Glad they could pull this off. Hoping for the best, if things work out this conference could be solid down the road.

Honestly, just throw Notre Dame in there and call it the "Nobody Cares Conference".

LJ;1004738 wrote:They couldnt even go undefeated in the MWC, which happens to be a better conference according to pundits

Then wouldn't they have an easier time in the Big East? Boise St has lost 3 conference games total since 2002.

As noted previously by Goosebumps, these additions actually improve the quality football in the Big East.

Big East Loses- Pitt, Syracuse and WVU
Big East Adds- UCF, Boise, San Diego State, SMU and Houston

In all honesty, Pitt and Syracuse have not been good in a long time. Syracuse, in particular has been one of the worst teams in an AQ conference since Donavan McNabb graduated. Other than last season when they won 9 games, Pitt has consistently been a 6-6, 7-5 team. The difference between these schools is that Pitt and Syracuse have more history than those schools and are accepted members of the mythical "big boys" club.

WVU is a big loss, but Boise has achieved more than them this past decade. I don't see that falling off. Boise still gets all that California talent that doesn't find their way into the PAC12 and as long as Chris Peterson is the head coach, their system stays intact.

Skyhook79;1004792 wrote:Then wouldn't they have an easier time in the Big East? Boise St has lost 3 conference games total since 2002.

I dont personally believe the MWC was better.

The Big East improved. As Little Danny said, Pitt has been garbage for years and Syracuse was even worse. WVU was a big loss, but they more than replaced them with Boise. If Houston and SMU can continue to improve, Marinatto hit a home run. I have my doubts about Houston though, especially if they lose Kevin Sumlin like it appears they are going to.

UCF and San Diego St. are forgettable additions

Little Danny;1004873 wrote:As noted previously by Goosebumps, these additions actually improve the quality football in the Big East.

Big East Loses- Pitt, Syracuse and WVU
Big East Adds- UCF, Boise, San Diego State, SMU and Houston

In all honesty, Pitt and Syracuse have not been good in a long time. Syracuse, in particular has been one of the worst teams in an AQ conference since Donavan McNabb graduated. Other than last season when they won 9 games, Pitt has consistently been a 6-6, 7-5 team. The difference between these schools is that Pitt and Syracuse have more history than those schools and are accepted members of the mythical "big boys" club.

WVU is a big loss, but Boise has achieved more than them this past decade. I don't see that falling off. Boise still gets all that California talent that doesn't find their way into the PAC12 and as long as Chris Peterson is the head coach, their system stays intact.

Its not enough to move them out of the basement.

Skyhook79;1004340 wrote:All the top so called "Mid Major" teams are going to the BCS conferences because they are tired of getting screwed over by the system.
I love it and will look forward to a Boise St vs Utah or TCU NC game, maybe that will finally blow this system up and we get a playoff.

Who was the last Big East team to play in the NCG?

WebFire;1005000 wrote:Who was the last Big East team to play in the NCG?

When they were in the Big East--- Miami.

Who was the last ACC team (while members of the ACC, not the defectors)?

Little Danny;1005008 wrote:When they were in the Big East--- Miami.

Who was the last ACC team (while members of the ACC, not the defectors)?

Current members please. Miami is irrelevant to this conversation.

None--- but answer my last question----- who was the last ACC school?

Since Miami, BC and VT bailed for the ACC the Big East is 3-3 in BCS Bowl Games. The ACC has only won one game. I don't see anyone bitching about that conference. You can discuss UC's blowout loss to Florida and Oklahoma's butt kicking of Connecticut, and I will discuss VT losing to Stanford by 30 last year. They have been so good that the conference actually got two BCS games this year.

Little Danny;1005028 wrote:None--- but answer my last question----- who was the last ACC school?

Since Miami, BC and VT bailed for the ACC the Big East is 3-3 in BCS Bowl Games. The ACC has only won one game. I don't see anyone bitching about that conference. You can discuss UC's blowout loss to Florida and Oklahoma's butt kicking of Connecticut, and I will discuss VT losing to Stanford by 30 last year. They have been so good that the conference actually got two BCS games this year.

People do talk shit about the ACC. This happens to be a thread about the Big East. Stop deflecting.

Need to come up with a new name for the conference if they are adding all these western teams.

GoJPM!;1005075 wrote:Need to come up with a new name for the conference if they are adding all these western teams.

Big Least

LJ;1005029 wrote:People do talk shit about the ACC. This happens to be a thread about the Big East. Stop deflecting.

Yeah, I would say the ACC gets its fair share of shit talk.

Little Danny;1005028 wrote:None--- but answer my last question----- who was the last ACC school?

Since Miami, BC and VT bailed for the ACC the Big East is 3-3 in BCS Bowl Games. The ACC has only won one game. I don't see anyone bitching about that conference. You can discuss UC's blowout loss to Florida and Oklahoma's butt kicking of Connecticut, and I will discuss VT losing to Stanford by 30 last year. They have been so good that the conference actually got two BCS games this year.

3-3 isn't exactly worth crowing about. I don't recall all the Big East opponents, but how many were against say another conferences 2/3 or at large bids?

Skyhook79;1004700 wrote:The Coat and Tie BCS committee do not want those teams playing for the NC and will do everything in their power to stop it like they have been.

Incorrect. The "coat and tie BCS committee" do not want teams from a non-AQ school playing for the NC. If these teams are in an AQ conference, the BCS will not care because the money stays in house.

It has nothing to do with the teams themselves. It has everything to do with what conference they are/are not in.

ytownfootball;1005091 wrote:3-3 isn't exactly worth crowing about. I don't recall all the Big East opponents, but how many were against say another conferences 2/3 or at large bids?

2006 WVU (BE Champs) beat Georgia (SEC Champ)
2007 UL (BE Champs) beat Wake Forest (ACC Champ)
2008 WVU (BE Champs) beat Oklahoma (B12 Champ)

The bottom line is the Big East had to make a move here. UC, UL, USF, Rutgers and UCONN were left stranded. If they could have joined other conferences I am sure they would have. If they add other eastern schools like Marshall, Temple, East Carolina, etc. then they would be screwed. Again, aside from the five left over Big East schools getting an invite to another conference, their only option would be to just give up. Those five schools have invested to much money into their programs just to willingly give up at this time.

From where San Diego State plays to where Connecticut plays, it is exactly 2,500.00 miles. Well, at least on Google Earth. That is insane.

LJ;1005080 wrote:Big Least

It was already called that. The Big East is a little better football conf now with the teams added and subtracted.

The Big East made the best move that they could. Landing Boise was a good get for them.

Airforce officially staying in the Mountain West.

http://www.gazette.com/articles/expanding-129756-story-marinatto.html

“The primary draw to stay put has to do with loyalties, has to do with regional affiliations with traditional rivals, has to do with the commitments we’ve made, and what I feel is the right thing for our cadets, for our Air Force Academy and for our Air Force.”[LEFT]

I expect this is exactly what Navy's position will be. The biggest difference, however, is that Navy is not currently in a conference. Next week will be interesting.



"....The potential for more money from the Big East didn’t override other factors, such as more travel time — for athletes and fans — and how much class time would be missed.

“That’s not who we are,” Gould said. “We don’t make decisions based solely on the potential for a big TV contract. We’re about taking care of our cadets.”..."

Love this comment. It's great to see some people still have a proper perspective on the proper priority of collegiate athletics.

[LEFT]
[/LEFT]

[/LEFT]

LOL @ people who think the Big East got better. Besides Boise, they added a bunch of crap and we'll see how Boise likes playing against the big boys week in, week out.

sleeper;1006972 wrote:LOL @ people who think the Big East got better. Besides Boise, they added a bunch of crap and we'll see how Boise likes playing against the big boys week in, week out.

Wait, is the Big East big boys or not? You kind of contradicted yourself there.