Big East's non-football members meet, discuss possible breakaway
Ken D. Dec 13, 9:25 p.m.
They might agree to that if they are being paid to agree to it. If the alternative is for everybody to walk away from the residual payout the BE is due for past tournament performance, that could be expensive.
I'm sure the basketball schools can find enough new partners to get their numbers above seven pretty fast
hovis Dec 13, 7:53 p.m.
The only reason that those seven teams would "blow up" the conference is if the exit fee was forced on them. If an agreement is made then the name does not have to be lost.
I see above me that it said that the bball schools are keeping the BE name. How could that happen? That is the equivalent of kicking out the football schools. Why would they agree to that? Not doubting your word, just wondering how that could be possible.
tcoutouzis Dec 13, 7:43 p.m.
Depending on what happens, this is why we could move up to play in 2013 as a full member
tcoutouzis Dec 13, 7:39 p.m.
The word on the street from this afternoon is that the seven will be announcing their breakaway as of tomorrow and taking the Big East name.
They are working on a new name for the conference. I gave Terry a new conference name when CUSA and the MWC were thinking of merging. He sent it to Banowski and the MWC commissioner and copied me on it. I think I am going to resubmit it for this new one.
davenportj Dec 13, 4:21 p.m.
If the U7 schools break/disolve they would not be able to keep the name Big East as the Conference is no more. If they were to form a new Coference as basketball only they would need more than 7 schools. I know that they had the BE name to begin with but I don't think they can keep it
hovis Dec 13, 12:23 p.m.
Just heard that the seven schools held a conference call this morning with Aresco and informed him of their intention of leaving. I just realized that this means ECU will have no problem getting all sports into whatever this conference becomes.
hovis Dec 12, 9:35 a.m.
This is mostly what I have suggested in the past as their end goal. When they get the 64 teams in the four major conferences, the "conferences" will really just be the "divisions" that you see in the NFL.
As to why they don't just do the 64 thing this ties back into the discussion that we had before. This is the reason that they will do their contracts directly with ESPN and leave out the NCAA altogether once they get themselves positioned like they want. Then they can do all the things that you are talking about.
hovis Dec 12, 9:29 a.m.
As this concerns recruiting, it would be nice if this hurried up and happened or did not happen. It is hard to recruit when people can recruit against you by saying things that make the conference look unstable. The lies told on the recruiting trail are hilarious and more often that not total bs. People recruiting against you will say anything to dissuade players from going to your school. It does not matter if they are based in fact or not. I can see recruiters in living rooms right now saying "I don't think that they will even have a conference. When they dissolve the BE, Cusa has said that they will not take them back since they have replaced them." It does not matter how untrue it is, people recruiting against you WILL say it if it gives them an advantage. If it takes you more than one sentence to refute it they will be left with doubts. This is a hard decision for many players and often comes down to things as small as these.
Ken D. Dec 12, 9:18 a.m.
I sometimes wonder if part of the problem with conference realignment, driven by football and ESPN, isn't that the notion of an all-sports conference may have become an anachronism. Even within such conferences, exceptions are made. ECU, Boise, San Diego State, Navy - all slated to be football only members of the Big East. Notre Dame just the opposite - first with the BE, now with the ACC.
What would be so wrong with having football only conferences, and men's basketball only conferences? Why make all your other sports play against opponents that make no sense, and travel ridiculous distances to do it? Why not just recognize that those two revenue sports are fundamentally different from all the others, and act accordingly?
For that matter, why not just have a single 64 team football only league that has a single contract with ESPN, and which divides TV and bowl revenues equally among all its members? Just because we've always done it one way doesn't mean we can't change.
Ken D. Dec 12, 9:08 a.m.
If you think about it, that isn't much different than ECU could have had by electing to be in the FCS instead of the FBS. While I might think that's a good idea, I think it would be met with strong resistance by that segment of Pirate fans (and a large segment at that) whose self image for ECU is that of a national football power.
Please sign in to post.
The Dan Lebatard Show
Under Center with McNabb and Malone
US Open Tennis: Mixed Double Championship & Women’s Singles Semi-Finals
Friday at 12:30 pm on WRAL-TV
US Open Tennis: Men’s Singles Semi-Finals
Saturday at 12:00 pm on WRAL-TV
NFL: Cleveland at Pittsburgh
Sunday at 1:00 pm on WRAL-TV
US Open Tennis: Women’s Championship
Sunday at 4:30 pm on WRAL-TV
Carolina Hurricanes Fan Town Hall
Tomorrow at 11:30 am on 99.9 The Fan
Dave Doeren Show
Tomorrow at 7:00 pm on 99.9 The Fan
MiLB Playoffs: Bulls at Columbus
Tomorrow at 7:00 pm on 620am
Ryder Cup selection projectionAdam Gold
Coaching 101: The 4-2-5 defenseLogan Zone
It's a 'Ruff-Cut' repeat in first tests of '14Caulton Tudor
The Mitchell Report: Gurley, a bad start and a great storyMandy Mitchell
— Tue 6:24 p.m.
— Tue 6:18 p.m.
— Tue 6:16 p.m.
— Tue 6:13 p.m.
— Tue 6:09 p.m.
— Tue 6:09 p.m.
— Tue 6:08 p.m.
— Tue 5:50 p.m.
— Tue 5:30 p.m.
— Tue 5:06 p.m.
— Tue 4:38 p.m.
— Tue 4:36 p.m.
— Tue 4:34 p.m.
— Tue 4:30 p.m.
— Tue 4:26 p.m.
— Tue 3:51 p.m.
— Tue 3:37 p.m.
— Tue 1:20 p.m.
— Tue 1:02 p.m.
— Tue 1:00 p.m.
— Tue 1:00 p.m.
— Tue 12:48 p.m.
— Mon 6:08 p.m.
— Mon 6:02 p.m.
— Mon 5:42 p.m.
— Mon 2:06 p.m.
— Mon 1:30 p.m.
— Sun 7:15 p.m.
— Sun 6:42 p.m.
— Sun 9:00 a.m.