Results 61 to 70 of 1140
Thread: Big East News
-
03-21-2013, 02:54 PM #61Award Winning Poster Since 2015
-
03-21-2013, 02:58 PM #62
No they wouldn't be in before Creighton, because Creighton is a better basketball program. That's my whole point, man. The other shit is secondary. This is about basketball. Kansas is in the middle of nowhere and I'm pretty sure any basketball conference would take that addition. You're right in that it's a little bit about all of the above. A little bit. But it's a LOT about basketball. You can believe that Fox and ESPN are going to have their people fights until the bloody death like some scene out of Anchorman all you want, but the bottom line is, if Xavier, Georgetown, Marquette, Villanova, Butler, etc. all remain great programs, this league is in no jeopardy. Good players will keep coming and the games will be on TV.
As for the bottom feeders, of course every conference has them. It's impossible for everyone to win! But you don't actively seek out new bottom feeders. Nobody in the current Big East thought, "You know what, we should add X, BU and CU to be our three worst programs so that people from Cinci, Indi, and Omaha watch more of our basketball games." Why would you just add Richmond and SLU if you don't legitimately believe in their basketball sustainability (which maybe they do even if I don't)?
As for "bigger is better," well wasn't that the model of the old, dead Big East? The football conferences are certainly going that route, but they have/had the luxury of having plenty of big time programs programs that put football up top, lining up at their doorsteps waiting to get in. How many elite, private basketball only schools are out there lining up for us? The answer is zero. If we could get ND, great, but that's not the case. With that in mind, as soon as you start getting bigger for the sake of getting bigger, all you're really doing is adding programs that aren't as good at what you've already got.
-
03-21-2013, 03:01 PM #63
On second thought, why am I wasting time trying to convince the guy who a year ago thought we should go independent? Clearly you don't get it.
-
03-21-2013, 03:07 PM #64
MHettel, media empires are in business to make money. They aren't in the business of waging wars or imposing retribution. If Fox fails (and it won't -- it may not turn out to be a great deal for them, but the network will not fail in a 12-year span), ESPN will sign us in a heartbeat if there is value there. The price may go down because ESPN will have established its monopoly, but it won't be because of "revenge."
Media companies don't do business like 7 year olds. Do you think the hollywood execs like the actors, directors and agents they work with on a daily basis? Or -- better yet -- the crooked producers? Hell no. They do so because they make one another a crapload of money.
-
03-21-2013, 05:26 PM #65
Extend your line of thought. Sure ESPN can make more money by signing XU, GTown and everyone to a TV deal. In isolation, they would benefit from doing that more than NOT doing it. But they would benefit the MOST by using a failed attempt by Fox to remind EVERYONE ELSE they do business with that they are the only show in town and that they set the market. Competition. Real. Basic. Stuff.
Look at the Patriots. How do they do business. They tell you what your contract will be, then you accept it or leave. If you leave they replace you. And everyone else on the teams knows those are the terms.
-
03-21-2013, 05:33 PM #66
I dont understand how Richmond and SLU are considered bottom feeders. Richmond has been anywhere from decent to pretty darn good for about 15 years. Not great, but good. SLU has also been solid on and off for some time, and very good for a couple years. SLU has first rate facilities, a solid fan base, a market with literally NO local competition, and their addition to the BE can lure a top coach who could stay in place for awhile.
Look, aside from a handful of the very elite programs, there are no guarantees when it comes to success. You have to look at the parts and determine if the success is sustainable. Using your logic, VCU wouldnt be attractive eaither right? In my mind their primary asset is their coach, who could be gone in an instant.
-
03-21-2013, 05:36 PM #67
My point is that we assume this is a "no lose" situation. If it all works out, it will be good as gold and a great thing for the school. I expect it to work out.
But on the other hand, I'm realisitc enough to understand that it COULD all go terribibly wrong if Fox fails and the impact of that might put us in a place that is worse than where we are today.
There is a downside. I see it. I do not think it's very likely to happen. But at least I'm not sticking my head in the sand.
-
03-21-2013, 05:38 PM #68
There is no downside.
-
03-21-2013, 05:42 PM #69
-
03-21-2013, 05:43 PM #70
Bookmarks