(09-24-2013 01:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:42 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  heres why i say the ACC doesnt like the BE

1. they have former BE schools. ive heard the argument that theres no beef between the former & the current BE schools.....i totally disagree with that.

the BE had its issues. there was always a mentality that the BB schools held the FB schools back, or kept the BE from forming into a better FB conference. then theres the whole "special treatment" that certain schools got. and those issues go all the way back to the BE rejecting psu, not closing the outlier gap with miami, the conf HQ being in provy, & provy having every conference commish. the BE had some great FB programs, a lot of which tanked after the formation of the BE. so yeah i dont think its unreasonable to suggest that there is some resentment among former BE schools now with the ACC.

2. the ACC has always been the top BB league. and for a while the BE threatened that and was as good. they were like the two biggest kids on the block. im sure the ACC hated the BE for not only dethroning them but for promoting such a different style of BB with their rougher style of play. the BE was a new league which gave birth to 3 new power programs in SU, uconn, & gtown. i dont see this as the ACC hating on the BE because they were good, but because of the way they rose to power and that they became a conference of equal strength. its kind of like why oregon gets so much hate in the football world.

3. the MSG tourny- the AAC has it....the ACC wants it

nuff said????

The ACC does not care about the Big East. If they wanted to destroy it they could have invited Gtown when they were asking for an invite.

no.....the ACC doesnt want to destroy the BE

the ACC only poached 7 BE schools....gimmie a break

You mistake the ACC's moved as being hostile towards the Big East rather than just good for the ACC. The did not poach those schools to hurt the Big East, they did it to make the ACC better.

It was never about hating the C7 or Big East.

(09-24-2013 01:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  Only 4 members of the AAC ever played with the Big East schools. And Temple only joined when they were leaving and played football with the schools who joined the ACC, Big 12 and Big 10.

Temple was never even really with them, since in both of their affiliations with the Big East, they were football only members. They are probably the only ones with a beef with the Big East teams (Nova) and even then, they get past their issues to be invited and be in the conference with Nova, before the split.

Here is the other thing to consider: had the C7/Big East split one year earlier, say after Pitt, Syracuse, and ND left, the AAC teams now might not have a BCS bid this year, or the $22 million that comes with it. That is $22 million, plus the $80 million or so in exit fees, etc, given the remaining schools to start a new league.

Yup they really hate them for that.

(09-24-2013 01:53 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:42 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  heres why i say the ACC doesnt like the BE

1. they have former BE schools. ive heard the argument that theres no beef between the former & the current BE schools.....i totally disagree with that.

the BE had its issues. there was always a mentality that the BB schools held the FB schools back, or kept the BE from forming into a better FB conference. then theres the whole "special treatment" that certain schools got. and those issues go all the way back to the BE rejecting psu, not closing the outlier gap with miami, the conf HQ being in provy, & provy having every conference commish. the BE had some great FB programs, a lot of which tanked after the formation of the BE. so yeah i dont think its unreasonable to suggest that there is some resentment among former BE schools now with the ACC.

2. the ACC has always been the top BB league. and for a while the BE threatened that and was as good. they were like the two biggest kids on the block. im sure the ACC hated the BE for not only dethroning them but for promoting such a different style of BB with their rougher style of play. the BE was a new league which gave birth to 3 new power programs in SU, uconn, & gtown. i dont see this as the ACC hating on the BE because they were good, but because of the way they rose to power and that they became a conference of equal strength. its kind of like why oregon gets so much hate in the football world.

3. the MSG tourny- the AAC has it....the ACC wants it

nuff said????

The ACC does not care about the Big East. If they wanted to destroy it they could have invited Gtown when they were asking for an invite.

no.....the ACC doesnt want to destroy the BE

the ACC only poached 7 BE schools....gimmie a break

You mistake the ACC's moved as being hostile towards the Big East rather than just good for the ACC. The did not poach those schools to hurt the Big East, they did it to make the ACC better.

It was never about hating the C7 or Big East.

they never poached because they hate the BE, but if you look at some of those BE schools, i dont think its unreasonable to say that they had their personal grudges.

the BE did threaten the ACC's bb dominance, so i think its pretty safe to say that there is some resentment there

(09-24-2013 01:53 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  Only 4 members of the AAC ever played with the Big East schools. And Temple only joined when they were leaving and played football with the schools who joined the ACC, Big 12 and Big 10.

Temple was never even really with them, since in both of their affiliations with the Big East, they were football only members. They are probably the only ones with a beef with the Big East teams (Nova) and even then, they get past their issues to be invited and be in the conference with Nova, before the split.

Here is the other thing to consider: had the C7/Big East split one year earlier, say after Pitt, Syracuse, and ND left, the AAC teams now might not have a BCS bid this year, or the $22 million that comes with it. That is $22 million, plus the $80 million or so in exit fees, etc, given the remaining schools to start a new league.

Yup they really hate them for that.

The BCS bid was never going to be in jeopardy. The AAC is organizationally the old Big East. If they had tried to take it away legally the AAC would have challenged and won. Esp with losing only 2 schools for this season.

(09-24-2013 02:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:53 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  Only 4 members of the AAC ever played with the Big East schools. And Temple only joined when they were leaving and played football with the schools who joined the ACC, Big 12 and Big 10.

Temple was never even really with them, since in both of their affiliations with the Big East, they were football only members. They are probably the only ones with a beef with the Big East teams (Nova) and even then, they get past their issues to be invited and be in the conference with Nova, before the split.

Here is the other thing to consider: had the C7/Big East split one year earlier, say after Pitt, Syracuse, and ND left, the AAC teams now might not have a BCS bid this year, or the $22 million that comes with it. That is $22 million, plus the $80 million or so in exit fees, etc, given the remaining schools to start a new league.

Yup they really hate them for that.

The BCS bid was never going to be in jeopardy. The AAC is organizationally the old Big East. If they had tried to take it away legally the AAC would have challenged and won. Esp with losing only 2 schools for this season.

I generally agree, but the BCS contract may have specific provisions for change of membership over a certain threshold.

(09-24-2013 02:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The BCS bid was never going to be in jeopardy. The AAC is organizationally the old Big East. If they had tried to take it away legally the AAC would have challenged and won. Esp with losing only 2 schools for this season.

That is true. But what I was referring to was if they had left at that time, left when those three split, and the football league just fell apart, meaning instead of 8 teams joining 5 and later 3, the three had to join another league and the BCS bid was gone as the league was gone. That was what I was referring to.

(09-24-2013 02:44 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 02:06 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The BCS bid was never going to be in jeopardy. The AAC is organizationally the old Big East. If they had tried to take it away legally the AAC would have challenged and won. Esp with losing only 2 schools for this season.

That is true. But what I was referring to was if they had left at that time, left when those three split, and the football league just fell apart, meaning instead of 8 teams joining 5 and later 3, the three had to join another league and the BCS bid was gone as the league was gone. That was what I was referring to.

If the split had taken place before last year, the only schools gone would have been Syracuse and Pittsburgh and West Virginia. You would have just seen then the CUSA schools move over sooner to join the other 5. Rutgers and Louisville would have still been part of the conference at that point.

Unless of course UAB pulled a Memphis...

But that is not what I am talking about. What I am saying is at that point, why would those other teams leave where they were? They may not have. Remember some were highly upset when the C7 left (whci is ironic since according to fans they were leaches anyway and the FB teams should have split a long time ago). anyway what I am saying is if they had left earlier, like as soon as those teams were gone, Boise and Navy likely never accept bids, and then we don't know if SMU, Houston, and UCF do (the others were invited later). That was what I was getting at. You just never know.

IMO if you aren't playing football at the highest level, you aren't worthy to be in D4, no matter how good your basketball is. The top division should be schools who play ALL their sports at the highest level. If you aren't doing that, you aren't worthy...

Why create a new classification, if not to exclude those who don't meet ALL the qualifications? And playing the biggest money sport at the highest level is of primary consideration...

Fanbase size should be part of it too. If you can't sustain an average attendance in football at whatever level they decide to set (used to be 30K - 40 years ago), then you aren't eligible either...

(09-24-2013 03:06 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Unless of course UAB pulled a Memphis...

But that is not what I am talking about. What I am saying is at that point, why would those other teams leave where they were? They may not have. Remember some were highly upset when the C7 left (whci is ironic since according to fans they were leaches anyway and the FB teams should have split a long time ago). anyway what I am saying is if they had left earlier, like as soon as those teams were gone, Boise and Navy likely never accept bids, and then we don't know if SMU, Houston, and UCF do (the others were invited later). That was what I was getting at. You just never know.

A league with Rutgers, Cincy, USF, UConn, and Louisville is still a massive upgrade from what they had in CUSA. (not to mention Temple). They would have gotten 2 from Memphis, Tulane, Houston, UCF, ECU to jump asap with no reservations.

I'm just saying, they did not all feel that way, with the exit fees and such, after the C7, Boise, and SDSU left (now to be fair that was after UofL and Rutgers were gone too). All I am saying, and that was a throw away lien that is way off topic here, was that if those teams hated the Big East teams so much, they would not have been so upset when they left. when someone you detest leaves, you are happy. You don't try to backchannel and reconcile.

(09-24-2013 03:51 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  I'm just saying, they did not all feel that way, with the exit fees and such, after the C7, Boise, and SDSU left (now to be fair that was after UofL and Rutgers were gone too). All I am saying, and that was a throw away lien that is way off topic here, was that if those teams hated the Big East teams so much, they would not have been so upset when they left. when someone you detest leaves, you are happy. You don't try to backchannel and reconcile.

yes that reminds me.....i wouldnt be surprised if even the MWC has it out for the BE as well

(09-24-2013 09:56 AM)SouthPhillyFall Wrote:  There is a lot of bad blood between the American and BE administrations from as much as we can tell. I wouldn't be surprised if the American tried to use their voting (especially if it's weighted like has been contemplated) to create parameters that are difficult for the BE to meet for the new division.

As a Temple fan, as horrible as it is, giving Villanova a taste of their own medicine would make me smile. They kept Temple out of the Big East as long as they could, then led the nBE split when they had their chance.

uh where did you come up with this idea?
if there is so much bad blood, why are uconn,cincy,louisville,rutgers and temple associate members of the BE? Why is Villanova an associate member of the American?
Villanova didnt single handidly keep temple out of the BE. They had nothing to do with temple fb being booted either

(09-24-2013 07:34 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 09:56 AM)SouthPhillyFall Wrote:  There is a lot of bad blood between the American and BE administrations from as much as we can tell. I wouldn't be surprised if the American tried to use their voting (especially if it's weighted like has been contemplated) to create parameters that are difficult for the BE to meet for the new division.

As a Temple fan, as horrible as it is, giving Villanova a taste of their own medicine would make me smile. They kept Temple out of the Big East as long as they could, then led the nBE split when they had their chance.

uh where did you come up with this idea?
if there is so much bad blood, why are uconn,cincy,louisville,rutgers and temple associate members of the BE? Why is Villanova an associate member of the American?
Villanova didnt single handidly keep temple out of the BE. They had nothing to do with temple fb being booted either

I doubt the ACC, B10, SEC, P12, and B12, care less what the American Conference thinks of the new Big East and can't see why anyone would think that AAC votes would really matter against the 65 weighted votes of the B-5.

Moreover, given the extreme instability of the old Big East from 79-13 I don't see how anyone can say there is bad blood against anything that is so amorphous. IIRC, UConn is the only original Big East school to not end up in a major conference or the New Big East and Temple is the only school from the class that came into the BE in 1991 not to make it into a major conference.

Given that the old BE voted Temple out for poor football, I don't see the issue. As to UConn, they were the only original BE school not to play FBS football, that then decided to move up and attempt to play FBS football and have played at that level on about 15 years or so.

Bad blood seems to make no sense because only UConn has any room for a complaint. Who else in the AAC has any legitimate complaint? And from it's inception, UConn was the odd duck - the only public school.

(09-24-2013 01:42 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 01:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  heres why i say the ACC doesnt like the BE

1. they have former BE schools. ive heard the argument that theres no beef between the former & the current BE schools.....i totally disagree with that.

the BE had its issues. there was always a mentality that the BB schools held the FB schools back, or kept the BE from forming into a better FB conference. then theres the whole "special treatment" that certain schools got. and those issues go all the way back to the BE rejecting psu, not closing the outlier gap with miami, the conf HQ being in provy, & provy having every conference commish. the BE had some great FB programs, a lot of which tanked after the formation of the BE. so yeah i dont think its unreasonable to suggest that there is some resentment among former BE schools now with the ACC.

2. the ACC has always been the top BB league. and for a while the BE threatened that and was as good. they were like the two biggest kids on the block. im sure the ACC hated the BE for not only dethroning them but for promoting such a different style of BB with their rougher style of play. the BE was a new league which gave birth to 3 new power programs in SU, uconn, & gtown. i dont see this as the ACC hating on the BE because they were good, but because of the way they rose to power and that they became a conference of equal strength. its kind of like why oregon gets so much hate in the football world.

3. the MSG tourny- the AAC has it....the ACC wants it

nuff said????

The ACC does not care about the Big East. If they wanted to destroy it they could have invited Gtown when they were asking for an invite.

Link or it didn't happen.

(09-24-2013 02:01 PM)john01992 Wrote:  they never poached because they hate the BE, but if you look at some of those BE schools, i dont think its unreasonable to say that they had their personal grudges.

Saying the big east hates the ACC does not mean the ACC hates the big east. The mugger is usually indifferent to the victim when all is said and done, the victim will be pissed forever.

Quote:the BE did threaten the ACC's bb dominance, so i think its pretty safe to say that there is some resentment there

I don't think the fact the BE challenged 5 years ago id causing any real resentment. The ACC saw a threat and dealt with it why would they resent the C7 or any of the BE schools now?

(09-24-2013 09:34 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 02:01 PM)john01992 Wrote:  they never poached because they hate the BE, but if you look at some of those BE schools, i dont think its unreasonable to say that they had their personal grudges.

Saying the big east hates the ACC does not mean the ACC hates the big east. The mugger is usually indifferent to the victim when all is said and done, the victim will be pissed forever.

Quote:the BE did threaten the ACC's bb dominance, so i think its pretty safe to say that there is some resentment there

I don't think the fact the BE challenged 5 years ago id causing any real resentment. The ACC saw a threat and dealt with it why would they resent the C7 or any of the BE schools now?

I also would say that the Big East was better than the ACC for the last ten years. Saying the ACC was better is ludicrous. The ACC was a two team league where as the Big East had a stable of top tier teams.

the Big East 2006-2013 was no doubt better than the ACC. I mean look at the NCAA units- the Big East was something like 30 units better than the ACC- that's an average of 5 more NCAA games every year over 6 years. That's amazing. A year where 11 teams made the tourney.

Yes, top to bottom the Beast was the Premier Basketball league the last 10 years. Poor Depaul would have been a major player in most other conferences.

(09-24-2013 09:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Would it matter? It sounds like the NCAA tourney as well as all other olympic sports championships would stay the same. Only football changes. There might be a slight recruiting advantage for D4----but how many basketball kids will opt for Arky State over Georgetown because of $2,000?

That would be exactly the only point on which it would matter, but it seems highly likely that the new division will include football and basketball as required sports, in the same way that basketball is a required sport for all of today's Div1.

For a lot of the New Big East (maybe all, I just don't have a detailed knowledge of each school in the conference), when you look at the tuition covered by a full ride scholarship, that's still pretty impressive. Georgetown is just under $1000 per credit hour, or $30,000+ for a full time load for a year. And that's just tuition ~ fees and books would push that up further.