(04-16-2018 09:50 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  Hardaway at Memphis will be interesting to watch. The Pres and BOD were upfront about it being a financial decision. Tubby Smith was a bad fit, but nobody saw the $ drain it would create. $4.7m loss is critical when 30% of the budget is based on tix sales and donations. A change needed to be made and Penny has brought in millions in revenue and a top 30 class within 3 weeks. Nike will supposedly be on board in a bigger way too. On court performance remains to be seen, but the program has been taken off life support and moved from ICU.

There's no question that hiring a Memphis hero in Penny has given a huge shot of adrenaline (and cash) into a floundering program, and that itself is important. But results on the court will be the factor that determines if it's just a shot of NOS or something that is sustainable.

We're in the same position with Ewing. I'm not optimistic, but a lot of Hoyas are, and I hope they are correct.

I have to believe that Omer Yurtseven's decision to transfer from NC State to Georgetown is a direct result of the Hoyas' decision to hire Ewing.

(04-16-2018 11:28 AM)ken d Wrote:  I have to believe that Omer Yurtseven's decision to transfer from NC State to Georgetown is a direct result of the Hoyas' decision to hire Ewing.

He will be Govan's replacement. There is a (small) chance he becomes eligible next season with the new academic transfer exception potentially being passed. Georgetown also just picked up another top-100 recruit today in James Akinjo (former UConn recruit). Ewing has some very strong momentum heading into next year.

(04-13-2018 01:48 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  He's probably too young to remember that before the Big East gifted UConn with a golden ticket to that league nobody knew that UConn played basketball (or anything else) either. And he's probably afraid that now that they are out of the Big East, it won't be long before the next generation of fans won't know that they do now.

I love your analysis of me based on me merely pointing out that Georgetown choked to Radford. Anyway, I am not young, so let us look at the facts:

1) UConn was a founding member of the Big East. Nobody "gifted UConn with a golden ticket"
2) The Big East was really good in the 80's with solid seasons from most members (notably Georgetown's championship in 1984 and Villanova's in 1985). However, the Big East wasn't TRULY great until UConn came along in the 90's and started winning like crazy in the age of ESPN and national coverage. That is what earned the league its long-term respect
3) The only school to win multiple national championships in the old Big East was UConn (Villanova's last two are in a league "called" the Big East, but the AAC is actually the old Big East with a new name)
4) Since we are out of the old Big East, I am worried that the next generation of fans will forget our past. However, the new Big East wouldn't guarantee anything. Look at Georgetown - they are also now a shell of their former selves.

1. Is most definitely true.

3. Is basically true, but I wouldn't marginalize Nova's accomplishment either in the current Big East to make it.

4. Is a legitimate concern. But the real head scratcher is...

2. Huh? The very early 90s Big East was living off its amazing run in the 80s, which included two NCs and saw 6 different programs make it to 8 Final Fours. By 93 the league's reputation started to go downhill with the loss of two of the five great coaches of the league (Carneseca and Massimino), Syracuse going on a two year probation, and by mid-90s the additions of WVU, Rutgers, and ND all bad at basketball at that time weighing the league down even more. And this was a tailspin that lasted into the mid-00s.

I give UConn props (and SU to a lesser extent) for it keeping the league in the conversation nationally, but it was during this period of time that the Big East (in all its renditions, including the current one) was at its lowest ebb, which is not what you describe above.

The league regained its prominence of the 80s in the 2006-2013 period which UConn also played a significant role in during that frame, as did Nova, Georgetown, and Pitt in the early part of that phase while Louisville, SU, Marquette, and WVU joined in on the fun during the latter part.

Cheers,
Neil

(04-13-2018 01:53 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:08 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-11-2018 10:41 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  My point is the previous poster trying to disparage ECU by making the joke that we don't sponsor basketball. Did you read the thread?

He's probably too young to remember that before the Big East gifted UConn with a golden ticket to that league nobody knew that UConn played basketball (or anything else) either. And he's probably afraid that now that they are out of the Big East, it won't be long before the next generation of fans won't know that they do now.

I grew up watching Georgetown vs St Johns Big East games before there was a ton of college basketball on tv...it was very rare in the early 80's unlike today with cable tv. Younger fans simply don't understand how college sports was before ESPN took over.
I first heard of UCONN in the 90's when Iowa beat them in a Hawaii tournament and afterwards people were telling us that Iowa pulled a huge upset!! We were all saying, "Who's UCONN?" Not derisive. We honestly didn't know who they were.

If you think hoops in the early 80's was rare on TV, imagine what it was like in the 50's and 60's when I first started following the sport. Before the classic UCLA-Houston game in the Astrodome (I think around 1968) what there was was very local in scope. Love 'em or hate 'em, ESPN changed sports in a cosmic way.

I grew up without any college allegiances, since there really wasn't much in the way of big time sports in or near New Jersey. If you wanted to find the score of a UConn game in the papers (which was about the only way to find it) you had to look really hard. If the NY Times had it, it was given about the same coverage as the Slippery Rock game. No joke - for some unknown reason Slippery Rock had almost a cult like following in the area.

We lived in a different world then.

Fun fact: ESPN was actually originally created to cover the New England Whalers, Bristol Red Sox, and UConn Huskies. It was meant to be a Connecticut cable sports channel and it sort of exploded into something that nobody ever could have imagined at that time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ESPN#Origins

So why was one of it's first telecasts a soccer match between App State and Western Carolina from Boone in September of 1979?

Sent from my XT1635-01 using CSNbbs mobile app

(04-16-2018 01:58 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:48 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  He's probably too young to remember that before the Big East gifted UConn with a golden ticket to that league nobody knew that UConn played basketball (or anything else) either. And he's probably afraid that now that they are out of the Big East, it won't be long before the next generation of fans won't know that they do now.

I love your analysis of me based on me merely pointing out that Georgetown choked to Radford. Anyway, I am not young, so let us look at the facts:

1) UConn was a founding member of the Big East. Nobody "gifted UConn with a golden ticket"
2) The Big East was really good in the 80's with solid seasons from most members (notably Georgetown's championship in 1984 and Villanova's in 1985). However, the Big East wasn't TRULY great until UConn came along in the 90's and started winning like crazy in the age of ESPN and national coverage. That is what earned the league its long-term respect
3) The only school to win multiple national championships in the old Big East was UConn (Villanova's last two are in a league "called" the Big East, but the AAC is actually the old Big East with a new name)
4) Since we are out of the old Big East, I am worried that the next generation of fans will forget our past. However, the new Big East wouldn't guarantee anything. Look at Georgetown - they are also now a shell of their former selves.

1. Is most definitely true.

3. Is basically true, but I wouldn't marginalize Nova's accomplishment either in the current Big East to make it.

4. Is a legitimate concern. But the real head scratcher is...

2. Huh? The very early 90s Big East was living off its amazing run in the 80s, which included two NCs and saw 6 different programs make it to 8 Final Fours. By 93 the league's reputation started to go downhill with the loss of two of the five great coaches of the league (Carneseca and Massimino), Syracuse going on a two year probation, and by mid-90s the additions of WVU, Rutgers, and ND all bad at basketball at that time weighing the league down even more. And this was a tailspin that lasted into the mid-00s.

I give UConn props (and SU to a lesser extent) for it keeping the league in the conversation nationally, but it was during this period of time that the Big East (in all its renditions, including the current one) was at its lowest ebb, which is not what you describe above.

The league regained its prominence of the 80s in the 2006-2013 period which UConn also played a significant role in during that frame, as did Nova, Georgetown, and Pitt in the early part of that phase while Louisville, SU, Marquette, and WVU joined in on the fun during the latter part.

Cheers,
Neil

Yes, from a national results POV, the pre-split Big East went through three hoops phases:

1) 1980 - 1989 ... Incredible out of the gate success, 2 titles, 4 runner-ups, 8 Final 4s. Put the Big East on the map as a power conference, it was the talk of the 1980s, right up there with the ACC and B1G. The original Golden Age, when all the rivalries blossomed.

When you combine, not just results, but rivalries, coaches, and tight-knit focus on hoops, this might have been the all-around best decade any conference ever has had.

2) 1990 - 2002 ... Fallow period, only two Final 4s, Syracuse in 96, UConn in 99.

3) 2003 - 2012 ... A second Golden Age, highlighted by titles by Syracuse (03) and UConn (04, 11), and Final 4 appearances by several others. This was a different Big East, though, from the 1980s version, a bigger, more sprawling conference thanks to the addition of football schools. The conference was as good on the court, but the football fissures were showing all the while.

The irony is that UConn came to power in the Big East during the 1990s, during the national fallow period.

Also ironically, it was a time when many doubted whether Calhoun would ever become a truly big-game coach. Between 1990 - 1998, UConn made six Sweet 16s and three Elite 8s without making it to the Final 4, much less winning a title. For much of the 90s, UConn had a "great during the regular season, but chokes in the tournament" reputation.

(04-16-2018 02:07 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:53 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:08 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  He's probably too young to remember that before the Big East gifted UConn with a golden ticket to that league nobody knew that UConn played basketball (or anything else) either. And he's probably afraid that now that they are out of the Big East, it won't be long before the next generation of fans won't know that they do now.

I grew up watching Georgetown vs St Johns Big East games before there was a ton of college basketball on tv...it was very rare in the early 80's unlike today with cable tv. Younger fans simply don't understand how college sports was before ESPN took over.
I first heard of UCONN in the 90's when Iowa beat them in a Hawaii tournament and afterwards people were telling us that Iowa pulled a huge upset!! We were all saying, "Who's UCONN?" Not derisive. We honestly didn't know who they were.

If you think hoops in the early 80's was rare on TV, imagine what it was like in the 50's and 60's when I first started following the sport. Before the classic UCLA-Houston game in the Astrodome (I think around 1968) what there was was very local in scope. Love 'em or hate 'em, ESPN changed sports in a cosmic way.

I grew up without any college allegiances, since there really wasn't much in the way of big time sports in or near New Jersey. If you wanted to find the score of a UConn game in the papers (which was about the only way to find it) you had to look really hard. If the NY Times had it, it was given about the same coverage as the Slippery Rock game. No joke - for some unknown reason Slippery Rock had almost a cult like following in the area.

We lived in a different world then.

Fun fact: ESPN was actually originally created to cover the New England Whalers, Bristol Red Sox, and UConn Huskies. It was meant to be a Connecticut cable sports channel and it sort of exploded into something that nobody ever could have imagined at that time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ESPN#Origins

So why was one of it's first telecasts a soccer match between App State and Western Carolina from Boone in September of 1979?

Sent from my XT1635-01 using CSNbbs mobile app

Because it was cheaper to broadcast via 24 hr satellite vs being a cable-only channel and ESPN needed national, not regional programming.

(04-16-2018 02:07 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:53 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 01:08 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-12-2018 02:00 PM)ken d Wrote:  He's probably too young to remember that before the Big East gifted UConn with a golden ticket to that league nobody knew that UConn played basketball (or anything else) either. And he's probably afraid that now that they are out of the Big East, it won't be long before the next generation of fans won't know that they do now.

I grew up watching Georgetown vs St Johns Big East games before there was a ton of college basketball on tv...it was very rare in the early 80's unlike today with cable tv. Younger fans simply don't understand how college sports was before ESPN took over.
I first heard of UCONN in the 90's when Iowa beat them in a Hawaii tournament and afterwards people were telling us that Iowa pulled a huge upset!! We were all saying, "Who's UCONN?" Not derisive. We honestly didn't know who they were.

If you think hoops in the early 80's was rare on TV, imagine what it was like in the 50's and 60's when I first started following the sport. Before the classic UCLA-Houston game in the Astrodome (I think around 1968) what there was was very local in scope. Love 'em or hate 'em, ESPN changed sports in a cosmic way.

I grew up without any college allegiances, since there really wasn't much in the way of big time sports in or near New Jersey. If you wanted to find the score of a UConn game in the papers (which was about the only way to find it) you had to look really hard. If the NY Times had it, it was given about the same coverage as the Slippery Rock game. No joke - for some unknown reason Slippery Rock had almost a cult like following in the area.

We lived in a different world then.

Fun fact: ESPN was actually originally created to cover the New England Whalers, Bristol Red Sox, and UConn Huskies. It was meant to be a Connecticut cable sports channel and it sort of exploded into something that nobody ever could have imagined at that time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ESPN#Origins

So why was one of it's first telecasts a soccer match between App State and Western Carolina from Boone in September of 1979?

Sent from my XT1635-01 using CSNbbs mobile app

The first concept was to be a local sports cable network but when pricing satellite transmission costs for road games it soon became apparent leasing a spot 24/7/365 was cheaper than just spot leasing as needed which led to the idea to do something national.

The NCAA's exclusive deal for college football kept ESPN out of college football and the first game carried in college football was the Independence Bowl serving as an affiliate of the Mizlou Network.

The "great player to coach" trend will fail, just like Clyde Drexler. Bye Penny, bye Mullins, bye Ewing, bye Manning.

(04-18-2018 09:35 PM)esayem Wrote:  The "great player to coach" trend will fail, just like Clyde Drexler. Bye Penny, bye Mullins, bye Ewing, bye Manning.

I agree. You look at the great coaches in college hoops, and how many were great players, especially in the NBA?

(04-13-2018 08:49 PM)ken d Wrote:  I don't buy that the conference UConn is now a part of is the same one they were invited to join in 1979. It's akin to the farmer bragging about the fact he's had the same axe for 40 years. It's had 15 new heads and 10 new handles, but it's still the same one he started out with.
....
It wasn't UConn's fault that league broke apart. It was bad luck for them, just like it was a measure of good luck that they were in the BE in the first place. That happens. Things change - and the landscape of college football changed dramatically in ways that were beyond the Big East's power to control or greatly influence. So UConn had a bad outcome, just like Houston did when the SWC broke up.

All they can do now is make decisions that give them the best chance for success in the future, not the past. Even if some - or even many - of their fans don't like them.

(04-13-2018 09:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Or acting like today's Southern Conference is similar in prestige to the league Alabama and Duke were members of.

I get the whole "well we've not changed leagues so it's the same league" thing but of the 9 schools that made the Big East such a respected basketball power, three are in the ACC and five are in the NBE.

The oldest internal league series in hoops are UConn-USF-Cincinnati that date back to the 2005-06 season. That is six years younger than the remaining charter members of MWC. That's a decade younger than UAB-USM in CUSA. It's 14 years younger than South Alabama-AState-UALR-Louisiana in the Sun Belt.

In football the UConn-USF-Cincinnati football games as league games date to 2005, AState-Louisiana-ULM in Sun Belt goes back to 2001, UAB-USF to 2000 as a league game, and the MWC charter schools back to 1999. If we disqualify UAB-USM for UAB's drop football interruption, then USM-Marshall-Rice-UTEP takes us to 2005 same as the AAC's oldest three.

Regardless of how anyone feels about it, the technical fact is that UConn never changed conferences, and that this is the conference they were invited to for football back in the late nineties. Stating otherwise is objectively wrong. However, responses like the ones you guys gave are the whole point - it's silly to act like this conference affiliation was some magic once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that solved all problems. The Big East was headed for a football-based split and UConn knew it - they wanted to go with the football-playing schools and so they moved up football (I think they believed at the time there would be some sort of orderly merger rather than a free-for-all). It was a wager gone bad, and now they're out a ton of money and in an undesirable alignment all because of their "golden ticket".

(04-16-2018 01:18 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 11:28 AM)ken d Wrote:  I have to believe that Omer Yurtseven's decision to transfer from NC State to Georgetown is a direct result of the Hoyas' decision to hire Ewing.

He will be Govan's replacement. There is a (small) chance he becomes eligible next season with the new academic transfer exception potentially being passed. Georgetown also just picked up another top-100 recruit today in James Akinjo (former UConn recruit). Ewing has some very strong momentum heading into next year.

There's always more work to do, but getting Yurtseven gives Georgetown a lot of breathing room on the 2019 recruiting circuit. Things will change, but right now they're set to have a coherent post-Govan starting lineup of juniors Jahvon Blair, Pickett, and Yurtseven with sophomores Akinjo and LeBlanc. That could be a nice little two-year run if it pans out in real life like it stacks up on paper.

(04-20-2018 11:31 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 08:49 PM)ken d Wrote:  I don't buy that the conference UConn is now a part of is the same one they were invited to join in 1979. It's akin to the farmer bragging about the fact he's had the same axe for 40 years. It's had 15 new heads and 10 new handles, but it's still the same one he started out with.
....
It wasn't UConn's fault that league broke apart. It was bad luck for them, just like it was a measure of good luck that they were in the BE in the first place. That happens. Things change - and the landscape of college football changed dramatically in ways that were beyond the Big East's power to control or greatly influence. So UConn had a bad outcome, just like Houston did when the SWC broke up.

All they can do now is make decisions that give them the best chance for success in the future, not the past. Even if some - or even many - of their fans don't like them.

(04-13-2018 09:39 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Or acting like today's Southern Conference is similar in prestige to the league Alabama and Duke were members of.

I get the whole "well we've not changed leagues so it's the same league" thing but of the 9 schools that made the Big East such a respected basketball power, three are in the ACC and five are in the NBE.

The oldest internal league series in hoops are UConn-USF-Cincinnati that date back to the 2005-06 season. That is six years younger than the remaining charter members of MWC. That's a decade younger than UAB-USM in CUSA. It's 14 years younger than South Alabama-AState-UALR-Louisiana in the Sun Belt.

In football the UConn-USF-Cincinnati football games as league games date to 2005, AState-Louisiana-ULM in Sun Belt goes back to 2001, UAB-USF to 2000 as a league game, and the MWC charter schools back to 1999. If we disqualify UAB-USM for UAB's drop football interruption, then USM-Marshall-Rice-UTEP takes us to 2005 same as the AAC's oldest three.

Regardless of how anyone feels about it, the technical fact is that UConn never changed conferences, and that this is the conference they were invited to for football back in the late nineties. Stating otherwise is objectively wrong. However, responses like the ones you guys gave are the whole point - it's silly to act like this conference affiliation was some magic once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that solved all problems. The Big East was headed for a football-based split and UConn knew it - they wanted to go with the football-playing schools and so they moved up football (I think they believed at the time there would be some sort of orderly merger rather than a free-for-all). It was a wager gone bad, and now they're out a ton of money and in an undesirable alignment all because of their "golden ticket".

(04-16-2018 01:18 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 11:28 AM)ken d Wrote:  I have to believe that Omer Yurtseven's decision to transfer from NC State to Georgetown is a direct result of the Hoyas' decision to hire Ewing.

He will be Govan's replacement. There is a (small) chance he becomes eligible next season with the new academic transfer exception potentially being passed. Georgetown also just picked up another top-100 recruit today in James Akinjo (former UConn recruit). Ewing has some very strong momentum heading into next year.

There's always more work to do, but getting Yurtseven gives Georgetown a lot of breathing room on the 2019 recruiting circuit. Things will change, but right now they're set to have a coherent post-Govan starting lineup of juniors Jahvon Blair, Pickett, and Yurtseven with sophomores Akinjo and LeBlanc. That could be a nice little two-year run if it pans out in real life like it stacks up on paper.

UConn isn't the only school to make a wager on conference affiliation that didn't pan out.

UMass made it with the MAC and the MAC made it with Temple/UMass thinking they'd get a balanced divisional schedule and pick-up some quality hoop games, they never got their balance.

New Mexico State wagered on the WAC leaving the Sun Belt and now they are no longer affiliated with any school that was in the WAC when they joined and they lost their home for football.

Not sure why there is a constant UConn grind on this board. They aren't the first school to have a league shot out from under them. New Mexico State had it happen with the Border, Missouri Valley, Big West and WAC. Houston, SMU, Rice, and TCU had it happen with the SWC. VMI had it happen when the SEC and ACC defected the Southern. Richmond, GW, William & Mary, The Citadel, Davidson, Furman, and West Virginia had it happen when the ACC schools defected the Southern.

The only thing left is either figure out how to be TCU and West Virginia or figure out how to grow where your planted or be a Furman or VMI and embrace being left behind.

(04-20-2018 12:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  UConn isn't the only school to make a wager on conference affiliation that didn't pan out.

UMass made it with the MAC and the MAC made it with Temple/UMass thinking they'd get a balanced divisional schedule and pick-up some quality hoop games, they never got their balance.

New Mexico State wagered on the WAC leaving the Sun Belt and now they are no longer affiliated with any school that was in the WAC when they joined and they lost their home for football.

Not sure why there is a constant UConn grind on this board. They aren't the first school to have a league shot out from under them. New Mexico State had it happen with the Border, Missouri Valley, Big West and WAC. Houston, SMU, Rice, and TCU had it happen with the SWC. VMI had it happen when the SEC and ACC defected the Southern. Richmond, GW, William & Mary, The Citadel, Davidson, Furman, and West Virginia had it happen when the ACC schools defected the Southern.

The only thing left is either figure out how to be TCU and West Virginia or figure out how to grow where your planted or be a Furman or VMI and embrace being left behind.

It's because UConn has a choice, and thus there's an actual debate to be had, as opposed to a NMSt who doesn't really have an alternative option right now. The UConn-AAC-Big East situation is really kind of unique in the college sports landscape right now.

If the Big East didn't exist you wouldn't hear half as much complaining from UConn fans, because there really wouldn't be a workable alternative to the AAC.

The point above that Connecticut was a founding member of the Big East is well intentioned but inaccurate. It was an original member of the Big East but not among its founders. The four founding schools were Providence, Georgetown, Syracuse, and St. John's.

The Big East owns the IP and history of the conference dating to 1979--the AAC sold that away in 2013. That's a contrast to the Big 12, which did not assume the history of the Big 8 nor the Southwest Conference when it was founded, nor the Mountain West, which was essentially the original WAC but did not take that with them.

(04-22-2018 08:59 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  The point above that Connecticut was a founding member of the Big East is well intentioned but inaccurate. It was an original member of the Big East but not among its founders. The four founding schools were Providence, Georgetown, Syracuse, and St. John's.

The Big East owns the IP and history of the conference dating to 1979--the AAC sold that away in 2013. That's a contrast to the Big 12, which did not assume the history of the Big 8 nor the Southwest Conference when it was founded, nor the Mountain West, which was essentially the original WAC but did not take that with them.

good point. UConn was actually the last school invited to join the original BE. Villanova entered the following year but had already accepted membership prior to both UConn and BC. Anyone who is honest with themselves should know that the current BE is the BE, history and all. Calling the AAC the BE with a new name, was an attempt to protect the leagues FB interests and status as a P6 . Does anyone really believe the American is a continuation of the original BE?

(04-22-2018 09:38 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(04-22-2018 08:59 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  The point above that Connecticut was a founding member of the Big East is well intentioned but inaccurate. It was an original member of the Big East but not among its founders. The four founding schools were Providence, Georgetown, Syracuse, and St. John's.

The Big East owns the IP and history of the conference dating to 1979--the AAC sold that away in 2013. That's a contrast to the Big 12, which did not assume the history of the Big 8 nor the Southwest Conference when it was founded, nor the Mountain West, which was essentially the original WAC but did not take that with them.

good point. UConn was actually the last school invited to join the original BE. Villanova entered the following year but had already accepted membership prior to both UConn and BC. Anyone who is honest with themselves should know that the current BE is the BE, history and all. Calling the AAC the BE with a new name, was an attempt to protect the leagues FB interests and status as a P6 . Does anyone really believe the American is a continuation of the original BE?

I've been a supporter of the Big East, since day one in 1979 - 1980, but to parse administrative syllables with UConn is silly. Bottom line is they were there at ground zero, competed in the conference from the very first day.

Surely, the current "new" Big East is the most rightful heir to the Big East legacy of 1979 - 2013, but that in no way should be used to disparage UConn's legitimacy as an OG member. Likewise with Syracuse.

Sad fact is, while most of the Big East DNA is in the new Big East, a significant amount is elsewhere, most prominently with UConn (and to a lesser extent Cincy) in the AAC and with Syracuse, BC, and Pitt in the ACC. Syracuse was obviously a founder, BC competed from day one, and Pitt from 1982. That's a lot of Big East DNA stolen by the ACC.

(04-22-2018 09:38 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(04-22-2018 08:59 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  The point above that Connecticut was a founding member of the Big East is well intentioned but inaccurate. It was an original member of the Big East but not among its founders. The four founding schools were Providence, Georgetown, Syracuse, and St. John's.

The Big East owns the IP and history of the conference dating to 1979--the AAC sold that away in 2013. That's a contrast to the Big 12, which did not assume the history of the Big 8 nor the Southwest Conference when it was founded, nor the Mountain West, which was essentially the original WAC but did not take that with them.

good point. UConn was actually the last school invited to join the original BE. Villanova entered the following year but had already accepted membership prior to both UConn and BC. Anyone who is honest with themselves should know that the current BE is the BE, history and all. Calling the AAC the BE with a new name, was an attempt to protect the leagues FB interests and status as a P6 . Does anyone really believe the American is a continuation of the original BE?

There is nothing to "believe". That is "in fact" exactly what it is. Clearly, the membership is different as is performance--but the point he made is correct. The current non-football "Big East" is actually a new conference while the old Big East rump maintains the original Big East corporate charter under a new name (AAC).

That said, selling the name "Big East"--along with the C7 Big East having 7 original BE members while the AAC only has 4 ex-members (and that's a stretch because I'm counting Temple)--pretty much means the Big East "brand" for all intents and purposes lies with the C7 Big East. Thats one of the many reasons I always thought it was a mistake to sell the name unless the money was invested in something that would yield long term conference value (like using it to create a high end bowl game for the conference champ).

(04-22-2018 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Thats one of the many reasons I always thought it was a mistake to sell the name unless the money was invested in something that would yield long term conference value (like using it to create a high end bowl game for the conference champ).

Agreed. I was thrilled when the C7 were able to negotiate for the name, whatever legacy credits or cash we signed over to do so was a pittance for something so valuable to us. It was Yuuuge to be able to claim that legacy, it was what the entire new conference was based on.

Very happy that Aresco didn't see the value in the name. I suspect he was blinded by the fact that in a football sense, the name was disparaged, and at that time, the AAC was focused on the football situation. He thus overlooked the fact that as a basketball brand, it had real value.

(04-22-2018 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  There is nothing to "believe". That is "in fact" exactly what it is. Clearly, the membership is different as is performance--but the point he made is correct. The current non-football "Big East" is actually a new conference while the old Big East rump maintains the original Big East corporate charter under a new name (AAC).

That said, selling the name "Big East"--along with the C7 Big East having 7 original BE members while the AAC only has 4 ex-members (and that's a stretch because I'm counting Temple)--pretty much means the Big East "brand" for all intents and purposes lies with the C7 Big East. Thats one of the many reasons I always thought it was a mistake to sell the name unless the money was invested in something that would yield long term conference value (like using it to create a high end bowl game for the conference champ).

The Big East brand was radioactive in football. It carried a stigma of instability and uncertainty. In a span of less than ten years, the league had lost Boston College, Virginia Tech, Miami, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Rutgers and Louisville. As much as realignment has been about money and exposure, it is also about associating with strong and proven brands - both on a conference-level and membership-level. The Big East football brand was near-worthless in 2012.

To add to your point, I think the Big East Football membership in 2012/2013 (UConn/Cincinnati/USF/Temple/UCF/Memphis/Houston/SMU/Tulane/ECU/Navy) made a mistake as a collective in the "American Athletic Conference" name. For its collective goal to create a new identity that branded itself as a "power" conference, it created a league image that was very "Conference USA" in logo, colors and membership. With four original charter members in the new conference, I still think they should have resurrected the Metro Conference name. I believe it would have made tremendous strides in winning non-membership fans over and associate themselves as a true major/power conference.

(04-22-2018 12:14 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(04-22-2018 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  There is nothing to "believe". That is "in fact" exactly what it is. Clearly, the membership is different as is performance--but the point he made is correct. The current non-football "Big East" is actually a new conference while the old Big East rump maintains the original Big East corporate charter under a new name (AAC).

That said, selling the name "Big East"--along with the C7 Big East having 7 original BE members while the AAC only has 4 ex-members (and that's a stretch because I'm counting Temple)--pretty much means the Big East "brand" for all intents and purposes lies with the C7 Big East. Thats one of the many reasons I always thought it was a mistake to sell the name unless the money was invested in something that would yield long term conference value (like using it to create a high end bowl game for the conference champ).

The Big East brand was radioactive in football. It carried a stigma of instability and uncertainty. In a span of less than ten years, the league had lost Boston College, Virginia Tech, Miami, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Rutgers and Louisville. As much as realignment has been about money and exposure, it is also about associating with strong and proven brands - both on a conference-level and membership-level. The Big East football brand was near-worthless in 2012.

To add to your point, I think the Big East Football membership in 2012/2013 (UConn/Cincinnati/USF/Temple/UCF/Memphis/Houston/SMU/Tulane/ECU/Navy) made a mistake as a collective in the "American Athletic Conference" name. For its collective goal to create a new identity that branded itself as a "power" conference, it created a league image that was very "Conference USA" in logo, colors and membership. With four original charter members in the new conference, I still think they should have resurrected the Metro Conference name. I believe it would have made tremendous strides in winning non-membership fans over and associate themselves as a true major/power conference.

Thats simply wrong. It was "radioactive" in that it was looked as the weakest of the power conferences. It had great value for basketball and was clearly recognized as a "power" conference in football (though it was disparaged as being the worst of the BCS conferences).

Now--do you want your league to have a recognizable name associated with being a power conference---or do you want an entirely new "CUSA" sounding name? I dont think its even a question as to which button Im pushing.