(09-18-2019 11:38 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote: (09-18-2019 11:12 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote: (09-18-2019 10:47 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote: Great argument for Temple from UTEPDallas from the other thread, which prompted my OP question.
Quote:Post: #3RE: How Big East conference realignment shaped Rutgers present
As I mentioned in another thread a few days ago, the Big East was the best platform for Miami, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Boston College and Louisville. They are where they are today because of the Big East. The biggest loser IMO was Temple more so than UConn, Cincinnati and South Florida. The former had a relationship with most of them that goes back to their independent days and the latter even though they lost their power status, they only played football in the Big East for less than a decade.
that is really a terrible argument when one looks at REALITY
since 1970 (49 seasons to 2018) Temple has had 17 winning seasons and 9 of those came before 1990
in the 14 seasons Temple was in the Big East they won 30 games TOTAL so an average win total of less than 2 games a season
they never had a winning season in those 14 years
the highest win total for any season was FOUR that came during a streak of 3 straight seasons of wining 4 games a season
in that time period they had 3 head coaches one that was there for 2 seasons and was from prior to the BE days and then two others one that lasted 5 seasons and one that lasted 7 seasons
SEVEN SEASONS and his highlight was three straight seasons of winning a MAX of four games....he actually got an 8th season as an independent when he went win less
so when you look at the reality of that total and complete garbage and the total and complete attitude of "collecting a check" it is a giant joke to say that any program that would embarrass themselves like that was somehow a loser from realignment because they were totally and completely irrelevant in the BE and worse yet they were happy with it and would have allowed it to continue forever if change was not forced upon them
and they were pretty terrible before that as well
there is no rightful way to claim to be a loser from some event (even one out of your control) when it is so clear that events in your control and your own apathy lead to your program being a total and complete disaster and only the fact that you were basically told to shove off woke you up to even try and put in a little effort
Todd, it’s not just about football records. Temple used to play other Eastern independents for decades and some in the Big East until the 2004 season. That’s not the case anymore. Most if not all of those schools are in the B1G and ACC. Temple is not. Something similar happened to UTEP between the late 1990s and mid 2000s. It lost all its rivals. The football program sucked and it continues to suck (unlike Temple’s these days) but the relationship and history were lost. That’s what fans usually care about.
those programs were not their "rivals" they were programs that kicked the crap out of them a lot
and they could have stayed independent instead of joining the BE or they could have stayed independent after being booted from the BE
and more importantly they did not "lose because or realignment" they lost because they simply did not give a damn about their program and sat around assuming they would just be in some conference with teams they liked to lose to a lot forever and ever
and those teams decided to move on without them
you can't lose something you never had and Temple never had anything of significance in football before they were in the BE or while they were in the BE or just after they were booted from the BE
answering with Temple is like asking which homeless person lost the most when all their shopping carts filled with trash were thrown in the trash......none of them lost anything because it was all trash and they can just go hop in another dumpster and get more if that is what they want more of.....or perhaps like Temple they can wake up and realize that no one is just going to hand them something for nothing and watch them do nothing but trash it and they better try and do something for themselves before they cry about the nothing they never had and '"lost"
when you had 17 winning seasons in 49 seasons and 14 seasons in a conference where your high point was winning 4 games a season for 3 seasons you had nothing and you did not even have rivals....you had teams you were happy to take an L from as long as you could take that L every year
(09-18-2019 01:26 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote: (09-18-2019 12:30 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I’d have to say Temple, Cincy, UConn, and USF. Houston, SMU, and Rice were the biggest losers in 1996 and still haven’t regained what they lost.
Temple went from playing all those old eastern independents, as they had for decades, got to spend a little over a decade in a conference with them as a football affiliate, and then got jilted by a combination of Villanova not wanting them to be on an equal footing or a full member and a UConn football program coming up that made them expendable and superfluous.
Cincy probably did the most on the field to deserve P5 status. I was desperately hoping that the 8 member Big 12 would take TCU, L’ville, WVU, and Cincy. Maryland to the Big Ten would have opened an ACC slot for UConn and 7 of the 8 2005-2012 Big Rast football schools would have all had P homes.
USF (and UCF) both fit the P mold—Big state universities in big cities. If CA and TX can support 4-5 P teams then so can FL.
Temple was thrown out of the BE, because Temple demanded a vote on full membership or NO membership. It simply overplayed its hand right after the first ACC raid and a time when the BE was particularly vulnerable. True, Temple was screwed by being the lone remaining football only member, as RU WVU and VT were all granted full BE membership. True, Temple's full membership was blocked by Villanova (who didn't want TU on the same footing for basketball and Olympic sports) and USF (who had a deal with Nova that kept UCF out of the BE) and some of the other original BE members (who just went with what Nova wanted). But the issue was pushed by Temple. Had they simply sat back and waited, full membership would have come, without the drama.
I agree that Cincy probably was the biggest loser in conference realignment. If wins and loses counted for anything, then Cincy was clearly deserving of a P5 home. IMHO, the B12 really missed the boat by not inviting them and Ville when WV was invited.
again one has to understand the history at the time
Louisville was not available to the Big 12 when the Big 12 NEEDED them to keep their new Fox Tier 2 TV contract that REQUIRED 10 teams to remain in place
Louisville was going to wait out the mandated contract with the BE before they left
in addition the Big 12 had a Tier 1 TV contract with ESPN that had 4 years remaining on it and that paid $60 million per year vs the $90 the new Fox contract paid
so the Big 12 was not in a position to just add more and more teams they were not going to get paid to add
yes the ESPN contract WAS for 12 teams, but the Fox contract was not and it was new, longer, and paying significantly more
but eventually after TCU and WVU were added ESPN came to the Big 12 and offered to toss the old contract and negotiate a new one that matched the length of the Fox contract
by then Louisville was already ion talks with the ACC because it was less than a month later that Louisville joined the BE
so the Big 12 was not in the position to make a 99 year decision on membership (the length of the Big 12 contract for conference membership) by just adding more and more teams when the finances associated with that were much less clear
/
Who's the biggest "loser" in conference realignment this decade?
