Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigdog13
I disagree. To compare Navy or Air Force to the Big East to Notre Dame or Ark. to the Big12 is a reach at best. Any of the service academies joining the Big East is 10 times more likely than Notre Dame giving up Indy or Ark leaving the SEC.
I meant comparable in terms of dynamics (it's what the conference wants, not what is likely to happen), not in terms of likelihood. I agree that that Navy and Air Force is less unlikely. But at this point I don't see it being very likely.
The academies don't work the same way that UH and LaTech do. Different priorities and different levels of potential.
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DQDawg
That ain't happening in my lifetime, and I ain't going anywhere anytime soon!!! We'll just have to see who they'll target. Hopefully, Houston gets courted by Big 12 & Big East?? Who knows??
One burger too many has very good contacts with AF insiders.
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Regarding SMU... I have difficulty believing that they would do TCU like that, even if TCU doesn't get the invite. I also have to think that TCU makes SMU somewhat redundant. The fact that they are in the same metro is not in itself the worst thing, but they're both of a very similar profile. Hopefully this is not wishful thinking on my part, as losing SMU would be pretty devastating to UH. And, as others point out, it wouldn't be good for you, either. UNT would become a very viable replacement.
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
I still think UTEP belongs in the MWC, geographically at least. If that happens that opens up a slot for us. But see this is what I'm talking about.....there are so many hypotheticals, scenarios, future movements, dominos yet to fall, etc. I wonder when the last "domino will fall"? Will it be like July/2012? Or sometime before then? This movement thing in conferences is killing my nerves. I'm ready for some CERTAINTY.
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
The only way we have a shot at ANY expansion is that CUSA has to have MULTIPLE schools.
From what I have seen or heard, our plan consists of "waiting and praying"
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dawg06
DR and BVDV are in discussions about chartering a new conference on the moon.
We will be the champion every year because we will be the only member... :icon_wink:
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EJ
We will be the champion every year because we will be the only member... :icon_wink:
Yeh but the travel costs are going to eat us alive!:icon_wink:
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
The moon....cool venue. How do you get 28,000 people there?
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HUGETechfan
The moon....cool venue. How do you get 28,000 people there?
Run shuttles from downtown Ruston.
(I'm thinking church vans.)
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
parialex
I meant comparable in terms of dynamics (it's what the conference wants, not what is likely to happen), not in terms of likelihood. I agree that that Navy and Air Force is less unlikely. But at this point I don't see it being very likely.
The academies don't work the same way that UH and LaTech do. Different priorities and different levels of potential.
Exactly!
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Bigdog, I know ANYTHING is possible (well, almost). But the Service Academies have a tendency to shy away from conference commitments (I know AF is in MWC before somebody says it), I have heard that AF didn't want to add Boise in the Mountain UNLESS the MWC went all the way to 2 divisions with a playoff system. With 9 teams, they're committed to 8 conference games, add Army and Navy, that leaves 2 slots for "additional national exposure" which they WANT more of. Granted, all 3 may head to another conference which will solve the "additional national exposure" problem, BUT let's face it, Army don't bring much to the game although going to Mitchie is fun. Navy didn't bring much in the past until the current group of coaches showed up.
We'll see. A 2 division grouping with a conference championship would fit all 3. AND I was just popping off about "never in my lifetime". You see, I'm getting OLD, OLD.
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Regarding SMU/TCU Big East check this out!
"SMU has had a lot of help from us over the last three or four years to improve their program," Patterson said. "I don't' appreciate being treated the way it is; that's how we got reciprocated. We're going to go on about our business, but they're not going to get the same help anymore -- not about a ballgame, not about conferences, not about anybody. They're getting no help from Gary Patterson, period.
"They shouldn't ask me at SMU about going into a conference, they shouldn't ask me about how they play, they shouldn't ask me about their players, they shouldn't ask me about anything because they're not getting any help, period, any more. Because we've bent over backwards to make sure that they can improve their program because I believe that's what you do."
Patterson then added further fuel to his fire.
"To be honest with you, SMU people have been looking down at TCU for a long time over here," he said. "So, us winning and doing things, the older group of alumni around here have a certain feeling about SMU. I didn't have that feeling, but I'm getting it."
http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/story/...mustangs-again
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DQDawg
Bigdog, I know ANYTHING is possible (well, almost). But the Service Academies have a tendency to shy away from conference commitments (I know AF is in MWC before somebody says it), I have heard that AF didn't want to add Boise in the Mountain UNLESS the MWC went all the way to 2 divisions with a playoff system. With 9 teams, they're committed to 8 conference games, add Army and Navy, that leaves 2 slots for "additional national exposure" which they WANT more of. Granted, all 3 may head to another conference which will solve the "additional national exposure" problem, BUT let's face it, Army don't bring much to the game although going to Mitchie is fun. Navy didn't bring much in the past until the current group of coaches showed up.
We'll see. A 2 division grouping with a conference championship would fit all 3. AND I was just popping off about "never in my lifetime". You see, I'm getting OLD, OLD.
I hear you. This stuff has just been so crazy lately that I'm not willing to dismiss anything yet. Nothing seems to make sense anymore!!
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigdog13
Regarding SMU/TCU Big East check this out!
"SMU has had a lot of help from us over the last three or four years to improve their program," Patterson said. "I don't' appreciate being treated the way it is; that's how we got reciprocated. We're going to go on about our business, but they're not going to get the same help anymore -- not about a ballgame, not about conferences, not about anybody. They're getting no help from Gary Patterson, period.
"They shouldn't ask me at SMU about going into a conference, they shouldn't ask me about how they play, they shouldn't ask me about their players, they shouldn't ask me about anything because they're not getting any help, period, any more. Because we've bent over backwards to make sure that they can improve their program because I believe that's what you do."
Patterson then added further fuel to his fire.
"To be honest with you, SMU people have been looking down at TCU for a long time over here," he said. "So, us winning and doing things, the older group of alumni around here have a certain feeling about SMU. I didn't have that feeling, but I'm getting it."
http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/story/...mustangs-again
Backs up what I stated earlier about there is no way TCU lets SMU in the Big East. AND, there is no way the Big East is going to upset TCU right now while everything is fluid.
Re: Big East authorizes "aggressive pursuit" of new schools
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigdog13
Regarding SMU/TCU Big East check this out!
"SMU has had a lot of help from us over the last three or four years to improve their program," Patterson said. "I don't' appreciate being treated the way it is; that's how we got reciprocated. We're going to go on about our business, but they're not going to get the same help anymore -- not about a ballgame, not about conferences, not about anybody. They're getting no help from Gary Patterson, period.
"They shouldn't ask me at SMU about going into a conference, they shouldn't ask me about how they play, they shouldn't ask me about their players, they shouldn't ask me about anything because they're not getting any help, period, any more. Because we've bent over backwards to make sure that they can improve their program because I believe that's what you do."
Patterson then added further fuel to his fire.
"To be honest with you, SMU people have been looking down at TCU for a long time over here," he said. "So, us winning and doing things, the older group of alumni around here have a certain feeling about SMU. I didn't have that feeling, but I'm getting it."
http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/story/...mustangs-again
Hope Patterson is right...SMU could be the dagger for us. Meanwhile, Louisville radio is reporting that an announcement about the Big 12 is imminent.
