but what happened prior to VT joining the BE football conference has nothing to do with this conversation.

VT did gain ground in the BE but that was in-spite of the Catholic 7 not because of them.

Melky, Louisville's in the Current AAC lineup!

(05-27-2013 07:01 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 04:23 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  You don't even know what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying that even if they split off they still would have left when approached by other leagues. There was zero loyalty within that group.

So, if the endgame for football was 14 and no higher, and the ACC had offered ND, Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's spots in the conference instead of simply ND, are you saying Georgetown, Villanova, and St. John's would have refused out of loyalty to Providence and Seton Hall?

Cheers,
Neil

Swing and a miss.

The FB schools had zero loyalty to each other and to suggest that if the FB schools split away from the BBall schools in the 90's and added Cincy and UofL they would all still be together today is just silly. Miami was looking out for Miami and BC was looking out for BC and Cuse was looking out for Cuse and thats the truth. Your question has ZERO BEARING on the conversation at hand.

Of course it has a bearing on the conversation. You said that the football schools had no loyalty to one another simply because they looked out for number one when better offers came along.

I posed a scenario question to you that you refused to answer since you know that had a better offer come along for the likes of St. John's, Georgetown, and Villanova, they'd have looked out for themselves as well and not given a crap about Providence, Seton Hall, or each other.

Your dodge of the question is a fail.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-27-2013 08:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 07:45 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  All of that "Blame Tranghese" stuff doesn't explain why the football schools couldn't come together to form their own all sports league when they had the chance. They didn't do it in the early '80's when Paterno tried to put something together. They didn't do it in the early '90's when circumstances made it patently obvious that they needed a league for football. They didn't do it in the aftermath of the ACC raid when it was ripe for the picking. Had they broken away as they were discussing, they may well have kept BC. And they didn't do it after 2010 when they had the "Get out of jail free" card.

Four different opportunities in 30 years and there was always some excuse Were they all Tranghese's fault?

But all of them leaped at the first opportunity to join some other group. Funny thing is that in retrospect it seems that the Catholic schools were more the glue holding them together than the problem.

Why is it that they could never bring themselves to trust each other enough to put their collective fate in each others' hands and pull the trigger on a decision to break away and form their own league?

EXACTLY!!!!!

All that went on and the BBall schools are still sticking together. Look at what happened when one of us trusted the FB schools. UConn is in no mans land right now. If they knew then what they know now they most likely don't upgrade their FB.

The BB schools haven't had any better offers. Look at the teams the nnnBE will be adding. Each one of them is bailing their current situation because they have a better offer. Heck, Butler is bailing for a second time in three years. If the ACC offers any one of or all three of St. John's, Georgetown, and Villanova tomorrow, they are gone.

There isn't even a question about it.

What about this do you fail to grasp?

Cheers,
Neil

BOING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(05-28-2013 01:44 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-27-2013 09:58 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 10:26 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:23 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Not really, we found the league that gave VT relevance. The Big East wasn't the Metro, it was a nationally known name and just came off an amazing decade for the league. That gave them the edge on a program like ECU.

Now for Louisville, being a member of the Big East gave them street cred in the BBall world. CUSA was a good league in the day but it wasn't considered on the level of the ACC, B1G, Pac or Big East. The ACC wouldn't have taken UofL fro CUSA but taking them from the Big East was okay to them. Not saying any one school did that for them, but the collective Big East did. Thats why I think it's funny that now all of a sudden 7 of those schools are "mid-majors".

They were always mid-majors clinging like leeches to the major sports programs in their conference. That's the way I viewed them in the 90's, the 2000's, and today. I expect a huge drop from those schools now that they no longer have major college programs to hold them up.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha without us you guys would be in CUSA/AAC right now. You think Vick or many of the other recruits you got over the years would have gone to VT if we didn't pick your sorry butts?

You didn't chose us. None of the Catholic 7 chose us. We were chosen by the BE football schools. VT owes nothing to the Catholic 7.

Virginia Tech was nominated as a potential football choice by WVU (as was ECU, who was denied when the decision was made to stick with 8 football schools, which was a huge mistake IMO), and to thank the Mountaineers the hokies want nothing to do with the school most responsible for them getting the platform for their success...