Big East, MWC, C-USA considering super conference?

NavyCrimson · Post by **NavyCrimson** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:42 pm

Remember how the AFL started. The NFL finally had to recognize it & deal with it. You never know???

ponyinNC · Post by **ponyinNC** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:07 pm

He's in a bunker somewhere hoarding ramen noodles and canned goods

S....M....U · Post by **S....M....U** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:22 pm

Noooooooooooo

TidePony · Post by **TidePony** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:41 pm

B. S. - and that's all.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:52 pm

This actually makes a lot of sense. With the latest talk of Missou to the SEC all but a "done deal" and the possibility of Big XII returning to 12 by adding West Virginia, Louisville and BYU...is there enough left of the Big East to really make it attractive (at least for football, when you consider the travel)?

Boise and AFA have to be rethinking this option and it's Boise who ultimately delivers that AQ status. In future years, who knows which program will be strong enough to play with the big boys of college football...but the reality is that the remaining schools in the Big East, CUSA and MWC are simply not deserving of more than "one bid" when you talk about our lining up against the goliaths of college football.

I don't like the proposed groupings and would personally prefer 9 member leagues for home/home schedule balance. Why not four 9 member groups with a mini-playoff to send a champion into what might become an 8 team playoff system?

Would like to see us stay with Tulsa, Rice and Houston if this is the way things develop. Beyond that, there are plenty of schools I'd like to be aligned with but would personally rather go eastward than westward.

The talk is that a "playoff" system will pay much more than the current BCS generates. SMU belongs in the grouping that would take a lesser share of the spoils. Let's face it, regardless of the produce on the field/court, we might have 50,000 people interested in the outcome of our games whereas may of the big state schools have hundreds of thousands. This kind of approach would at least give us a chance to compete at the highest level and would at least give us a small piece of the economic pie.

NavyCrimson · Post by **NavyCrimson** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:08 pm

"... but the reality is that the remaining schools in the Big East, CUSA and MWC are simply not deserving of more than "one bid" when you talk about our lining up against the goliaths of college football..."

This is where I disagree. As long as the current system exists, two difference classes will remain with all non-AQ teams being 2nd class. So you're right - we'll never match up.

But once we are allowed by the almighty, great, & magnificient rulers of college football, you'll see a shift of power but only when everyone is on equal footing. But then again, cartels don't work that way & this is what we have. LOL!!! The whole point of the cartel was to hoard recruits & run everyone else out! It's not a matter of deserving the opportunity to compete (with the AQ teams) but having the ability to compete on equal footing & that is what doesn't exist now right now in Div I.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:27 pm

NavyCrimson wrote:
"... but the reality is that the remaining schools in the Big East, CUSA and MWC are simply not deserving of more than "one bid" when you talk about our lining up against the goliaths of college football..."

This is where I disagree. As long as the current system exists, two difference classes will remain with all non-AQ teams being 2nd class. So you're right - we'll never match up.

But once we are allowed by the almighty, great, & magnificient rulers of college football, you'll see a shift of power but only when everyone is on equal footing. But then again, cartels don't work that way & this is what we have. LOL!!! The whole point of the cartel was to hoard recruits & run everyone else out! It's not a matter of deserving the opportunity to compete (with the AQ teams) but having the ability to compete on equal footing & that is what doesn't exist now right now in Div I.

in this approach (assuming a playoff system rather than the current BCS approach) we WOULD be able to compete at the highest level...there would simply be a recognition that no matter what our product on the field, we will never generate the revenue the big dogs do. I guess I should never say never, but my frame of reference is based on following SMU athletics for almost 50 years and seeing that as a small private school, we just can't deliver the numbers the large public schools can...so why should they share equally? if roles were reversed, I can't imagine how pompous SMU would be.

03EMBA · Post by **03EMBA** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:55 pm

Big East denies interest in 28-32 team expansion with conf USA/mt w, ESPN reports

S....M....U · Post by **S....M....U** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:58 pm

S....M....U · Post by **S....M....U** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:58 pm

I was worried

CalallenStang · Post by **CalallenStang** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:59 pm

03EMBA wrote:Big East denies interest in 28-32 team expansion with conf USA/mt w, ESPN reports

As reported earlier today and posted a page ago

gostangs · Post by **gostangs** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:23 pm

yall are insane. That never made sense. Everyone needs to not be so trigger happy on all this b.s - we will be in the BE in a week. write it down. Go freak out about something else.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:33 pm

I wouldn't get all lathered up about this Big East deal just yet.

The Big East football may consist of UConn, Rutgers, USF and Cincy by the tie the dust settles. I guess we are attracted because of the opportunity to play all sports with a strong bball league...but if Boise decides to stay west, Big East football becomes the original CUSA. If that plays out, SMU and Houston might rather become teams 11 and 12 in the MWC?

I am assuming Missou to SEC and then West Virginia, Louisville and BYU to Big XII

If Boise goes east (which seems crazy to me), Big East looks like this:

West: Boise, AFA, SMU, Houston, Cincy, Memphis

East: UConn, Rutgers, Navy, ECU, USF, UCF

gostangs · Post by **gostangs** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:36 pm

You take the BE for the money no matter what it looks like as long as it is 8 teams. MWC is the same as CUSA only worse travel.

PoconoPony · Post by **PoconoPony** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:40 pm

All of this garbage simply because inept NCAA will not formulate a playoff system incorporating the Bowl people who could bid on playoff games, get exclusive TV coverage and end up with every game having significant importance in the run to a national championship. College Presidents are at fault for not having a clue as to what this potential $$$$ could be generated by a playoff system.