Big East looking at TCU

[RednBlue11]

my point is that it is a far more political and delicate situation than you give it credit.

there are several universities that are in the Big East that do not have football programs and will continue not to have football programs...im sure you can surmise what that implies about how they treat their mens basketball programs.

you have to put yourself in their shoes to understand why is does matter, which i can understand is not a simple as it sounds. football will NEVER be as important to the social fabric of Chicago or New York as it is here in Texas and many other less densely urbanized cities around the country.

also, i had never heard of this until i saw this subject header so i strongly doubt that this has traction.

[West Coast Johnny]

there are several universities that are in the Big East that do not have football programs and will continue not to have football programs...im sure you can surmise what that implies about how they treat their mens basketball programs.


also, i had never heard of this until i saw this subject header so i strongly doubt that this has traction.

Yea, basketball is important in the Big East. But it doesn't pay the bills. There are so many backhanded deals and stabs in the back that you never know what's going on until after it happens. This may be the Big East's smokescreen for some other hidden agenda. Or it may be that TCU wants options as it renegotiates with the Mountain West. Everyone has hidden agendas and leaking this stuff to the press is just one more way to negotiate.

[Blvd_Stang]

My idea...The Big 14

East
Connecticut
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
South Florida
Syracuse
West Virginia
UCF (54k student undergrad)

West
Cincinnati
Louisville
Missouri
Memphis
Houston
SMU
TCU
(together will capture dallas market...I believe last weeks game showed the Dallas community will get into local football if the teams are winners and there is notable competition playing + the rivalry)

[RednBlue11]

Basketball certainly does pay the bills, just like our football program does...and im sure that you also know that our program has been in the red for years but, how can this be?

thinking about a year to year accounting of only the programs costs vs. the rev, it def looks like it doesn't do anything to only have basketball for instance...but that totally ignores that point of playing sports in the 1st place...its the main engine for raising those tens of millions that give the university it's ability to grow and sustain credibility...especially when that university is in the middle of a capitol campaign, and I'm not talking about SMU.

[Big Hoss]

Ultimately, you have to think of sports as basically marketing and PR expense. Those expenses bring in donations (aka "revenue"). No one that has any real understanding for economics should assume that sports programs operating in the red are depleting their university of any funds that might be used for other purposes. I am sure we could go find some exceptions to this rule, but I doubt there are very many.

And as far as support from the local community, if UTA had a football team, I'd bet TCU wouldn't have half the supporters in Tarrant County as they do now!

[FroggieFever]

[EastStang]

If I recall correctly, the basketball portion of the Big East TV contract is more lucrative than its football component. Why? You have St. Johns/Rutgers, Notre Dame, you have Georgetown, and you have DePaul all in major markets. Add in Cincy, Pitt, Providence, Marquette, South Florida, in mid major markets. And you have powerhouse programs like Syracuse, Louisville and West Virginia. They would only offer TCU as a football only. Also, not sure TCU would want its baseball and other programs in the BE. It might try and broker a deal with CUSA to join as a non-football member. I would not mind adding back St. Louis, UNCC, Creighton or perhaps another eastern school as all sports members to get to 16 for hoops and improve conference baseball and soccer.

[GoRedGoBlue]

The Big East would be better than MWC any day, except one little detail:

If Big10 expands again, they will pilf from the Big East 2-3 teams), and the ACC will then want to expand to 16 and/or replenish from the SEC stealing a few from the ACC (mia, fla st, etc).

So, that's a much less stable conference than the MWC...and currently, or in reality the past 3-4 seasons, the MWC is a better FB conference.

Both the WAC and the MWC are ranked higher than the ACC or the Big East. Those rankings shouldn't change much since 80-90% of all non-conf play is over.

[ponyinNC]

ah, expansion talk.

[leopold]

Missed it, huh?

The Big East would be better than MWC any day, except one little detail:

If Big10 expands again, they will pilf from the Big East 2-3 teams), and the ACC will then want to expand to 16 and/or replenish from the SEC stealing a few from the ACC (mia, fla st, etc).

So, that's a much less stable conference than the MWC...and currently, or in reality the past 3-4 seasons, the MWC is a better FB conference.

Both the WAC and the MWC are ranked higher than the ACC or the Big East. Those rankings shouldn't change much since 80-90% of all non-conf play is over.

Not so fast my friend!!

Right now there's a bigger chance the Big XII expands and if they do so then they will most likely take from the MWC (or at least BYU). So I have to disagree with you there.

[The PonyGrad]

Wait, TCU can't move to the Big East until SMU moves to the MWC.

At least that is the MO from the past.

[WSGJ]

I thought conference talk was done for the year. Didn't somebody on this board guarantee that SMU was going to the Big XII or something?

[Samurai Stang]

The Big East would be better than MWC any day, except one little detail:

If Big10 expands again, they will pilf from the Big East 2-3 teams), and the ACC will then want to expand to 16 and/or replenish from the SEC stealing a few from the ACC (mia, fla st, etc).

So, that's a much less stable conference than the MWC...and currently, or in reality the past 3-4 seasons, the MWC is a better FB conference.

The MWC is quickly becoming irrelevant, a fact past success cannot change. True, the MWC is more stable, but that is only because the teams that are left are undesirable. Other than stability, the MWC offers nothing.

I highly doubt that ESPN will ever allow the Big East to ever lose its BCS AQ. If the Big East is adding TCU now, it is in an attempt to maintain relevance when Big 10 expands. TCU may be joining a Big East that very quickly changes its membership, but even with such future changes it will remain a better option than the MWC.

[RednBlue11]

people, there is no way TCU goes to the big East...this fanciful idea about ONLY the football program going is foolish at best.

we all know Notre Dame is the only example of the football program being separated and we also know why that is, and TCU certainly doesn't have that kind of interest nationally.


and don't go citing Villinova or George town...all of TCU's large sports program at D1A

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

I don't really agree that the MWC is that stable. In fact, I see the MWC as somewhat unstable. . . and in this case instability is spelled "TCU". If I were the Frogs, I'd be looking around pretty hard for a better deal. I just don't see the MWC minus BYU and Utah as being attractive to TCU. The Big East would certainly be a better deal as things stand today. The problem is that things are moving so quickly that it's really hard to see whether it would be a good deal for TCU 5, 10, or 15 years down the road. Will the Big-10, ACC, and SEC make moves that will tear up the Big East in the next 10 years? It's certainly possible. Will we end up with the 4 "super-conferences" and just do away with the BCS and/or the NCAA altogether? I don't know. . .but I can say that if we go to 4 super-conferences the Big East will not be one of them. It's just really hard to know what's the right move.