PonyFans.com

Saw in the DMN where C-USA is having a conference call today to discuss expansion. I wonder if anything will come of it.

<A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/09/sports/ncaabasketball/09bigeast.html?ex=1058328000&en=957ddebe442bb24a&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE" TARGET=_blank>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/09/sports/ncaabasketball/09bigeast.html?ex=1058328000&en=957ddebe442bb24a&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE</A>

Hopefully an invitation. I realize other pieces have to fall into place first, but it would be a step up.

My concern is that if the BE and C-USA merge, they won't be looking to add any new teams and we will be SOL.

PK, this has been my fear all along. An allicance between CUSA and BE where the BE takes two schools like Louisville and Army to get to 8, leaving CUSA with a workable 9 and the two league champs playing in a championship game for BCS bid. Leaves BE basketball in tact and could be a win-win for everybody. The only thing that could prevent it is BE arrogance and greed frankly, and they might be more humble right now. If you read the Frog board, a supposed insider says Banowsky is pitching this and its gaining steam in the east. We could be more than SOL if this happens, and its why I wish Turner and Copeland would quit sabotaging the WAC publicly.

Quick question. How are Copeland and Turner "sabotaging" the WAC publicly? Just curious.

The Big East keeps their BCS bid until they fail to have their conference champion average a top 12 BCS Final Ranking over a four year period....

1999: #2
2000: #3
2001: #1
2001: #1

Considering Miami and VA Tech should challenge for a top ranking again in 2003, you’ve got 5 years before that is a possibility.

Certainly, the Big East would file suit and allow their legal options (against the other 5 conferences) to play out before ever agreeing to a play-in game. No one in his or her right mind would freely give up the guaranteed money.

Frankly, the Big East is not in as horrible position as people speculate; the BCS needs a presence in the Northeast if their package hopes to carry strong ratings in all major DMAs. Otherwise the Ad Agencies are going to kill them (the Network carrying the package) in negotiations...

Sounds to me like CUSA is giving it a nice PR try… just as the Big East did over the last quarter.

I heard one of the criterion C-USA will use in determining the replacement schools will be volume at the school's fan web sites!

Soooo...

POST! POST! POST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sabotage is a bad choice of words, Eddie. However, there is no reason to talk in the press about a regional league. Just do it and talk about it when its a reality. It does no good to speculate publicly about a more regional league. Its mostly out of our control and if it doesnt happen having speculated about it does nothing but hurt the perception of your program. Again. In terms of the BE keeping its bid, Southland makes valid points but you can't ignore two pressures that could lead to such an alliance: 1) the voting power of the BE bball only schools and the desire for Syracuse and Uconn to stay aligned with them.
2)the BCS will not let an 8 or 9 team BE have the same access as the 12 team power leagues, they just won't. Let the lawsuits begin. And by the way, the theoretical BE-CUSA alliance obviously wouldn't take effect til '06 after the current BCS contract expires.

It seems to me that the DMN has been dropping little hints to us that we are going to be in some type of regional C-USA.

Once the BE and C-USA start talking in earnest about the BE taking some schools away from C-USA some disagreements and hard feelings will no doubt arise.

The most shocking development would have TCU going to the BE so I think that will happen. I really do. That would be the worst thing that could happen to us, so that is the thing will happen. It's an SMU rule.

If the Big East was forced into a play-in game after their legal options expired, I'd say it's a lot more likely that a 8-9 school Big East (which would carry 2-3 current CUSA schools) would be matched in a play-in game with an expanded MWC.

In that scenerio, the BCS covers the two holes that the 5 "majors" don't (Northeast, Rockies). The major disadvantage for the southern CUSA schools is that their territory is already covered, hence, they aren't needed.

maybe, but I think Tranghese and the Big East would rather face a watered down CUSA opponent in a defacto "play-in" than a MWC, playing at altitude every other year. A key distinction is that this strategy would not be planned or sanctioned in advance by the BCS. Its a way of the Big East proactively protecting the place it already has in the BCS. Its a lot less subject to criticism if it produces a champ from a 17 team pool and I say that the Big East will want to control that pool and the revenue from the championship game from the outset. I may underestimate the power of greed, but the alliance concept has been aluded to by Tranghese before as a way to maintain rivalries but also get championship game revenue.

[This message has been edited by Hoop Fan (edited 07-09-2003).]