Page 1 of 2

the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:36 pm
by GRGB
BCS Worthy?

UConn - UConn football moved up to Division I-A status in 2000, was included in official NCAA Division I-A statistics for the first time in 2002
USF - The team began playing in 1997, competing their first four years as a Division I-AA, moved to Division I-A, in 2001
Cincinnati - former CUSA
Louisville - former CUSA

Rutgers
WVA


add:

UCF - move to Division I-A in 1996
Army
Navy
AFA




I think the MWC has better overall strength.


Current Big East
Image

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:36 pm
by smupony94
ECU left at the alter again?

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:53 pm
by Water Pony
If all three services academies accept along with UCF, the BE is a 10 FB member conference.

If 12, SMU/UH would add western depth with AFA.

If 14, ECU and Temple.

Does the Big 12 need to put a fence around DFW and Houston? Having the SEC gain a second foothold in Texas, it would be bad news with a weekly SEC game in either College Station or Dallas.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:02 pm
by SMU89
Nice map. We need more quality posts with visuals.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:05 pm
by Stallion

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:14 pm
by mathman
Good article.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:14 pm
by rich59
After thinking about it here are some reasons why the Big East might make a good fit for SMU and vice versa, if two or three of the service academies sign on.

Somewhat similar academics, size of schools and athletic budgets. SMU gives the BE a presence in Texas which is what TCU offered. If two or three service academies sign on preferably three, the BCS will feel pressure to keep the BE a AQ conference. For SMU it offers schools which we have a better chance of competing with, even dominating. Down the road ND might see the sense of joining the BE because of the above factors, which would really enhance the BE.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:16 pm
by smupony94
Big East wanted TCU for their BCS credits, not access to Texas

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:20 pm
by LHS81
I have the feeling Rutgers, UConn, Cinci, USF, and Louisville are looking for the nearest fire exits.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:23 pm
by smupony94
LHS81 wrote:I have the feeling Rutgers, UConn, Cinci, USF, and Louisville are looking for the nearest fire exits.

USF has no options

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:27 pm
by 03Mustang
Without AFA I disagree - Big East is stronger than MWC

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:36 pm
by Water Pony
USF, UConn and Rutgers have no options. BC will blackball UConn and, as a result, no reason to take Rutgers. The remaining threat to the BE is the Ohio River schools being poached by the Big 12, who should focus regionally on the SW and Great Plains. I don't think Big 12 gets better, except for WVA, which is a long way from Texas/OK.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:45 pm
by mustangbill67
Air Force going to Big East and probably Navy. According to current news articles posted in other threads, Army has said no.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:55 pm
by Nacho
i hate playing triple option teams.

Re: the New Big East

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 3:58 pm
by rich59
I would not be one bit surprised if Orsini is not having conversations with the Big East. Of course SMU would not want to get in if the BE dissolves. The key is at least AFA and Navy, to keep the BE an AQ. SMU offers much the same advantage as TCU did.