Goodbye, Big East...

[Samuel Fang]

and good riddance.

Even if Virginia Tech never goes to another bowl game, even if Tech
becomes another Duke, even if Tech NEVER WINS ANOTHER GAME IN ANY
SPORT WHATSOEVER AGAIN, it'll all have been worth it to screw you out
of the millions each school is going to be losing.

After a solid DECADE of doing everything short of pulling Tech's pants
down and ass-raping us on the 50 yardline during Homecoming, the Big
East schools came to Tech with words like "brotherhood" and "loyalty"
and "togetherness".

Bullshit.

After including VT in the original Big East Football Conference, the
Big East hasn't done a single favor for Tech. Everything Tech has
gotten out of the Big East, Tech has EARNED through TECH'S sweat,
TECH'S blood, TECH'S tears, and yes, TECH'S money.

Starting with full round-robin conference play in 1993, the Big East
decided that Tech should play, in conference, AT Miami in back-to-back
years. Of course, Tech got a generous consolation prize: Temple at
home for two years. Gee, the turnstiles were spinning for those
games.

In 1994, when the football teams went to the rest of the Big East to
include the football-only schools in the conference for all sports,
the Big East left out VT and Temple. This, after Syracuse publicly
proclaimed that it was all or nothing: if the basketball schools
didn't accept the entire roster of football schools, the football
schools would all leave to form their own conference.

Thanks for hanging with us there, fellas.

Then, AFTER Tech picked up the conference's flag in
Alliance/Coalition/BCS games the next two years, Conference
Commissioner Mike Tranghese started SHOPPING Tech to other
conferences. In 1998, TRANGHESE approached the ACC to get the Big
East football schools included into a new, ACC football conference,
with the other sports memberhip staying the same.

Gee, thanks, Mike. Because we LOVED being in the A-freakin-10 for
non-football sports.

Finally, in 1999, the Big East magnaminously extends an invitation to
Virginia Tech to join the Big East for all sports. The cost? A $2.5
million entrance fee (to be paid over 10 years), no conference revenue
sharing in non-football sports for the first 5 years (at roughly $1.3
million a year).

Look it up. That's the STEEPEST price EVER paid by ANY school to join
ANY sports conference in the HISTORY of college athletics. Let alone
the price paid by a manna-bringing school to fully join a sixth-rated
conference.

When UConn decided to join the conference for football (UConn, being
an all-sports-but-football member, could walk in without having to go
through a vote, according to the football conference charter),
everyone rejoiced (except Temple). Tech fans were pumped: we'd
finally have a chance to fix our schedule. Tech's schedule was weak
because of conscious decision, yes, but it was also weak because of
the twin problems of 1.) NEEDING to schedule 6 home games, and 2.) the
unbalanced Big East/UVa schedule, that made Tech's "permanent"
schedule a rotation of 3 home games on odd-numbered years and 5 home
games on even-numbered years. You figure it out. At the same time,
Pittsburgh and Syracuse approached the Big East about rescheduling
Tech: they didn't want to have to play VT and Miami on the road on the
same years.

Guess who got what they wanted? VT's schedule was twisted around like
a pretzel to try to make sure Pittsburgh and Syracuse were satisfied,
while Tech was stuck with the same 3-5 split, just with new faces.

At the end of the 2000 season, when VT finished the season 10-1 and
was OBVIOUSLY deserving of a BCS bowl spot, where was Big East
Commissioner Mike Tranghese? His counterpart at the PAC-10 was loudly
and publicly announcing that Oregon State deserved a spot in the
Fiesta Bowl. Where was Tranghese with his hossanas for HIS
conference's team? Quietly happy that he didn't speak up, and
therefore anger Notre Dame?

On the other hand, as soon as Tech got a bowl bid Tech probably didn't
deserve (the '01 Gator Bowl), Tranghese quickly and decisively
instituted reforms to make sure *THAT* never happened again.

Now, did the Big East help VT? Sure. By including Tech in the
conference, Tech gained a lot of benefits. But no more than Rutgers
or Temple. Shit, Rutgers got a LOT more help than VT did, and look
what they've done with it. Could VT have made the strides in football
that it did without the Big East? No. But the Big East Football
Conference would NOT have had what success it did have without VT's
hard work. Tech EARNED everything it got from the Big East, EXCEPT
the slaps in the face.

People will say VT would have brought nothing to the Big East
basketball conference in '94, and *did* bring nothing in '00. The
latter is true, the former is not. Tech, in the '95-'96 basketball
season, went to the NCAA tournament, losing to eventual champion
Kentucky in the second round by the slimmest margin Kentucky won by
all tournament (not saying much, but it's true: Kentucky just plain
steamrolled everyone that year). If Tech were included in the first
round of expansion, TECH VERY LIKELY WOULD HAVE MADE CONTRIBUTIONS IN
BASKETBALL, TOO.

Thanks for relegating our men's basketball program to the basement,
fellas. That 5 seasons of A-10 level recruiting did wonders for our
roundball program.

And what did VT do for the Big East during this time? Oh, nothing
much. Tech was the only team, other than Miami, to win a bowl game as
Big East conference champion. Tech, while WVU was wiffing on being
bowl eligible, was the only reason *any* bowl games beyond the
Alliance/Coalition/BCS and the Gator would even LOOK at including Big
East schools (the only reasons the Gator looked were Tech and the
*chance* to pick up Notre Dame). In case nobody's noticed, Tech and
WVU were the only Big East schools that brought more than a few
thousand fans to a bowl game. The Music City Bowl might not have been
all that big a deal, but it put almost a hundred thousand dollars into
the pocket of every Big East school, and the only reason it stuck
around after that inaugural year was because of the number of fans
Tech brough with us. Notice how quickly they dropped the Big East
after Syracuse and BC brought pitiful representation in '99 and '01,
respectively?

Now, was the Big East legally within its rights to do all of these
things? Absolutely. But when you've been spending that long, toying
with a school that NEEDED these things from you and screwing them over
for as much money as you possibly could get out of them, and THEN
approach them hat in hand to not ditch your sorry asses at the first
chance, SCREW YOU.

I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[s***@yahoo.com]

Post by Samuel Fang
I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy

In the political muscle of one Mark Warner.

[Samuel Fang]

Post by s***@yahoo.com

Post by Samuel Fang
I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy

In the political muscle of one Mark Warner.

Actually, all indications are that Mark Warner did two things:
1.) Bring some more recognition to the issue.
2.) Provide cover for UVa President Casteen, who was already heavily
disposed towards helping Tech get into the ACC, but was getting some
heat from his Board of Visitors. Warner told the BoV to back off.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[xyzzy]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by s***@yahoo.com

Post by Samuel Fang
I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy

In the political muscle of one Mark Warner.

1.) Bring some more recognition to the issue.
2.) Provide cover for UVa President Casteen, who was already heavily
disposed towards helping Tech get into the ACC, but was getting some
heat from his Board of Visitors. Warner told the BoV to back off.

D00d, I'm just as happy as you to be in the ACC but let's not make
ourselves look like fools by trying to deny that the reason we are in is
because we elbowed our way in, not because the ACC wanted to add us. I
think VT is such a good fit that over time the ACC will know they did
the right thing, but in fact Warner and Casteen did cram us down their
throats! To try to deny that just makes us look dumn.

And enough with the Big East bitterness. Save it for when provoked by
BE fans with accusations of being traitors or ungrateful. Don't pull it
out gratuitously. The best revenge is living well, not in being obsessed.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[xyzzy (***@addr.net)]
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:22:02 -0400]

:Samuel Fang wrote:
:
:> Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, ***@yahoo.com ?
:>
:>
:>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400, Samuel Fang <***@vt.edu>
:>>wrote:
:>>
:>>
:>>>I'll be sitting here watching your
:>>>shittiness with pride and joy
:>>
:>>In the political muscle of one Mark Warner.
:>
:>
:> Actually, all indications are that Mark Warner did two things:
:> 1.) Bring some more recognition to the issue.
:> 2.) Provide cover for UVa President Casteen, who was already heavily
:> disposed towards helping Tech get into the ACC, but was getting some
:> heat from his Board of Visitors. Warner told the BoV to back off.
:
:D00d, I'm just as happy as you to be in the ACC but let's not make
:ourselves look like fools by trying to deny that the reason we are in is
:because we elbowed our way in, not because the ACC wanted to add us. I
:think VT is such a good fit that over time the ACC will know they did
:the right thing, but in fact Warner and Casteen did cram us down their
:throats! To try to deny that just makes us look dumn.
:
:And enough with the Big East bitterness. Save it for when provoked by
:BE fans with accusations of being traitors or ungrateful. Don't pull it
:out gratuitously. The best revenge is living well, not in being obsessed.

I submit this (again) to dispute your statement:

"Frasier: You know the expression "Living well is the best revenge"?
Niles: Wonderful expression. I just don't know how true it is, you don't
see it turning up in a lot of opera plots. "Ludwig, maddened by the
poisoning of his entire family, wreaked vengeance on Gunther in the
third act by living well.""

[xyzzy]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:22:02 -0400]
:>
:>
:>>
:>>
:>>>I'll be sitting here watching your
:>>>shittiness with pride and joy
:>>
:>>In the political muscle of one Mark Warner.
:>
:>
:> 1.) Bring some more recognition to the issue.
:> 2.) Provide cover for UVa President Casteen, who was already heavily
:> disposed towards helping Tech get into the ACC, but was getting some
:> heat from his Board of Visitors. Warner told the BoV to back off.
:D00d, I'm just as happy as you to be in the ACC but let's not make
:ourselves look like fools by trying to deny that the reason we are in is
:because we elbowed our way in, not because the ACC wanted to add us. I
:think VT is such a good fit that over time the ACC will know they did
:the right thing, but in fact Warner and Casteen did cram us down their
:throats! To try to deny that just makes us look dumn.
:And enough with the Big East bitterness. Save it for when provoked by
:BE fans with accusations of being traitors or ungrateful. Don't pull it
:out gratuitously. The best revenge is living well, not in being obsessed.
"Frasier: You know the expression "Living well is the best revenge"?
Niles: Wonderful expression. I just don't know how true it is, you don't
see it turning up in a lot of opera plots. "Ludwig, maddened by the
poisoning of his entire family, wreaked vengeance on Gunther in the
third act by living well.""

DAMB YOU SLICK, GOIN ALL CULTURED ON ME!!1!!!!

[Bryan S. Slick]

[xyzzy (***@addr.net)]
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:33:38 -0400]

:Bryan S. Slick wrote:
:
:> [xyzzy (***@addr.net)]
:> [Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:22:02 -0400]
:>
:> :Samuel Fang wrote:
:> :
:> :> Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, ***@yahoo.com ?
:> :>
:> :>
:> :>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400, Samuel Fang <***@vt.edu>
:> :>>wrote:
:> :>>
:> :>>
:> :>>>I'll be sitting here watching your
:> :>>>shittiness with pride and joy
:> :>>
:> :>>In the political muscle of one Mark Warner.
:> :>
:> :>
:> :> Actually, all indications are that Mark Warner did two things:
:> :> 1.) Bring some more recognition to the issue.
:> :> 2.) Provide cover for UVa President Casteen, who was already heavily
:> :> disposed towards helping Tech get into the ACC, but was getting some
:> :> heat from his Board of Visitors. Warner told the BoV to back off.
:> :
:> :D00d, I'm just as happy as you to be in the ACC but let's not make
:> :ourselves look like fools by trying to deny that the reason we are in is
:> :because we elbowed our way in, not because the ACC wanted to add us. I
:> :think VT is such a good fit that over time the ACC will know they did
:> :the right thing, but in fact Warner and Casteen did cram us down their
:> :throats! To try to deny that just makes us look dumn.
:> :
:> :And enough with the Big East bitterness. Save it for when provoked by
:> :BE fans with accusations of being traitors or ungrateful. Don't pull it
:> :out gratuitously. The best revenge is living well, not in being obsessed.
:>
:> I submit this (again) to dispute your statement:
:>
:> "Frasier: You know the expression "Living well is the best revenge"?
:> Niles: Wonderful expression. I just don't know how true it is, you don't
:> see it turning up in a lot of opera plots. "Ludwig, maddened by the
:> poisoning of his entire family, wreaked vengeance on Gunther in the
:> third act by living well.""
:>
:>
:
:DAMB YOU SLICK, GOIN ALL CULTURED ON ME!!1!!!!

What's sad is that I remember an episode of Frasier I haven't seen in at
least four years well enough to find the quote via Google.

[Samuel Fang]

<snip>

Post by xyzzy

Post by Samuel Fang
1.) Bring some more recognition to the issue.
2.) Provide cover for UVa President Casteen, who was already heavily
disposed towards helping Tech get into the ACC, but was getting some
heat from his Board of Visitors. Warner told the BoV to back off.

D00d, I'm just as happy as you to be in the ACC but let's not make
ourselves look like fools by trying to deny that the reason we are in is
because we elbowed our way in, not because the ACC wanted to add us. I
think VT is such a good fit that over time the ACC will know they did
the right thing, but in fact Warner and Casteen did cram us down their
throats! To try to deny that just makes us look dumn.

I think Casteen rammed Tech down the ACC's throat.
I'm not entirely sure that Warner did all that much to make it happen.
I'm pretty sure Tech did less politicing than Warner, when all's said
and done.

I don't think Tech was shrewd, or smart, or brilliant in getting into
the ACC. I think Tech is the guy who is lost, gets hit by a tornado,
and the tornado drops him down gently onto his porch back home.

In short, we'uns got lucky.

Post by xyzzy
And enough with the Big East bitterness. Save it for when provoked by
BE fans with accusations of being traitors or ungrateful. Don't pull it
out gratuitously. The best revenge is living well, not in being obsessed.

Today's the day to say goodbye. On my way out, I'll let 'em know how
I feel.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.
Even if Virginia Tech never goes to another bowl game, even if Tech
becomes another Duke, even if Tech NEVER WINS ANOTHER GAME IN ANY
SPORT WHATSOEVER AGAIN, it'll all have been worth it to screw you out
of the millions each school is going to be losing.
After a solid DECADE of doing everything short of pulling Tech's pants
down and ass-raping us on the 50 yardline during Homecoming, the Big
East schools came to Tech with words like "brotherhood" and "loyalty"
and "togetherness".
Bullshit.
After including VT in the original Big East Football Conference, the
Big East hasn't done a single favor for Tech. Everything Tech has
gotten out of the Big East, Tech has EARNED through TECH'S sweat,
TECH'S blood, TECH'S tears, and yes, TECH'S money.
Starting with full round-robin conference play in 1993, the Big East
decided that Tech should play, in conference, AT Miami in back-to-back
years. Of course, Tech got a generous consolation prize: Temple at
home for two years. Gee, the turnstiles were spinning for those
games.
In 1994, when the football teams went to the rest of the Big East to
include the football-only schools in the conference for all sports,
the Big East left out VT and Temple. This, after Syracuse publicly
proclaimed that it was all or nothing: if the basketball schools
didn't accept the entire roster of football schools, the football
schools would all leave to form their own conference.
Thanks for hanging with us there, fellas.
Then, AFTER Tech picked up the conference's flag in
Alliance/Coalition/BCS games the next two years, Conference
Commissioner Mike Tranghese started SHOPPING Tech to other
conferences. In 1998, TRANGHESE approached the ACC to get the Big
East football schools included into a new, ACC football conference,
with the other sports memberhip staying the same.
Gee, thanks, Mike. Because we LOVED being in the A-freakin-10 for
non-football sports.
Finally, in 1999, the Big East magnaminously extends an invitation to
Virginia Tech to join the Big East for all sports. The cost? A $2.5
million entrance fee (to be paid over 10 years), no conference revenue
sharing in non-football sports for the first 5 years (at roughly $1.3
million a year).
Look it up. That's the STEEPEST price EVER paid by ANY school to join
ANY sports conference in the HISTORY of college athletics. Let alone
the price paid by a manna-bringing school to fully join a sixth-rated
conference.
When UConn decided to join the conference for football (UConn, being
an all-sports-but-football member, could walk in without having to go
through a vote, according to the football conference charter),
everyone rejoiced (except Temple). Tech fans were pumped: we'd
finally have a chance to fix our schedule. Tech's schedule was weak
because of conscious decision, yes, but it was also weak because of
the twin problems of 1.) NEEDING to schedule 6 home games, and 2.) the
unbalanced Big East/UVa schedule, that made Tech's "permanent"
schedule a rotation of 3 home games on odd-numbered years and 5 home
games on even-numbered years. You figure it out. At the same time,
Pittsburgh and Syracuse approached the Big East about rescheduling
Tech: they didn't want to have to play VT and Miami on the road on the
same years.
Guess who got what they wanted? VT's schedule was twisted around like
a pretzel to try to make sure Pittsburgh and Syracuse were satisfied,
while Tech was stuck with the same 3-5 split, just with new faces.
At the end of the 2000 season, when VT finished the season 10-1 and
was OBVIOUSLY deserving of a BCS bowl spot, where was Big East
Commissioner Mike Tranghese? His counterpart at the PAC-10 was loudly
and publicly announcing that Oregon State deserved a spot in the
Fiesta Bowl. Where was Tranghese with his hossanas for HIS
conference's team? Quietly happy that he didn't speak up, and
therefore anger Notre Dame?
On the other hand, as soon as Tech got a bowl bid Tech probably didn't
deserve (the '01 Gator Bowl), Tranghese quickly and decisively
instituted reforms to make sure *THAT* never happened again.
Now, did the Big East help VT? Sure. By including Tech in the
conference, Tech gained a lot of benefits. But no more than Rutgers
or Temple. Shit, Rutgers got a LOT more help than VT did, and look
what they've done with it. Could VT have made the strides in football
that it did without the Big East? No. But the Big East Football
Conference would NOT have had what success it did have without VT's
hard work. Tech EARNED everything it got from the Big East, EXCEPT
the slaps in the face.
People will say VT would have brought nothing to the Big East
basketball conference in '94, and *did* bring nothing in '00. The
latter is true, the former is not. Tech, in the '95-'96 basketball
season, went to the NCAA tournament, losing to eventual champion
Kentucky in the second round by the slimmest margin Kentucky won by
all tournament (not saying much, but it's true: Kentucky just plain
steamrolled everyone that year). If Tech were included in the first
round of expansion, TECH VERY LIKELY WOULD HAVE MADE CONTRIBUTIONS IN
BASKETBALL, TOO.
Thanks for relegating our men's basketball program to the basement,
fellas. That 5 seasons of A-10 level recruiting did wonders for our
roundball program.
And what did VT do for the Big East during this time? Oh, nothing
much. Tech was the only team, other than Miami, to win a bowl game as
Big East conference champion. Tech, while WVU was wiffing on being
bowl eligible, was the only reason *any* bowl games beyond the
Alliance/Coalition/BCS and the Gator would even LOOK at including Big
East schools (the only reasons the Gator looked were Tech and the
*chance* to pick up Notre Dame). In case nobody's noticed, Tech and
WVU were the only Big East schools that brought more than a few
thousand fans to a bowl game. The Music City Bowl might not have been
all that big a deal, but it put almost a hundred thousand dollars into
the pocket of every Big East school, and the only reason it stuck
around after that inaugural year was because of the number of fans
Tech brough with us. Notice how quickly they dropped the Big East
after Syracuse and BC brought pitiful representation in '99 and '01,
respectively?
Now, was the Big East legally within its rights to do all of these
things? Absolutely. But when you've been spending that long, toying
with a school that NEEDED these things from you and screwing them over
for as much money as you possibly could get out of them, and THEN
approach them hat in hand to not ditch your sorry asses at the first
chance, SCREW YOU.
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

YSB. AYB?

Post by Samuel Fang
--
Samuel Fang
"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Alan Mundy]

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.
Even if Virginia Tech never goes to another bowl game, even if Tech
becomes another Duke, even if Tech NEVER WINS ANOTHER GAME IN ANY
SPORT WHATSOEVER AGAIN, it'll all have been worth it to screw you out
of the millions each school is going to be losing.
After a solid DECADE of doing everything short of pulling Tech's pants
down and ass-raping us on the 50 yardline during Homecoming, the Big
East schools came to Tech with words like "brotherhood" and "loyalty"
and "togetherness".
Bullshit.
After including VT in the original Big East Football Conference, the
Big East hasn't done a single favor for Tech. Everything Tech has
gotten out of the Big East, Tech has EARNED through TECH'S sweat,
TECH'S blood, TECH'S tears, and yes, TECH'S money.
Starting with full round-robin conference play in 1993, the Big East
decided that Tech should play, in conference, AT Miami in back-to-back
years. Of course, Tech got a generous consolation prize: Temple at
home for two years. Gee, the turnstiles were spinning for those
games.
In 1994, when the football teams went to the rest of the Big East to
include the football-only schools in the conference for all sports,
the Big East left out VT and Temple. This, after Syracuse publicly
proclaimed that it was all or nothing: if the basketball schools
didn't accept the entire roster of football schools, the football
schools would all leave to form their own conference.
Thanks for hanging with us there, fellas.
Then, AFTER Tech picked up the conference's flag in
Alliance/Coalition/BCS games the next two years, Conference
Commissioner Mike Tranghese started SHOPPING Tech to other
conferences. In 1998, TRANGHESE approached the ACC to get the Big
East football schools included into a new, ACC football conference,
with the other sports memberhip staying the same.
Gee, thanks, Mike. Because we LOVED being in the A-freakin-10 for
non-football sports.
Finally, in 1999, the Big East magnaminously extends an invitation to
Virginia Tech to join the Big East for all sports. The cost? A $2.5
million entrance fee (to be paid over 10 years), no conference revenue
sharing in non-football sports for the first 5 years (at roughly $1.3
million a year).
Look it up. That's the STEEPEST price EVER paid by ANY school to join
ANY sports conference in the HISTORY of college athletics. Let alone
the price paid by a manna-bringing school to fully join a sixth-rated
conference.
When UConn decided to join the conference for football (UConn, being
an all-sports-but-football member, could walk in without having to go
through a vote, according to the football conference charter),
everyone rejoiced (except Temple). Tech fans were pumped: we'd
finally have a chance to fix our schedule. Tech's schedule was weak
because of conscious decision, yes, but it was also weak because of
the twin problems of 1.) NEEDING to schedule 6 home games, and 2.) the
unbalanced Big East/UVa schedule, that made Tech's "permanent"
schedule a rotation of 3 home games on odd-numbered years and 5 home
games on even-numbered years. You figure it out. At the same time,
Pittsburgh and Syracuse approached the Big East about rescheduling
Tech: they didn't want to have to play VT and Miami on the road on the
same years.
Guess who got what they wanted? VT's schedule was twisted around like
a pretzel to try to make sure Pittsburgh and Syracuse were satisfied,
while Tech was stuck with the same 3-5 split, just with new faces.
At the end of the 2000 season, when VT finished the season 10-1 and
was OBVIOUSLY deserving of a BCS bowl spot, where was Big East
Commissioner Mike Tranghese? His counterpart at the PAC-10 was loudly
and publicly announcing that Oregon State deserved a spot in the
Fiesta Bowl. Where was Tranghese with his hossanas for HIS
conference's team? Quietly happy that he didn't speak up, and
therefore anger Notre Dame?
On the other hand, as soon as Tech got a bowl bid Tech probably didn't
deserve (the '01 Gator Bowl), Tranghese quickly and decisively
instituted reforms to make sure *THAT* never happened again.
Now, did the Big East help VT? Sure. By including Tech in the
conference, Tech gained a lot of benefits. But no more than Rutgers
or Temple. Shit, Rutgers got a LOT more help than VT did, and look
what they've done with it. Could VT have made the strides in football
that it did without the Big East? No. But the Big East Football
Conference would NOT have had what success it did have without VT's
hard work. Tech EARNED everything it got from the Big East, EXCEPT
the slaps in the face.
People will say VT would have brought nothing to the Big East
basketball conference in '94, and *did* bring nothing in '00. The
latter is true, the former is not. Tech, in the '95-'96 basketball
season, went to the NCAA tournament, losing to eventual champion
Kentucky in the second round by the slimmest margin Kentucky won by
all tournament (not saying much, but it's true: Kentucky just plain
steamrolled everyone that year). If Tech were included in the first
round of expansion, TECH VERY LIKELY WOULD HAVE MADE CONTRIBUTIONS IN
BASKETBALL, TOO.
Thanks for relegating our men's basketball program to the basement,
fellas. That 5 seasons of A-10 level recruiting did wonders for our
roundball program.
And what did VT do for the Big East during this time? Oh, nothing
much. Tech was the only team, other than Miami, to win a bowl game as
Big East conference champion. Tech, while WVU was wiffing on being
bowl eligible, was the only reason *any* bowl games beyond the
Alliance/Coalition/BCS and the Gator would even LOOK at including Big
East schools (the only reasons the Gator looked were Tech and the
*chance* to pick up Notre Dame). In case nobody's noticed, Tech and
WVU were the only Big East schools that brought more than a few
thousand fans to a bowl game. The Music City Bowl might not have been
all that big a deal, but it put almost a hundred thousand dollars into
the pocket of every Big East school, and the only reason it stuck
around after that inaugural year was because of the number of fans
Tech brough with us. Notice how quickly they dropped the Big East
after Syracuse and BC brought pitiful representation in '99 and '01,
respectively?
Now, was the Big East legally within its rights to do all of these
things? Absolutely. But when you've been spending that long, toying
with a school that NEEDED these things from you and screwing them over
for as much money as you possibly could get out of them, and THEN
approach them hat in hand to not ditch your sorry asses at the first
chance, SCREW YOU.
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

You went from one conference that didn't want you to another conference
that doesn't want you.

Big F'in deal.

--
Alan Mundy

[Bryan S. Slick]

[Samuel Fang (***@vt.edu)]
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400]

:I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
:Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
:programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
:CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
:shittiness with pride and joy.

Post of the Year, by far, so far.

Brought a tear to me eye, it did.

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400]
:I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
:Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
:programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
:CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
:shittiness with pride and joy.
Post of the Year, by far, so far.
Brought a tear to me eye, it did.

Invalid nomination. Obvious conflict of interest.

[Clockwork Orange]

Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries, Bryan

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400]
:I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
:Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
:programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
:CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
:shittiness with pride and joy.
Post of the Year, by far, so far.
Brought a tear to me eye, it did.

Yes, y'all go take your perennially underacheiving football program
down to an irrelevent football conference. That'll help for sure.
Meanwhile the Big East is becoming the nation's premier basketball
conference.

Both y'all sound bitter, but not near as bitter as yer gonna be.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Clockwork Orange

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries, Bryan

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400]
:I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
:Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
:programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
:CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
:shittiness with pride and joy.
Post of the Year, by far, so far.
Brought a tear to me eye, it did.

Yes, y'all go take your perennially underacheiving football program
down to an irrelevent football conference. That'll help for sure.
Meanwhile the Big East is becoming the nation's premier basketball
conference.
Both y'all sound bitter, but not near as bitter as yer gonna be.

Please be enjoying the drastic cutbacks in all of your athletic
budgets, and becoming the a bouncyball conference while everyone knows
the future of college athletics is in football.

When ABC/ESPN renegotiate the Big East's TV contract, you'll be more
than just bitter, you'll be angry at how badly Syracuse in particular
has handled the expansion/breakaway/football issue since 1980.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Clockwork Orange]

Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yes, y'all go take your perennially underacheiving football
program down to an irrelevent football conference. That'll help
for sure. Meanwhile the Big East is becoming the nation's
premier basketball conference.
Both y'all sound bitter, but not near as bitter as yer gonna be.

Please be enjoying the drastic cutbacks in all of your athletic
budgets, and becoming the a bouncyball conference while everyone
knows the future of college athletics is in football.

Tell that to March Madness, Sparky. That sucker's stronger'n rent.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Clockwork Orange

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yes, y'all go take your perennially underacheiving football
program down to an irrelevent football conference. That'll help
for sure. Meanwhile the Big East is becoming the nation's
premier basketball conference.
Both y'all sound bitter, but not near as bitter as yer gonna be.

Please be enjoying the drastic cutbacks in all of your athletic
budgets, and becoming the a bouncyball conference while everyone
knows the future of college athletics is in football.

Tell that to March Madness, Sparky. That sucker's stronger'n rent.

I disagree. The Only Thing That Matters after the Meaningless Regular
Season isn't doomed by any means, but it's not power player in college
athletics: college football's bowl and BCS systems are.

The Bball Tournament is a wholly owned entity of the NCAA, and the
NCAA has the real power there. In effect, your bouncyball conference
will be sharing its power with the likes of the A-10, the Big West,
etc., and will likely be looking up at the football power conferences.

Bowl games and the BCS represent an independent source of revenue,
outside the direct control of the NCAA. Bowls are the power
bargaining chip in the college sports landscape that allow the power
conferences to maintain their power position. And no, I don't see
anything wrong with that: just how has CUSA contributed to college
football, in terms of money and exposure?

And this doesn't even start on the issue of how vulnerable the New Big
East is to poaching. If the Big Televen comes calling to either
Syracuse, Notre Dame, or Pittsburgh, they'd be well advised to run
with it. This partial-membership thing is the Achilles Heel of the
Big East, and it still hasn't been resolved. In fact, the Big East
has simply made it worse, with weaker components.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Clockwork Orange]

Sam,

I don't really disagree with much of your post, but for you to
simply dismiss college basketball as irrelevent while claiming
football is "the future of college athletics" seems hyperbolic.
That's all I'm saying.
--Jeff

Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Clockwork Orange

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yes, y'all go take your perennially underacheiving football
program down to an irrelevent football conference. That'll
help for sure. Meanwhile the Big East is becoming the nation's
premier basketball conference.
Both y'all sound bitter, but not near as bitter as yer gonna
be.

Please be enjoying the drastic cutbacks in all of your
athletic budgets, and becoming the a bouncyball conference
while everyone knows the future of college athletics is in
football.

Tell that to March Madness, Sparky. That sucker's stronger'n
rent.

I disagree. The Only Thing That Matters after the Meaningless
Regular Season isn't doomed by any means, but it's not power
player in college athletics: college football's bowl and BCS
systems are.
The Bball Tournament is a wholly owned entity of the NCAA, and
the NCAA has the real power there. In effect, your bouncyball
conference will be sharing its power with the likes of the A-10,
the Big West, etc., and will likely be looking up at the
football power conferences.
Bowl games and the BCS represent an independent source of
revenue, outside the direct control of the NCAA. Bowls are the
power bargaining chip in the college sports landscape that allow
the power conferences to maintain their power position. And no,
I don't see anything wrong with that: just how has CUSA
contributed to college football, in terms of money and exposure?
And this doesn't even start on the issue of how vulnerable the
New Big East is to poaching. If the Big Televen comes calling
to either Syracuse, Notre Dame, or Pittsburgh, they'd be well
advised to run with it. This partial-membership thing is the
Achilles Heel of the Big East, and it still hasn't been
resolved. In fact, the Big East has simply made it worse, with
weaker components.

[lein]

Post by Clockwork Orange
Sam,
I don't really disagree with much of your post, but for you to
simply dismiss college basketball as irrelevent while claiming
football is "the future of college athletics" seems hyperbolic.
That's all I'm saying.
--Jeff

College basketball is pretty much maxed out as far as revenue growth. What
else can you do to add money? Up march-madness to 128 teams? Shift a lot
of team affiliations?


There is still money to be realized with College football if a league can
get the right additions and add a championship game. (right additions
meaning the championship game doesn't subsidize adding the new team). Bowls
are still negotiated at the conference level and if the ABC/ESPN monopoly
ends, there's playoff revenue to be had.

[Clockwork Orange]

Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by lein

Post by Clockwork Orange
I don't really disagree with much of your post, but for you to
simply dismiss college basketball as irrelevent while claiming
football is "the future of college athletics" seems hyperbolic.
That's all I'm saying.
--Jeff

College basketball is pretty much maxed out as far as revenue
growth. What else can you do to add money? Up march-madness to
128 teams? Shift a lot of team affiliations?
There is still money to be realized with College football if a
league can get the right additions and add a championship game.
(right additions meaning the championship game doesn't subsidize
adding the new team). Bowls are still negotiated at the
conference level and if the ABC/ESPN monopoly ends, there's
playoff revenue to be had.

Granted, a league that doesn't already have one can add a
championship game. That's a one-time bullet, though, and there are
only so many leagues.

As far as March Madness goes, there are always TV/radio contracts
and advertising/sponsorship revenue, both of which are negotiable
on a periodic basis.

Again, I'm not dissing football, yeah it's #1, but bounceyball is
a strong #2. This "future of college athletics" crappe is out of
line.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Clockwork Orange

Post by Clockwork Orange
Sam,
I don't really disagree with much of your post, but for you to
simply dismiss college basketball as irrelevent while claiming
football is "the future of college athletics" seems hyperbolic.
That's all I'm saying.

On that, I can agree. Honestly, Jeff, I wish you all the best in the
new Big East. Actually, for your sake, I hope the Big Televen picks
you guys.

Syracuse has always been my 2nd favorite Big East team, simply because
of the friends I've had who were Syracuse grads. I frankly think
Syracuse's athletic department has made some ridiculously bad choices
over the years, and I really don't feel bad seeing the program suffer
because of those bad decisions.

Jeff, can you honestly say Syracuse is a victim here, or is Syracuse
finally getting their come-uppance for more than two decades of going
south when they should have gone north?

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Clockwork Orange]

Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Clockwork Orange
I don't really disagree with much of your post, but for you to
simply dismiss college basketball as irrelevent while claiming
football is "the future of college athletics" seems hyperbolic.
That's all I'm saying.

On that, I can agree. Honestly, Jeff, I wish you all the best
in the new Big East. Actually, for your sake, I hope the Big
Televen picks you guys.
Syracuse has always been my 2nd favorite Big East team, simply
because of the friends I've had who were Syracuse grads. I
frankly think Syracuse's athletic department has made some
ridiculously bad choices over the years, and I really don't feel
bad seeing the program suffer because of those bad decisions.
Jeff, can you honestly say Syracuse is a victim here, or is
Syracuse finally getting their come-uppance for more than two
decades of going south when they should have gone north?

They've done some stupid shit, you'll get no argument from me on that
one.

[Bill Lang]

Nevermind the facts, Clockwork Orange, just give me the details!

Post by Clockwork Orange
Yer mother was a hamster and yer father smelt of elderberries,

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:48:16 -0400]
:I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse,
:WVU, Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the
:athletic programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by
:the MWC and CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here
:watching your shittiness with pride and joy.
Post of the Year, by far, so far.
Brought a tear to me eye, it did.

Yes, y'all go take your perennially underacheiving football
program down to an irrelevent football conference. That'll help
for sure. Meanwhile the Big East is becoming the nation's
premier basketball conference.

What is this "basketball"? Are those what are in those sacks
Tranghese has been squeezin"?

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.
Even if Virginia Tech never goes to another bowl game, even if Tech
becomes another Duke, even if Tech NEVER WINS ANOTHER GAME IN ANY
SPORT WHATSOEVER AGAIN, it'll all have been worth it to screw you out
of the millions each school is going to be losing.
After a solid DECADE of doing everything short of pulling Tech's pants
down and ass-raping us on the 50 yardline during Homecoming, the Big
East schools came to Tech with words like "brotherhood" and "loyalty"
and "togetherness".
Bullshit.
After including VT in the original Big East Football Conference, the
Big East hasn't done a single favor for Tech. Everything Tech has
gotten out of the Big East, Tech has EARNED through TECH'S sweat,
TECH'S blood, TECH'S tears, and yes, TECH'S money.
Starting with full round-robin conference play in 1993, the Big East
decided that Tech should play, in conference, AT Miami in back-to-back
years. Of course, Tech got a generous consolation prize: Temple at
home for two years. Gee, the turnstiles were spinning for those
games.
In 1994, when the football teams went to the rest of the Big East to
include the football-only schools in the conference for all sports,
the Big East left out VT and Temple. This, after Syracuse publicly
proclaimed that it was all or nothing: if the basketball schools
didn't accept the entire roster of football schools, the football
schools would all leave to form their own conference.
Thanks for hanging with us there, fellas.
Then, AFTER Tech picked up the conference's flag in
Alliance/Coalition/BCS games the next two years, Conference
Commissioner Mike Tranghese started SHOPPING Tech to other
conferences. In 1998, TRANGHESE approached the ACC to get the Big
East football schools included into a new, ACC football conference,
with the other sports memberhip staying the same.
Gee, thanks, Mike. Because we LOVED being in the A-freakin-10 for
non-football sports.
Finally, in 1999, the Big East magnaminously extends an invitation to
Virginia Tech to join the Big East for all sports. The cost? A $2.5
million entrance fee (to be paid over 10 years), no conference revenue
sharing in non-football sports for the first 5 years (at roughly $1.3
million a year).
Look it up. That's the STEEPEST price EVER paid by ANY school to join
ANY sports conference in the HISTORY of college athletics. Let alone
the price paid by a manna-bringing school to fully join a sixth-rated
conference.
When UConn decided to join the conference for football (UConn, being
an all-sports-but-football member, could walk in without having to go
through a vote, according to the football conference charter),
everyone rejoiced (except Temple). Tech fans were pumped: we'd
finally have a chance to fix our schedule. Tech's schedule was weak
because of conscious decision, yes, but it was also weak because of
the twin problems of 1.) NEEDING to schedule 6 home games, and 2.) the
unbalanced Big East/UVa schedule, that made Tech's "permanent"
schedule a rotation of 3 home games on odd-numbered years and 5 home
games on even-numbered years. You figure it out. At the same time,
Pittsburgh and Syracuse approached the Big East about rescheduling
Tech: they didn't want to have to play VT and Miami on the road on the
same years.
Guess who got what they wanted? VT's schedule was twisted around like
a pretzel to try to make sure Pittsburgh and Syracuse were satisfied,
while Tech was stuck with the same 3-5 split, just with new faces.
At the end of the 2000 season, when VT finished the season 10-1 and
was OBVIOUSLY deserving of a BCS bowl spot, where was Big East
Commissioner Mike Tranghese? His counterpart at the PAC-10 was loudly
and publicly announcing that Oregon State deserved a spot in the
Fiesta Bowl. Where was Tranghese with his hossanas for HIS
conference's team? Quietly happy that he didn't speak up, and
therefore anger Notre Dame?
On the other hand, as soon as Tech got a bowl bid Tech probably didn't
deserve (the '01 Gator Bowl), Tranghese quickly and decisively
instituted reforms to make sure *THAT* never happened again.
Now, did the Big East help VT? Sure. By including Tech in the
conference, Tech gained a lot of benefits. But no more than Rutgers
or Temple. Shit, Rutgers got a LOT more help than VT did, and look
what they've done with it. Could VT have made the strides in football
that it did without the Big East? No. But the Big East Football
Conference would NOT have had what success it did have without VT's
hard work. Tech EARNED everything it got from the Big East, EXCEPT
the slaps in the face.
People will say VT would have brought nothing to the Big East
basketball conference in '94, and *did* bring nothing in '00. The
latter is true, the former is not. Tech, in the '95-'96 basketball
season, went to the NCAA tournament, losing to eventual champion
Kentucky in the second round by the slimmest margin Kentucky won by
all tournament (not saying much, but it's true: Kentucky just plain
steamrolled everyone that year). If Tech were included in the first
round of expansion, TECH VERY LIKELY WOULD HAVE MADE CONTRIBUTIONS IN
BASKETBALL, TOO.
Thanks for relegating our men's basketball program to the basement,
fellas. That 5 seasons of A-10 level recruiting did wonders for our
roundball program.
And what did VT do for the Big East during this time? Oh, nothing
much. Tech was the only team, other than Miami, to win a bowl game as
Big East conference champion. Tech, while WVU was wiffing on being
bowl eligible, was the only reason *any* bowl games beyond the
Alliance/Coalition/BCS and the Gator would even LOOK at including Big
East schools (the only reasons the Gator looked were Tech and the
*chance* to pick up Notre Dame). In case nobody's noticed, Tech and
WVU were the only Big East schools that brought more than a few
thousand fans to a bowl game. The Music City Bowl might not have been
all that big a deal, but it put almost a hundred thousand dollars into
the pocket of every Big East school, and the only reason it stuck
around after that inaugural year was because of the number of fans
Tech brough with us. Notice how quickly they dropped the Big East
after Syracuse and BC brought pitiful representation in '99 and '01,
respectively?
Now, was the Big East legally within its rights to do all of these
things? Absolutely. But when you've been spending that long, toying
with a school that NEEDED these things from you and screwing them over
for as much money as you possibly could get out of them, and THEN
approach them hat in hand to not ditch your sorry asses at the first
chance, SCREW YOU.
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

The Big East might have treated you better if you hadn't insisted on 1-
fer-1's from Real Football Schools.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

The Big East might have treated you better if you hadn't insisted on 1-
fer-1's from Real Football Schools.

Which would make some sense, if we were talking about OOC scheduling.

Which we're not.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

The Big East might have treated you better if you hadn't insisted on 1-
fer-1's from Real Football Schools.

Which would make some sense, if we were talking about OOC scheduling.
Which we're not.

But it's the ROOT CAUSE of Tech's dis, don't you see?

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by James Schrumpf
The Big East might have treated you better if you hadn't insisted on 1-
fer-1's from Real Football Schools.

Which would make some sense, if we were talking about OOC scheduling.
Which we're not.

But it's the ROOT CAUSE of Tech's dis, don't you see?

Please be explaining this Hillbilly logic to we'uns, Jamie.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by James Schrumpf
The Big East might have treated you better if you hadn't insisted on
1- fer-1's from Real Football Schools.

Which would make some sense, if we were talking about OOC
scheduling.
Which we're not.

But it's the ROOT CAUSE of Tech's dis, don't you see?

Please be explaining this Hillbilly logic to we'uns, Jamie.

See, the BE knew VT would never contribute in a bouncyball way, and by
refusing to go out and play Big Name Schools unless they'd agree to come
out to Blecchsburg for a rematch, you cost the BE many $$$.

Therefore, they hate you.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Please be explaining this Hillbilly logic to we'uns, Jamie.

See, the BE knew VT would never contribute in a bouncyball way, and by

This is rong. In the 1994/1995 bouncyball season, VT went to and won
the NIT. Now, that ain't a whole lot in the grand scheme of things,
but it *did* mean VT was a halfway respectable program.

In the 1995/1996 bouncyball season, VT went to the NCAA Tournament,
and only lost in the second round to eventual champion Kentucky.

That was an example of what one halfway solid recruiting class
(brought in mostly by the chance that VT would be a full BE member by
their senior years) could do for Tech back in '94.

I'm not going to sit here and say VT's men's basketball program would
have won a national championship if the BE had included Tech in '94,
but Tech *would* have likely been a solid, solid basketball program.
In that scenario, Tech would more often than not have gone to either
the NCAA or NIT tourneys.

Post by James Schrumpf
refusing to go out and play Big Name Schools unless they'd agree to come
out to Blecchsburg for a rematch, you cost the BE many $$$.

You don't want me to start again on just how much money Tech has
brought to the Big East over the years. On the Big East newsgroup,
we've discussed the lack of bowl tie-ins for the Big East, as compared
to other "Big Six" conferences.

After the BCS slot and the Gator Bowl, it can be argued that (because
WVU wasn't bowl eligible for much of this past decade) Tech was the
only attractive Big East team to the bowl comittees that awarded bowl
tie-ins. After a certain point, TV revenue money doesn't mean much to
the bowl comittees: they only really need to get the minimum necessary
to satisfay ABC/ESPN. After that, what they make their money off of
is butts in seats. Other than WVU, VT was the only school in the Big
East that could put butts in seats at a bowl game.

And regarding playing Big Name Schools: bullshit. Under both the CBS
and ABC/ESPN contracts, the Big East has NEVER gone above the minimum
contracted games those television partners have been obligated to
show. Not when WVU played UMD, not when Miami played PSU, not when
Syracuse played NC State, not when VT played TAMU, and not when BC
played ND.

VT was no more resonsbile for those lackluster television draws than
any other Big East school, and probably considerably LESS responsible.

Shit, WVU's backslide in Nehlen's later years hurt the Big East a LOT
more financially (TV-wise) than VT's scheduling philosophy.

And frankly, if the Big East cared that much about Tech's scheduling,
the Big East wouldn't have put Tech behind the eight-ball with the 3/5
split scheduling.

Post by James Schrumpf
Therefore, they hate you.

But they should hate Miami and WVU a hell of a lot more.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[xyzzy]

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.

The Big East might have treated you better if you hadn't insisted on 1-
fer-1's from Real Football Schools.

Which would make some sense, if we were talking about OOC scheduling.
Which we're not.

But it's the ROOT CAUSE of Tech's dis, don't you see?

I thougth the root cause was the suckitude of our bounceyball team

[Samuel Fang]

<snip>

Post by xyzzy

Post by James Schrumpf
But it's the ROOT CAUSE of Tech's dis, don't you see?

I thougth the root cause was the suckitude of our bounceyball team

I think they'd love to say that, but I think I shot that one down in
paragraph #1,407.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Dave Christian]

VT should have been in the ACC long ago.

Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

[Pauli G]

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.

Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that Tech's
left.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Daniel Seriff]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.
Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that Tech's
left.

In a conference with Rutgers and Temple (for one more season, at any rate),
no one else is qualified to be a conference prison bitch.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see UConn win a Big East championship
within the next five years.

[Samuel Fang]

<snip>

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Samuel Fang
Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.
Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that Tech's
left.

In a conference with Rutgers and Temple (for one more season, at any rate),
no one else is qualified to be a conference prison bitch.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see UConn win a Big East championship
within the next five years.

I ain't talking about on the field. I'm talking about the designated
"screw them over for as much money as you can extort from them" team.

Which, given the football revenue sharing deal UConn had to sign, that
designated prison bitch plays home games at Rentschler Field.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Dave Christian]

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.
Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that Tech's
left.

In a conference with Rutgers and Temple (for one more season, at any rate),
no one else is qualified to be a conference prison bitch.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see UConn win a Big East championship
within the next five years.

Agreed. UConn is successful at whatever they put their resources
behind. A strong UConn football program is likely.

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.
Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that Tech's
left.

In a conference with Rutgers and Temple (for one more season, at any rate),
no one else is qualified to be a conference prison bitch.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see UConn win a Big East championship
within the next five years.

Agreed. UConn is successful at whatever they put their resources
behind. A strong UConn football program is likely.

Again, I'm not talking about UConn's on-field program. I would have
greatly preferred the ACC taking UConn instead of BC.

I'm referring to the Big East apparently needing a designated mugging
victim from whom they can extort all the money they can. That
designated victim used to be VT. Looking at the football "revenue
sharing" deal between the Big East and UConn, I think it's pretty
obvious who the new designated victim is.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.
Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that
Tech's left.

In a conference with Rutgers and Temple (for one more season, at any
rate), no one else is qualified to be a conference prison bitch.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see UConn win a Big East
championship within the next five years.

Agreed. UConn is successful at whatever they put their resources
behind. A strong UConn football program is likely.

Again, I'm not talking about UConn's on-field program. I would have
greatly preferred the ACC taking UConn instead of BC.
I'm referring to the Big East apparently needing a designated mugging
victim from whom they can extort all the money they can. That
designated victim used to be VT. Looking at the football "revenue
sharing" deal between the Big East and UConn, I think it's pretty
obvious who the new designated victim is.

Perhaps your problem is your hallucination that the BE is about football.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Again, I'm not talking about UConn's on-field program. I would have
greatly preferred the ACC taking UConn instead of BC.
I'm referring to the Big East apparently needing a designated mugging
victim from whom they can extort all the money they can. That
designated victim used to be VT. Looking at the football "revenue
sharing" deal between the Big East and UConn, I think it's pretty
obvious who the new designated victim is.

Perhaps your problem is your hallucination that the BE is about football.

No, I'm aware the Big East sees football as nothing more than a
distraction from the basketball season. I see that as yet another
example of how poorly led and how completely lacking in vision the Big
East leadership is.

Basketball is the solid #2 collegiate sport. But if the Big East
decides to be a basketball power and to de-emphasize football, it's
paving a path for itself to become a mid-major conference instead of a
real power conference.

Five years from now (and assuming the BCS develops the way most think
it will), I think it's more than likely that the MWC will have the Big
East's automatic BCS spot and the Big East will have to battle it out
with the other mid-majors to get any "mid-major" bids that are left
for them.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Again, I'm not talking about UConn's on-field program. I would have
greatly preferred the ACC taking UConn instead of BC.
I'm referring to the Big East apparently needing a designated
mugging victim from whom they can extort all the money they can.
That designated victim used to be VT. Looking at the football
"revenue sharing" deal between the Big East and UConn, I think it's
pretty obvious who the new designated victim is.

Perhaps your problem is your hallucination that the BE is about football.

No, I'm aware the Big East sees football as nothing more than a
distraction from the basketball season. I see that as yet another
example of how poorly led and how completely lacking in vision the Big
East leadership is.
Basketball is the solid #2 collegiate sport. But if the Big East
decides to be a basketball power and to de-emphasize football, it's
paving a path for itself to become a mid-major conference instead of a
real power conference.
Five years from now (and assuming the BCS develops the way most think
it will), I think it's more than likely that the MWC will have the Big
East's automatic BCS spot and the Big East will have to battle it out
with the other mid-majors to get any "mid-major" bids that are left
for them.

I guess the real question here is:

Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?

I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and with
now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
football... well, you do the math. --
------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net

"PC Load Letter"? What the @&*% does THAT mean?!

[Bryan S. Slick]

[James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
[Tue, 06 Jul 2004 17:34:03 -0500]

:I guess the real question here is:
:
:Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
:going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?
:
:I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and with
:now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
:football... well, you do the math. --
:------------------------------------------------------------------------
:James Schaedenfraude http://www.hilltopper.net

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Tue, 06 Jul 2004 17:34:03 -0500]
:Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
:going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?
:I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and
:with now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
:football... well, you do the math. --
:-----------------------------------------------------------------------
:- James Schaedenfraude
:http://www.hilltopper.net

Took me a while to find it, Bryan.

Good one.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<***@adelphia.nospamnet> ?

<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf
Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?
I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and with
now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
football... well, you do the math. --

Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.

I think Tech has a VERY difficult challenge ahead of it, in playing in
the ACC. I accept that.

Tech very well might not go to a bowl game for the first time in 12
years. I accept that.

I accept it because Tech now has a platform to build a better program
than it had before. That isn't to say it will: it just means it has a
better chance to do so.

Living in ACC country, where every recruit grew up watching ACC
sports, Tech was able to build a football program that did pretty damn
well in the Big East. Tech had a winning record against EVERY Big
East opponent in the 11 years of round-robin play.

Potentially, now that Tech is actually in the ACC, and Tech is on
equal footing financially with other ACC schools (or will be, in two
years), Tech can build an even stronger program. That isn't to say
that it will. Winning the lottery is no guarantee you won't throw
away all your money and end up broke and unhappy. But Tech has the
POTENTIAL to do well, and the only other time Tech got a break
anywhere near this level, Tech ran with it.

What I *do* know is that losing $7.5 million a year in TV revenue
can't help the leftover Big East schools. What I do know is that the
leftover Big East schools have lost their connection to Florida
recruits (unless you really believe telling a kid, "your family can
see you play against USF!!" is going to get you anyone). What I do
know is that the leftover Big East, in years when WVU isn't going to a
bowl game, is not going to get any bowls even sniffing at them BECAUSE
NOBODY EXCEPT WVU TRAVELS WORTH A DAMN. If WVU either becomes the
Marshall of the Big East and routinely goes to the top bowl (either
BCS or Gator) or goes into the toilet and isn't bowl eligible, where
is the incentive for a #3 bowl for the Big East? Insight.com will be
dropping the Big East pretty damn soon, and be prepared to say goodbye
to any chances of keeping or picking up any bowls past the #1 and
maybe the #2 bowls for the Big East.

This year, the Big East will probably be okay. Next year, the Big
East will probably be okay. Five years from now, Big East football
will be a mid-major conference, unless a miracle occurs.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf
Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?
I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and
with now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
football... well, you do the math. --

Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.

Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.

Post by Samuel Fang
I think Tech has a VERY difficult challenge ahead of it, in playing in
the ACC. I accept that.
Tech very well might not go to a bowl game for the first time in 12
years. I accept that.
I accept it because Tech now has a platform to build a better program
than it had before. That isn't to say it will: it just means it has a
better chance to do so.

I don't think I agree with that.

Realistically, VT's football program has been about on par with the
non-FSU and non-Duke et al fooball teams in the ACC. Except for the
Mike Vick years, when he single-handedly boosted the program to the
uppermost levels, VT has played three-loss ball for the most part:

Year Won Lost
2003 8 5
2002 10 4
2001 8 4
2000 11 1
1999 11 1
1998 9 3
1997 7 5
1996 10 2
1995 10 2
1994 8 4

Post by Samuel Fang
Living in ACC country, where every recruit grew up watching ACC
sports, Tech was able to build a football program that did pretty damn
well in the Big East. Tech had a winning record against EVERY Big
East opponent in the 11 years of round-robin play.

Granted, though it fell off mightily the past three years.

Post by Samuel Fang
Potentially, now that Tech is actually in the ACC, and Tech is on
equal footing financially with other ACC schools (or will be, in two
years), Tech can build an even stronger program. That isn't to say
that it will. Winning the lottery is no guarantee you won't throw
away all your money and end up broke and unhappy. But Tech has the
POTENTIAL to do well, and the only other time Tech got a break
anywhere near this level, Tech ran with it.
What I *do* know is that losing $7.5 million a year in TV revenue
can't help the leftover Big East schools. What I do know is that the
leftover Big East schools have lost their connection to Florida
recruits (unless you really believe telling a kid, "your family can
see you play against USF!!" is going to get you anyone). What I do
know is that the leftover Big East, in years when WVU isn't going to a
bowl game, is not going to get any bowls even sniffing at them BECAUSE
NOBODY EXCEPT WVU TRAVELS WORTH A DAMN. If WVU either becomes the
Marshall of the Big East and routinely goes to the top bowl (either
BCS or Gator) or goes into the toilet and isn't bowl eligible, where
is the incentive for a #3 bowl for the Big East? Insight.com will be
dropping the Big East pretty damn soon, and be prepared to say goodbye
to any chances of keeping or picking up any bowls past the #1 and
maybe the #2 bowls for the Big East.
This year, the Big East will probably be okay. Next year, the Big
East will probably be okay. Five years from now, Big East football
will be a mid-major conference, unless a miracle occurs.

Five years from now the BCS won't exist, and there will be a playoff in
place. Strangely enough, the Big 10 baseball suit is going to be the
cause of this:

http://tinyurl.com/2h96t

By Matt Hayes - Sporting News

"The Big Ten Conference is upset about (I swear I'm not making this up)
competitive inequity in college baseball. The league that, along with
the Pac-10, is holding the BCS hostage while dangling the lucrative Rose
Bowl is upset because The Man is keeping them down. Yep, they say,
forcing Big Ten teams to play baseball on the road in February and March
because their fields are snowed under creates a competitive disadvantage
for the league when it comes to qualifying for the NCAA Tournament and
the College World Series.

"Now, ladies and gentlemen, we give you the connection to college
football: By moving the baseball season back, the presidents of these
prestigious universities are allowing an NCAA sport to be played not
only beyond its proposed semester but beyond the school year. Meanwhile,
the steadfast argument against a national football playoff has been that
it would extend the season into the second semester.

"When the hypocrisy of that was mentioned to Oregon president Dave
Frohnmayer, he quickly turned into Mel Tillis, stammering and stumbling
over every response. At one point, he said the "readiness" of some
universities would come into play; you know, the players,
administration, fans and bands.

"Holy mother of God -- the bands."

* * *

The horror. The horror.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
[Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:43:34 -0500]

:> Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
:> never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
:> if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.
:
:Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.

There's bits and pieces of irony meter all over my office now.

Thanks.

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:43:34 -0500]
:> Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
:> never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
:> if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.
:Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.
There's bits and pieces of irony meter all over my office now.
Thanks.

Neat. But I think your understanding of irony is approximately equal to
that of Alanis's.

However, I offer you the opportunity to explain yourself.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
[Tue, 06 Jul 2004 23:29:49 -0500]

:Bryan S. Slick <***@slick-family.not> wrote in
:news:***@news-40.giganews.com:
:
:> [James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
:> [Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:43:34 -0500]
:>
:>:> Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
:>:> never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
:>:> if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.
:>:
:>:Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.
:>
:> There's bits and pieces of irony meter all over my office now.
:>
:> Thanks.
:>
:
:Neat. But I think your understanding of irony is approximately equal to
:that of Alanis's.
:
:However, I offer you the opportunity to explain yourself.

You can't be serious.

As you watched WVU twirl down the crapper, what were your naysaying
posts against VT, Jamie? And now you're going to accuse someone else...

Good God. Get some self-awareness, please.

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Tue, 06 Jul 2004 23:29:49 -0500]
:> [Tue, 06 Jul 2004 19:43:34 -0500]
:>
:>:> Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
:>:> never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my
:>:> life, if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.
:>:Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.
:>
:> There's bits and pieces of irony meter all over my office now.
:>
:> Thanks.
:>
:Neat. But I think your understanding of irony is approximately equal
:to that of Alanis's.
:However, I offer you the opportunity to explain yourself.
You can't be serious.
As you watched WVU twirl down the crapper, what were your naysaying
posts against VT, Jamie? And now you're going to accuse someone else...
Good God. Get some self-awareness, please.

Bryan, I never EVER said "I don't care if WVU never wins another game as
long as VT gets it in the ass," which is essentially what Sam has said
about ALL the remaining BE teams.

My inciteful and pentrating analysis of VT's future after Mike Vick left
was UNRELATED to how I felt about how WVU was performing at the time.

Perhaps you failed to notice this, so I'll give you the benefit of the
doubt. You've had a lot on your mind lately, to say the least.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
[Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:28:07 -0500]

:My inciteful and pentrating analysis of VT's future after Mike Vick left
. ^^^^^^^^^

You spelled that correctly.

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:28:07 -0500]
:My inciteful and pentrating analysis of VT's future after Mike Vick left
. ^^^^^^^^^
You spelled that correctly.

Freudian slip fer sure.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
[Wed, 07 Jul 2004 22:04:05 -0500]

:Bryan S. Slick <***@slick-family.not> wrote in
:news:***@news-40.giganews.com:
:
:> [James Schrumpf (***@adelphia.nospamnet)]
:> [Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:28:07 -0500]
:>
:>:My inciteful and pentrating analysis of VT's future after Mike Vick left
:> . ^^^^^^^^^
:>
:> You spelled that correctly.
:>
:
:Freudian slip fer sure.

No, I was serious, and not making fun of your spelling.

Incite is definitely the proper root for almost any post of yours
involving VT.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf
Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?
I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and
with now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
football... well, you do the math. --

Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.

Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.

What can I say? I'm a mean, vindictive bastard.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
I think Tech has a VERY difficult challenge ahead of it, in playing in
the ACC. I accept that.
Tech very well might not go to a bowl game for the first time in 12
years. I accept that.
I accept it because Tech now has a platform to build a better program
than it had before. That isn't to say it will: it just means it has a
better chance to do so.

I don't think I agree with that.
Realistically, VT's football program has been about on par with the
non-FSU and non-Duke et al fooball teams in the ACC. Except for the
Mike Vick years, when he single-handedly boosted the program to the
Year Won Lost
2003 8 5
2002 10 4
2001 8 4
2000 11 1
1999 11 1
1998 9 3
1997 7 5
1996 10 2
1995 10 2
1994 8 4

Yes. Tech built a program that was on par with non-FSU and non-Duke
football teams in the ACC, while in ACC country, WITH SEVERE
DISADVANTAGES. Tech had less money, less regional exposure, and less
allure to local/regional high school players.

To put it in terms you would understand, Jamie, it's like WVU putting
together a competitive team mostly on players from Big Televen
country, while having considerably fewer resources than Big Televen
schools. If WVU suddenly got Big Televen membership, wouldn't you say
WVU then had a better platform to boost the program?

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Living in ACC country, where every recruit grew up watching ACC
sports, Tech was able to build a football program that did pretty damn
well in the Big East. Tech had a winning record against EVERY Big
East opponent in the 11 years of round-robin play.

Granted, though it fell off mightily the past three years.

Sure. It's growing pains. Tech is suddenly getting some blue-chip
players instead of building a team out of "diamonds in the rough".
The big question right now is whether the coaching staff can work with
the egos of some of the kids we're getting now (Kevin Jones was a
prima donna of the first caliber, for example, and seriously hurt team
chemistry).

I think that's an open question: the coaches are addressing the issue,
but nobody knows if it'll work out in another two or three years.

<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
This year, the Big East will probably be okay. Next year, the Big
East will probably be okay. Five years from now, Big East football
will be a mid-major conference, unless a miracle occurs.

Five years from now the BCS won't exist, and there will be a playoff in
place. Strangely enough, the Big 10 baseball suit is going to be the

<snip>

If you honestly believe that writer's desperate attempt to manufacture
relevance for college baseball, I'm sorry for you.

Even if there is a playoff of some sort, I seriously doubt it'll be an
NCAA controlled event. My belief is that given the choice between a
lucrative playoff controlled by the NCAA or a less lucrative bowl
system controlled by themselves, big time college football will ALWAYS
choose the latter. It's the thing that sets them apart from the rest
of collegiate athletics. Otherwise, the voting weight of the rest of
the NCAA members to distribute all of the money *they* earn among the
rest of college athletics.

That being the case, there's no reason why the big time football
programs can't simply shuffle the Big East off into the semi-oblivion
of mid-majors.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf
Is all this talk just to make yourself feel better that VT is never
going to see another BCS bowl in the ACC as currently constituted?
I mean, let's get real. VT will be teh suck in ACC bouncyball, and
with now having to deal with Miami AND Florida State every year in
football... well, you do the math. --

Nope. I said it in the thread-starter: I'm willing to accept Tech
never winning another game in another sport for the rest of my life,
if it means the leftover Big East schools circle the drain.

Wow. How very... Pyrrhic of you.

What can I say? I'm a mean, vindictive bastard.

Tell that to Bryan. He thinks you're ironic... or something.

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
I think Tech has a VERY difficult challenge ahead of it, in playing
in the ACC. I accept that.
Tech very well might not go to a bowl game for the first time in 12
years. I accept that.
I accept it because Tech now has a platform to build a better
program than it had before. That isn't to say it will: it just
means it has a better chance to do so.

I don't think I agree with that.
Realistically, VT's football program has been about on par with the
non-FSU and non-Duke et al fooball teams in the ACC. Except for the
Mike Vick years, when he single-handedly boosted the program to the
Year Won Lost
2003 8 5
2002 10 4
2001 8 4
2000 11 1
1999 11 1
1998 9 3
1997 7 5
1996 10 2
1995 10 2
1994 8 4

Yes. Tech built a program that was on par with non-FSU and non-Duke
football teams in the ACC, while in ACC country, WITH SEVERE
DISADVANTAGES. Tech had less money, less regional exposure, and less
allure to local/regional high school players.

But... Tech built that program, for the most part, while a part of the
BE, which (not going into your money problems), had better exposure than
the ACC and thus I would imagine more allure to the high schoolers.

Post by Samuel Fang
To put it in terms you would understand, Jamie, it's like WVU putting
together a competitive team mostly on players from Big Televen
country, while having considerably fewer resources than Big Televen
schools. If WVU suddenly got Big Televen membership, wouldn't you say
WVU then had a better platform to boost the program?

You mean like how Penn State has vastly improved their program after
joining the Big Televen???

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Living in ACC country, where every recruit grew up watching ACC
sports, Tech was able to build a football program that did pretty
damn well in the Big East. Tech had a winning record against EVERY
Big East opponent in the 11 years of round-robin play.

Granted, though it fell off mightily the past three years.

Sure. It's growing pains. Tech is suddenly getting some blue-chip
players instead of building a team out of "diamonds in the rough".
The big question right now is whether the coaching staff can work with
the egos of some of the kids we're getting now (Kevin Jones was a
prima donna of the first caliber, for example, and seriously hurt team
chemistry).
I think that's an open question: the coaches are addressing the issue,
but nobody knows if it'll work out in another two or three years.

One word: Marcus Vick.

Post by Samuel Fang
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
This year, the Big East will probably be okay. Next year, the Big
East will probably be okay. Five years from now, Big East football
will be a mid-major conference, unless a miracle occurs.

Five years from now the BCS won't exist, and there will be a playoff
in place. Strangely enough, the Big 10 baseball suit is going to be

<snip>
If you honestly believe that writer's desperate attempt to manufacture
relevance for college baseball, I'm sorry for you.

It's not relevance, it's precedent. Like in law. I think it'll count
for a lot. And there are many other forces pushing for a playoff as
well.

Post by Samuel Fang
Even if there is a playoff of some sort, I seriously doubt it'll be an
NCAA controlled event. My belief is that given the choice between a
lucrative playoff controlled by the NCAA or a less lucrative bowl
system controlled by themselves, big time college football will ALWAYS
choose the latter. It's the thing that sets them apart from the rest
of collegiate athletics. Otherwise, the voting weight of the rest of
the NCAA members to distribute all of the money *they* earn among the
rest of college athletics.

What are you saying? It's called "NCAA Football" for a reason, you
know. It's the NCAA that puts teams on probation, not some amorphous
"big time college football" organization.

Post by Samuel Fang
That being the case, there's no reason why the big time football
programs can't simply shuffle the Big East off into the semi-oblivion
of mid-majors.

[shrug] All conferences get their "rating" based on the top two or
three schools -- usually the top two. It also has nothing to do with a
"big time college football" mafia.

Where would the Big Televen be without Michigan and Ohio State? The Big
Twelve without Oklahoma and Nebraska? The Pac-10 without... never mind.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Yes. Tech built a program that was on par with non-FSU and non-Duke
football teams in the ACC, while in ACC country, WITH SEVERE
DISADVANTAGES. Tech had less money, less regional exposure, and less
allure to local/regional high school players.

But... Tech built that program, for the most part, while a part of the
BE, which (not going into your money problems), had better exposure than
the ACC and thus I would imagine more allure to the high schoolers.

Hunh? In what way did the BE of the 1990s have better exposure than
the ACC of now? Miami, the only team that really brought exposure to
the Big East, is coming with Tech.

Are you saying you truly believe in the "Big Media Markets" myth of
college sports?

If anything, the Big East has LESS exposure than any of the other
major conferences. The CBS TV deal of the 90s wasn't dropped because
the Big East got a better deal: it was dropped because CBS didn't want
it any more. During the time CBS had the BE's TV contract, they NEVER
went above the contractual MINIMUM of games carried.

That doesn't say much for the exposure the Big East had in the 90s.
The ACC has a LOT better exposure.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
To put it in terms you would understand, Jamie, it's like WVU putting
together a competitive team mostly on players from Big Televen
country, while having considerably fewer resources than Big Televen
schools. If WVU suddenly got Big Televen membership, wouldn't you say
WVU then had a better platform to boost the program?

You mean like how Penn State has vastly improved their program after
joining the Big Televen???

Yes. Precisely. Because you're not distinguishing between having a
better PLATFORM and actual better PERFORMANCE.

Not to mention the fact that Penn State was reaching, geographically,
to play in the Big Televen. Basically, all the recruits Penn State
normally got before joining weren't from B10 areas. All PSU joining
did was open up THEIR recruiting areas to other B10 schools, while
opening up well-established and fished-out areas for PSU.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Sure. It's growing pains. Tech is suddenly getting some blue-chip
players instead of building a team out of "diamonds in the rough".
The big question right now is whether the coaching staff can work with
the egos of some of the kids we're getting now (Kevin Jones was a
prima donna of the first caliber, for example, and seriously hurt team
chemistry).
I think that's an open question: the coaches are addressing the issue,
but nobody knows if it'll work out in another two or three years.

One word: Marcus Vick.

And he's off the team indefinitely, and that's sending an effective
message. Again, I don't know if it'll WORK, but there's a real
attempt being made there, and not of the F$U "reform" variety.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
If you honestly believe that writer's desperate attempt to manufacture
relevance for college baseball, I'm sorry for you.

It's not relevance, it's precedent. Like in law. I think it'll count
for a lot. And there are many other forces pushing for a playoff as
well.

Sure there are other forces pushing for a playoff.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Even if there is a playoff of some sort, I seriously doubt it'll be an
NCAA controlled event. My belief is that given the choice between a
lucrative playoff controlled by the NCAA or a less lucrative bowl
system controlled by themselves, big time college football will ALWAYS
choose the latter. It's the thing that sets them apart from the rest
of collegiate athletics. Otherwise, the voting weight of the rest of
the NCAA members to distribute all of the money *they* earn among the
rest of college athletics.

What are you saying? It's called "NCAA Football" for a reason, you
know. It's the NCAA that puts teams on probation, not some amorphous
"big time college football" organization.

Yes. But Big Time College Football RUNS the NCAA. As of July 7th,
there are over 1,200 NCAA member institutions. There are only 117
Division IA member institutions, but that less than 10% (actually
less, when you really look at who runs IA) control and dictate the
path of college athletics.

A VERY large part of that power is the fact that IA schools bring in
the vast majority of the revenue needed to run the NCAA, particularly
with the NCAA basketball tournament. HOWEVER, there's really nothing
keeping the NCAA from simply taking all the money from the bball
tourney and spreading it equally among all 1200 members, not just the
326 Division I schools. Except that the DivIA schools can actually
ditch the NCAA any time they really feel like it, because they have
this HUGE source of revenue that's outside the direct control of the
NCAA bureacracy.

It's a lot like the permanent Security Council members having a veto
in the UN. That independent source of revenue is a VERY powerful
bargaining chip that keeps the NCAA from doing things that are
detrimental to Big School athletics. Giving up that power would be
ridiculous.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
That being the case, there's no reason why the big time football
programs can't simply shuffle the Big East off into the semi-oblivion
of mid-majors.

[shrug] All conferences get their "rating" based on the top two or
three schools -- usually the top two. It also has nothing to do with a
"big time college football" mafia.
Where would the Big Televen be without Michigan and Ohio State? The Big
Twelve without Oklahoma and Nebraska? The Pac-10 without... never mind.

That is wrong. Oh, the Big Televen wouldn't be as strong without UM
or tOSU, but the other schools aren't cupcakes, either. #3-#6 in the
B12 aren't cupcakes.

What the Big East was looking like for a long time, as you should well
know, was one or two really good teams, two or three okay teams, and
then crap. The other power conferences manage to consistently have
reasonably strong teams below their halfway point, which the Big East
has not.

You're losing the two teams that, between them, have always managed to
be at least one of the really good teams and almost always (the only
exception being Miami's '97 team) got the other team *at least* into
the okay category. Replacing them, you're plugging in Louisville,
Cincinnatti, and USF. Between those three, you'll be very lucky to
get a consistent "okay" team out of the bunch.

Big East football is in serious trouble, Jamie. You're losing half of
your TV revenue, and you're likely going to lose a couple of bowl
games, all during a time when the other major conferences (and many of
the mid-major conferences) are beefing up their TV contracts and
increasing the number of bowls their conferences play in.

You're on a down escalator, when everyone else is going up. That's
not a good thing for you.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Yes. Tech built a program that was on par with non-FSU and non-Duke
football teams in the ACC, while in ACC country, WITH SEVERE
DISADVANTAGES. Tech had less money, less regional exposure, and
less allure to local/regional high school players.

But... Tech built that program, for the most part, while a part of the
BE, which (not going into your money problems), had better exposure
than the ACC and thus I would imagine more allure to the high
schoolers.

Hunh? In what way did the BE of the 1990s have better exposure than
the ACC of now? Miami, the only team that really brought exposure to
the Big East, is coming with Tech.

It HAD better exposure than the ACC at the time. "Jefferson-Pilot
Presents the ACC" was not gripping TV outside of Tobacco Road.

That it NOW has WORSE exposure than the ACC is not relevant to your
argument about when VT built its program.

Post by Samuel Fang
Are you saying you truly believe in the "Big Media Markets" myth of
college sports?

I don't really know what the myth is in the first place. Considering
that none of the Really Good Teams live in a Big Media Area (except
maybe Michigan if they count in Chicago, and the SoCal Pac-10 yeams),
I'd guess I'd say "no."

Post by Samuel Fang
If anything, the Big East has LESS exposure than any of the other
major conferences. The CBS TV deal of the 90s wasn't dropped because
the Big East got a better deal: it was dropped because CBS didn't want
it any more. During the time CBS had the BE's TV contract, they NEVER
went above the contractual MINIMUM of games carried.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Is it common for a network to
contract for say, 10 games/year but show more if there are compelling
matchups that weren't in the original schedule?

Post by Samuel Fang
That doesn't say much for the exposure the Big East had in the 90s.
The ACC has a LOT better exposure.

Having exposure and anyone wanting to see the product are two different
things. UNC - NC State isn't going to be any more attractive outside
Tobacco Road than BC - Temple was outside Boston and the Main Line.

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
To put it in terms you would understand, Jamie, it's like WVU
putting together a competitive team mostly on players from Big
Televen country, while having considerably fewer resources than Big
Televen schools. If WVU suddenly got Big Televen membership,
wouldn't you say WVU then had a better platform to boost the
program?

You mean like how Penn State has vastly improved their program after
joining the Big Televen???

Yes. Precisely. Because you're not distinguishing between having a
better PLATFORM and actual better PERFORMANCE.

If the program declines when joining a new platform, how does that
translate into a better platform? One could convincingly argue that the
Eastern Independent platform was better for PSU than is the Big Televen
platform.

Post by Samuel Fang
Not to mention the fact that Penn State was reaching, geographically,
to play in the Big Televen. Basically, all the recruits Penn State
normally got before joining weren't from B10 areas. All PSU joining
did was open up THEIR recruiting areas to other B10 schools, while
opening up well-established and fished-out areas for PSU.

So we're agreed that it wasn't a better platform for PSU?

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Sure. It's growing pains. Tech is suddenly getting some blue-chip
players instead of building a team out of "diamonds in the rough".
The big question right now is whether the coaching staff can work
with the egos of some of the kids we're getting now (Kevin Jones was
a prima donna of the first caliber, for example, and seriously hurt
team chemistry).
I think that's an open question: the coaches are addressing the
issue, but nobody knows if it'll work out in another two or three
years.

One word: Marcus Vick.

And he's off the team indefinitely, and that's sending an effective
message. Again, I don't know if it'll WORK, but there's a real
attempt being made there, and not of the F$U "reform" variety.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
If you honestly believe that writer's desperate attempt to
manufacture relevance for college baseball, I'm sorry for you.

It's not relevance, it's precedent. Like in law. I think it'll count
for a lot. And there are many other forces pushing for a playoff as
well.

Sure there are other forces pushing for a playoff.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Even if there is a playoff of some sort, I seriously doubt it'll be
an NCAA controlled event. My belief is that given the choice
between a lucrative playoff controlled by the NCAA or a less
lucrative bowl system controlled by themselves, big time college
football will ALWAYS choose the latter. It's the thing that sets
them apart from the rest of collegiate athletics. Otherwise, the
voting weight of the rest of the NCAA members to distribute all of
the money *they* earn among the rest of college athletics.

What are you saying? It's called "NCAA Football" for a reason, you
know. It's the NCAA that puts teams on probation, not some amorphous
"big time college football" organization.

Yes. But Big Time College Football RUNS the NCAA. As of July 7th,
there are over 1,200 NCAA member institutions. There are only 117
Division IA member institutions, but that less than 10% (actually
less, when you really look at who runs IA) control and dictate the
path of college athletics.
A VERY large part of that power is the fact that IA schools bring in
the vast majority of the revenue needed to run the NCAA, particularly
with the NCAA basketball tournament. HOWEVER, there's really nothing
keeping the NCAA from simply taking all the money from the bball
tourney and spreading it equally among all 1200 members, not just the
326 Division I schools. Except that the DivIA schools can actually
ditch the NCAA any time they really feel like it, because they have
this HUGE source of revenue that's outside the direct control of the
NCAA bureacracy.
It's a lot like the permanent Security Council members having a veto
in the UN. That independent source of revenue is a VERY powerful
bargaining chip that keeps the NCAA from doing things that are
detrimental to Big School athletics. Giving up that power would be
ridiculous.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
That being the case, there's no reason why the big time football
programs can't simply shuffle the Big East off into the
semi-oblivion of mid-majors.

[shrug] All conferences get their "rating" based on the top two or
three schools -- usually the top two. It also has nothing to do with
a "big time college football" mafia.
Where would the Big Televen be without Michigan and Ohio State? The
Big Twelve without Oklahoma and Nebraska? The Pac-10 without... never
mind.

That is wrong. Oh, the Big Televen wouldn't be as strong without UM
or tOSU, but the other schools aren't cupcakes, either. #3-#6 in the
B12 aren't cupcakes.
What the Big East was looking like for a long time, as you should well
know, was one or two really good teams, two or three okay teams, and
then crap. The other power conferences manage to consistently have
reasonably strong teams below their halfway point, which the Big East
has not.
You're losing the two teams that, between them, have always managed to
be at least one of the really good teams and almost always (the only
exception being Miami's '97 team) got the other team *at least* into
the okay category. Replacing them, you're plugging in Louisville,
Cincinnatti, and USF. Between those three, you'll be very lucky to
get a consistent "okay" team out of the bunch.
Big East football is in serious trouble, Jamie. You're losing half of
your TV revenue, and you're likely going to lose a couple of bowl
games, all during a time when the other major conferences (and many of
the mid-major conferences) are beefing up their TV contracts and
increasing the number of bowls their conferences play in.
You're on a down escalator, when everyone else is going up. That's
not a good thing for you.

But how is it going to feel going from the "one or two really good
teams" to the "two or three okay teams"?

I have a feeling you're going to fall into the mental trap that exists
in college football, that I've pointed out many times: it doesn't
matter what your record is like as much as what conference you're in and
what your school name is. If Louisville and Cincy develop into winning
programs it won't matter as much as the fact that their school names
aren't Wisconsin and Texas.

Time will tell.

[Dave-tx]

Post by James Schrumpf
But how is it going to feel going from the "one or two really good
teams" to the "two or three okay teams"?

As someone who attended Tech for 6 years and was on hand for about
one winning season, I'm probably more charitable than students from
the past decade - that said, I'm find with being among the "two
or three okay teams", just as long as there's the occasional chance
for a "really good" season.

Of course, the "really good" seasons are more fun... but I look
forward to the chance to develop better geographical rivalries.

-Dave

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Dave-tx

Post by Dave-tx

Post by James Schrumpf
But how is it going to feel going from the "one or two really good
teams" to the "two or three okay teams"?

As someone who attended Tech for 6 years and was on hand for about
one winning season, I'm probably more charitable than students from
the past decade - that said, I'm find with being among the "two
or three okay teams", just as long as there's the occasional chance
for a "really good" season.
Of course, the "really good" seasons are more fun... but I look
forward to the chance to develop better geographical rivalries.

As a guy who arrived in Blacksburg just in time for the '93 season,
and the start of the winning seasons streak, I can fully agree with
that.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Bryan S. Slick]

[Samuel Fang (***@vt.edu)]
[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 08:55:17 -0400]

:As a guy who arrived in Blacksburg just in time for the '93 season,
:and the start of the winning seasons streak, I can fully agree with
:that.

Spoiled brat.

(I got there in '91.)

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Bryan S. Slick

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 08:55:17 -0400]
:As a guy who arrived in Blacksburg just in time for the '93 season,
:and the start of the winning seasons streak, I can fully agree with
:that.
Spoiled brat.
(I got there in '91.)

I brought the mojo.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Bryan S. Slick]

[Samuel Fang (***@vt.edu)]
[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 09:56:00 -0400]

:Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Bryan S. Slick
:<***@slick-family.not> ?
:
:>[Samuel Fang (***@vt.edu)]
:>[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 08:55:17 -0400]
:>
:>:As a guy who arrived in Blacksburg just in time for the '93 season,
:>:and the start of the winning seasons streak, I can fully agree with
:>:that.
:>
:>Spoiled brat.
:>
:>(I got there in '91.)
:
:I brought the mojo.

I didn't know operating restaurants was so profitable.

You rool, dood.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Bryan S. Slick

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 09:56:00 -0400]
:Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Bryan S. Slick
:>[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 08:55:17 -0400]
:>
:>:As a guy who arrived in Blacksburg just in time for the '93 season,
:>:and the start of the winning seasons streak, I can fully agree with
:>:that.
:>
:>Spoiled brat.
:>
:>(I got there in '91.)
:I brought the mojo.
I didn't know operating restaurants was so profitable.
You rool, dood.

I *brought* the mojo. I didn't say I "bought" the mojo.

I'm not Logan Young, dood.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Bruce Harper]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Sat, 10 Jul 2004 08:55:17 -0400]
:As a guy who arrived in Blacksburg just in time for the '93 season,
:and the start of the winning seasons streak, I can fully agree with
:that.
Spoiled brat.
(I got there in '91.)

And then there were those of us from "back in the day" when VT went
through coaches about every three or four seasons (Coffey and Sharpe)
before settling on boring Bill Dooley (who played in-state teams long
after he should have), followed by Beamer and his long rise from
Dooley's bad mistakes. An 8-4 record against decent opponents (as
opposed to the likes of VMI, William & Mary, Temple, etc.) won't be a
disappointment to those of us who suffered through those time.

Bruce in Blacksburg

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Hunh? In what way did the BE of the 1990s have better exposure than
the ACC of now? Miami, the only team that really brought exposure to
the Big East, is coming with Tech.

It HAD better exposure than the ACC at the time. "Jefferson-Pilot
Presents the ACC" was not gripping TV outside of Tobacco Road.
That it NOW has WORSE exposure than the ACC is not relevant to your
argument about when VT built its program.

No. What is relevant is that the TV coverage of ACC football RIGHT
NOW is better than the TV coverage of Big East football in 1993.

On top of that, I think it's clear that ACC coverage has been better,
year-to-year, every year since 1993. The ACC had the same number of
national TV draws (1: FSU for the ACC, and Miami for the Big East),
while the ACC had almost complete dominance of the coverage within
their region. The Big East was lucky if they finished third in their
own "major media markets".

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Are you saying you truly believe in the "Big Media Markets" myth of
college sports?

I don't really know what the myth is in the first place. Considering
that none of the Really Good Teams live in a Big Media Area (except
maybe Michigan if they count in Chicago, and the SoCal Pac-10 yeams),
I'd guess I'd say "no."

Which is my point: please be explaining your logic that the Big East
had better TV coverage. Plain and simple: they didn't, they don't,
and they won't.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
If anything, the Big East has LESS exposure than any of the other
major conferences. The CBS TV deal of the 90s wasn't dropped because
the Big East got a better deal: it was dropped because CBS didn't want
it any more. During the time CBS had the BE's TV contract, they NEVER
went above the contractual MINIMUM of games carried.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Is it common for a network to
contract for say, 10 games/year but show more if there are compelling
matchups that weren't in the original schedule?

It *is* a bad thing. The minimums are written into the contract years
before the games. A strong conference gets more games covered than
the minimum, because they're more compelling, AND gets a bonus for
those extra games. A weak conference just gets the base minimum, and
gets no bonus $$ from the TV partners.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
That doesn't say much for the exposure the Big East had in the 90s.
The ACC has a LOT better exposure.

Having exposure and anyone wanting to see the product are two different
things. UNC - NC State isn't going to be any more attractive outside
Tobacco Road than BC - Temple was outside Boston and the Main Line.

No, it probably isn't. The difference is that WITHIN Tobacco Road
that game is VERY compelling. Nobody gives a flying fuck about ANY BC
game that doesn't involve Notre Dame, and nobody gives a fuck about
any Temple game, period.

With the exception of WVU, what leftover Big East team would you say
has even a strong regional following?

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Yes. Precisely. Because you're not distinguishing between having a
better PLATFORM and actual better PERFORMANCE.

If the program declines when joining a new platform, how does that
translate into a better platform? One could convincingly argue that the
Eastern Independent platform was better for PSU than is the Big Televen
platform.

Yes. And you could say that a kid born rich had a worse platform,
because he blows all his fortunes away, while the kid born poor had a
better platform, because he built a fortune because of his poverty.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Not to mention the fact that Penn State was reaching, geographically,
to play in the Big Televen. Basically, all the recruits Penn State
normally got before joining weren't from B10 areas. All PSU joining
did was open up THEIR recruiting areas to other B10 schools, while
opening up well-established and fished-out areas for PSU.

So we're agreed that it wasn't a better platform for PSU?

Yes and no. I'm saying Penn State didn't take advantage of the
platform they had because the platform, while a better one, also
wasn't suited to them.

Please be explaining how Penn State being forced to recruit out of
their region in the Big Televen has any parrallels with VT, who has
already been recruiting inside the ACC's territory for the last
several decades.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
You're on a down escalator, when everyone else is going up. That's
not a good thing for you.

But how is it going to feel going from the "one or two really good
teams" to the "two or three okay teams"?
I have a feeling you're going to fall into the mental trap that exists
in college football, that I've pointed out many times: it doesn't
matter what your record is like as much as what conference you're in and
what your school name is. If Louisville and Cincy develop into winning
programs it won't matter as much as the fact that their school names
aren't Wisconsin and Texas.

To a degree, though, that "mental trap" has validity.

Is it better to be a 10-2 team in the MAC than a 8-4 team in the ACC?
Was Marshall better off in '99 than a 8-4 BC of '99? I don't think
so. It's like choosing between being George Steinbrenner and Kevin
Pitts. Yeah, in a given year Pitts' Diamondbacks may be better than
the Yankees (not since Pitts took over in '03, but still). But year
in and year out, Steinbrenner will be in a stronger position than
Pitts.

You may not LIKE Steinbrenner or the Yankees, but you can't deny that
they're the powerhouse team in MLB. With the recent changes, the ACC
has gone from being the A's to being the Yankees, while the Big East
has gone from being the Astros to being the Pirates.

And are you changing your long-standing argument that VT was just an
okay team before Michael Vick, and is only an okay team after Michael
Vick?

The fact of the matter is that in a few years an okay team in the ACC
will be a LOT better off than the conference champion of the Big East.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Pauli G]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

Pauli, as far as I can tell you're a UConn fan.
Enjoy being the Big East's designated prison bitch, now that Tech's
left.

In a conference with Rutgers and Temple (for one more season, at any rate),
no one else is qualified to be a conference prison bitch.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see UConn win a Big East championship
within the next five years.

Agreed. UConn is successful at whatever they put their resources
behind. A strong UConn football program is likely.

Again, I'm not talking about UConn's on-field program. I would have
greatly preferred the ACC taking UConn instead of BC.

Samuel, in a later post in this thread you mention that UConn should
have made the D1 football jump in the 1990s and would be sitting
pretty today (agreed). Unfortunately, the university had to spin
their wheels because they had a lot of trouble getting funding for a
stadium which satisfied D1 requirements. Anyway, my point is that I
wonder who the ACC would have targeted if UConn was even 5 years
further down the road than they are now. Methinks that UConn would
have trumped BC for sure in that regard (especially considering the
bouncyball that would have been thrown into the package). I suspect
that UConn would have been in the initial offer for ACC membership
(Miami, Cuse and BC) rather than either Cuse or BC. The fit is too
good (state school, not afraid to devote major money to sports, some
success in bouncyball, demonstrated support for fledgling football
program, respectable academics, etc). Of course, the geographic fit
is still a bit iffy.

I'm not a huge football fan, so this isn't meant as a flame or
anything: wasn't VT a successful mid-major football program before it
climbed to national prominence in the Big East? My point is that you
guys were able to climb out of the mid-major gutter and become a
powerhouse program (if I am not wildly misunderstanding VT's history).
That's what gives me hope for UConn, even if the Big East is greatly
weakened right now. Connecticut, with no pro teams, has always
supported UConn's bouncyball program even when they sucked, and it's
looking (fingers crossed) like there is a lot of excitement and
support for D1 football.

At any rate, I wish you (VT) the best. It's BC that gets my venom.

[Daniel Seriff]

Post by Pauli G
wasn't VT a successful mid-major football program before it
climbed to national prominence in the Big East? My point is that you
guys were able to climb out of the mid-major gutter and become a
powerhouse program (if I am not wildly misunderstanding VT's history).

VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993. If not for the Big East, that
would still be true.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[Daniel Seriff (***@nospam.com)]
[Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:45:34 -0500]

:VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993.

..quoth the Vanderbilt grad.

Heh.

[Daniel Seriff]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:45:34 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff
VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993.

..quoth the Vanderbilt grad.
Heh.

1923 Southern Conference co-champions, baybee.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[Daniel Seriff (***@nospam.com)]
[Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:34:58 -0500]

:On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 16:20:52 -0500, Bryan S. Slick wrote
:(in message <***@news-40.giganews.com>):
:
:> [Daniel Seriff (***@nospam.com)]
:> [Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:45:34 -0500]
:>
:>> VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993.
:>
:> ..quoth the Vanderbilt grad.
:>
:> Heh.
:
:1923 Southern Conference co-champions, baybee.

So Vanderbilt's more successful than the Cubs *and* Red Sox.

Interesting.

[Daniel Seriff]

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:34:58 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:45:34 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff
VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993.

..quoth the Vanderbilt grad.
Heh.

1923 Southern Conference co-champions, baybee.

So Vanderbilt's more successful than the Cubs *and* Red Sox.
Interesting.

Vandy has more conference championships than VT. More MNCs, too.

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:34:58 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:45:34 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff
VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993.

..quoth the Vanderbilt grad.
Heh.

1923 Southern Conference co-champions, baybee.

So Vanderbilt's more successful than the Cubs *and* Red Sox.
Interesting.

Vandy has more conference championships than VT. More MNCs, too.

This is at least a partial lie.

MNCs only apply in college football.
Vandy has no MNCs that I have been able to research.

Also, Vanderbilt has been in the SEC since 1933. VT hadn't been in a
major college conference in the modern day until the 1990s.

Just how many SEC conference championships has Vandy won, Daniel?

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Daniel Seriff]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:34:58 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:45:34 -0500]

Post by Daniel Seriff
VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993.

..quoth the Vanderbilt grad.
Heh.

1923 Southern Conference co-champions, baybee.

So Vanderbilt's more successful than the Cubs *and* Red Sox.
Interesting.

Vandy has more conference championships than VT. More MNCs, too.

This is at least a partial lie.

No lie.

Post by Samuel Fang
MNCs only apply in college football.
Vandy has no MNCs that I have been able to research.

Billingsley, 1911. Sure, it's not NCF, but it's more than VT has.

Post by Samuel Fang
Also, Vanderbilt has been in the SEC since 1933. VT hadn't been in a
major college conference in the modern day until the 1990s.
Just how many SEC conference championships has Vandy won, Daniel?

None, but between 1897 and 1923, Vandy won 13 SIAC/SoCon championships or
co-championships, including 5 straight between 1903 and 1907, and was
undefeated 4 times.

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Pauli G
wasn't VT a successful mid-major football program before it
climbed to national prominence in the Big East? My point is that you
guys were able to climb out of the mid-major gutter and become a
powerhouse program (if I am not wildly misunderstanding VT's history).

VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993. If not for the Big East, that
would still be true.

This is true. Then again, you could say the same of Temple and
RUTSgers.

Tech took advantage of the oppurtunities offered by the Big East.
After accepting Tech in the early 90s, the Big East went out of its
way to not do Tech any favors, and that attitude helped spawn the
"betrayal" of Tech.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[lein]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Daniel Seriff

Post by Pauli G
wasn't VT a successful mid-major football program before it
climbed to national prominence in the Big East? My point is that you
guys were able to climb out of the mid-major gutter and become a
powerhouse program (if I am not wildly misunderstanding VT's history).

VT wasn't a successful *anything* before 1993. If not for the Big East, that
would still be true.

This is true. Then again, you could say the same of Temple and
RUTSgers.
Tech took advantage of the oppurtunities offered by the Big East.
After accepting Tech in the early 90s, the Big East went out of its
way to not do Tech any favors, and that attitude helped spawn the
"betrayal" of Tech.

Something's not right here.
Big East offered Tech opportunities
Big East went out of its way not to do Tech any favors.

So offering an opportunity is not a favor?

Consider the alternative, if not for the Big East, where would Tech be
today? CUSA? MAC? I doubt you would be in the ACC.

--
John Leinaweaver

[Samuel Fang]

<snip>

Post by lein

Post by Samuel Fang
Tech took advantage of the oppurtunities offered by the Big East.
After accepting Tech in the early 90s, the Big East went out of its
way to not do Tech any favors, and that attitude helped spawn the
"betrayal" of Tech.

Something's not right here.
Big East offered Tech opportunities
Big East went out of its way not to do Tech any favors.
So offering an opportunity is not a favor?

No, it is a favor. And that favor was bestowed on Tech when the Big
East accepted Tech in the early 90s. After that , the Big East went
out of its way to not do Tech any favors, and went well out of its way
to punish Tech every way they could think of.

Post by lein
Consider the alternative, if not for the Big East, where would Tech be
today? CUSA? MAC? I doubt you would be in the ACC.

Granted. And if the Big East hadn't treated Tech like a prison bitch
for more than a decade, maybe Tech wouln't be in the ACC today,
either.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, ***@hotmail.com (Pauli G) ?

<snip>

Post by Pauli G
Samuel, in a later post in this thread you mention that UConn should
have made the D1 football jump in the 1990s and would be sitting
pretty today (agreed). Unfortunately, the university had to spin
their wheels because they had a lot of trouble getting funding for a
stadium which satisfied D1 requirements. Anyway, my point is that I
wonder who the ACC would have targeted if UConn was even 5 years
further down the road than they are now. Methinks that UConn would
have trumped BC for sure in that regard (especially considering the
bouncyball that would have been thrown into the package). I suspect
that UConn would have been in the initial offer for ACC membership
(Miami, Cuse and BC) rather than either Cuse or BC. The fit is too
good (state school, not afraid to devote major money to sports, some
success in bouncyball, demonstrated support for fledgling football
program, respectable academics, etc). Of course, the geographic fit
is still a bit iffy.

I'm not sure about that. Again, the only reason BC was looked at in
the first place (c'mon, look at them: NOTHING about BC to the ACC
makes any sense) is because Donna Shalayla wanted them along.
Speculation is that there are a lot of UM alums in the Boston area,
but that doesn't really make any sense to me.

I honestly don't know if UConn would have gotten included in the mix
if they had been in IA for an extra decade or so. The package Miami
put together for the ACC (and that the ACC was initially willing to
accept) made very little sense, unless someone was actually willing to
believe the "large television markets" myth.

Post by Pauli G
I'm not a huge football fan, so this isn't meant as a flame or
anything: wasn't VT a successful mid-major football program before it
climbed to national prominence in the Big East? My point is that you
guys were able to climb out of the mid-major gutter and become a
powerhouse program (if I am not wildly misunderstanding VT's history).

Tech had some occassional basketball success (they measured on the
scale of a mid-major, of course, being simply appearances in the NCAA
Tournament) and very little football success. A large part of that
was Tech's composition until the late 60s/early 70s: Until then, Tech
was a military school about the size of VMI or the Citadel. Expansion
into a state university wasn't nearly as smooth as it was for F$U and
some other teams of the like. Athletics being one of the ways the
transition wasn't smooth.

Post by Pauli G
That's what gives me hope for UConn, even if the Big East is greatly
weakened right now. Connecticut, with no pro teams, has always
supported UConn's bouncyball program even when they sucked, and it's
looking (fingers crossed) like there is a lot of excitement and
support for D1 football.

Sure, and I can understand that hope. However, the Big East VT joined
in the 1990s was a lot stronger than the Big East UConn is joining.
The New Big East is considerably weaker in marquee value, weaker in TV
contract negotiating power, has a weaker line-up, AND still carries
all the inherent weaknesses of the split membership of the Big East.

Post by Pauli G
At any rate, I wish you (VT) the best. It's BC that gets my venom.

BC and Miami both deserve it. Miami may have been wronged, but they
were also sneaking around like the rats they are.

I wish UConn the best. At this point, that looks like UConn building
a program quickly enough, and good enough, that the Big Televen
chooses them instead of Pittsburgh, Syracuse, or a mytically and
suddenly rational Notre Dame.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[James Schrumpf]

Post by Samuel Fang
<snip>

Post by Pauli G
Samuel, in a later post in this thread you mention that UConn should
have made the D1 football jump in the 1990s and would be sitting
pretty today (agreed). Unfortunately, the university had to spin
their wheels because they had a lot of trouble getting funding for a
stadium which satisfied D1 requirements. Anyway, my point is that I
wonder who the ACC would have targeted if UConn was even 5 years
further down the road than they are now. Methinks that UConn would
have trumped BC for sure in that regard (especially considering the
bouncyball that would have been thrown into the package). I suspect
that UConn would have been in the initial offer for ACC membership
(Miami, Cuse and BC) rather than either Cuse or BC. The fit is too
good (state school, not afraid to devote major money to sports, some
success in bouncyball, demonstrated support for fledgling football
program, respectable academics, etc). Of course, the geographic fit
is still a bit iffy.

I'm not sure about that. Again, the only reason BC was looked at in
the first place (c'mon, look at them: NOTHING about BC to the ACC
makes any sense) is because Donna Shalayla wanted them along.
Speculation is that there are a lot of UM alums in the Boston area,
but that doesn't really make any sense to me.
I honestly don't know if UConn would have gotten included in the mix
if they had been in IA for an extra decade or so. The package Miami
put together for the ACC (and that the ACC was initially willing to
accept) made very little sense, unless someone was actually willing to
believe the "large television markets" myth.

Post by Pauli G
I'm not a huge football fan, so this isn't meant as a flame or
anything: wasn't VT a successful mid-major football program before it
climbed to national prominence in the Big East? My point is that you
guys were able to climb out of the mid-major gutter and become a
powerhouse program (if I am not wildly misunderstanding VT's history).

Tech had some occassional basketball success (they measured on the
scale of a mid-major, of course, being simply appearances in the NCAA
Tournament) and very little football success. A large part of that
was Tech's composition until the late 60s/early 70s: Until then, Tech
was a military school about the size of VMI or the Citadel. Expansion
into a state university wasn't nearly as smooth as it was for F$U and
some other teams of the like. Athletics being one of the ways the
transition wasn't smooth.

A little perspective: when Bobbuh Bowden left WVU for FSU after the 1975
season, FSU was basically a teacher's college that was considering
dropping its football program. Bobbuh single-handedly saved the program
there; I'm not sure if that qualfies as a "smooth" expansion or not.

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G
That's what gives me hope for UConn, even if the Big East is greatly
weakened right now. Connecticut, with no pro teams, has always
supported UConn's bouncyball program even when they sucked, and it's
looking (fingers crossed) like there is a lot of excitement and
support for D1 football.

Sure, and I can understand that hope. However, the Big East VT joined
in the 1990s was a lot stronger than the Big East UConn is joining.
The New Big East is considerably weaker in marquee value, weaker in TV
contract negotiating power, has a weaker line-up, AND still carries
all the inherent weaknesses of the split membership of the Big East.

Post by Pauli G
At any rate, I wish you (VT) the best. It's BC that gets my venom.

BC and Miami both deserve it. Miami may have been wronged, but they
were also sneaking around like the rats they are.
I wish UConn the best. At this point, that looks like UConn building
a program quickly enough, and good enough, that the Big Televen
chooses them instead of Pittsburgh, Syracuse, or a mytically and
suddenly rational Notre Dame.

My God, Sam; your hate has completely unhinged you.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, James Schrumpf
<snip>

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang
Tech had some occassional basketball success (they measured on the
scale of a mid-major, of course, being simply appearances in the NCAA
Tournament) and very little football success. A large part of that
was Tech's composition until the late 60s/early 70s: Until then, Tech
was a military school about the size of VMI or the Citadel. Expansion
into a state university wasn't nearly as smooth as it was for F$U and
some other teams of the like. Athletics being one of the ways the
transition wasn't smooth.

A little perspective: when Bobbuh Bowden left WVU for FSU after the 1975
season, FSU was basically a teacher's college that was considering
dropping its football program. Bobbuh single-handedly saved the program
there; I'm not sure if that qualfies as a "smooth" expansion or not.

However, FSU was in a state where the legislature was both willing and
able to put tons of money into the athletic programs at FSU. Doak is
built largely with taxpayer dollars.

The Commonwealth of Virginia, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that
all collegiate athletics in the state can NOT be directly supported
with taxpayer's dollars.

But yes, if Tech had gotten a coach of Bobbuh in the 70s, Tech might
well have built a stronger program in the interim.

Post by James Schrumpf

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G
That's what gives me hope for UConn, even if the Big East is greatly
weakened right now. Connecticut, with no pro teams, has always
supported UConn's bouncyball program even when they sucked, and it's
looking (fingers crossed) like there is a lot of excitement and
support for D1 football.

Sure, and I can understand that hope. However, the Big East VT joined
in the 1990s was a lot stronger than the Big East UConn is joining.
The New Big East is considerably weaker in marquee value, weaker in TV
contract negotiating power, has a weaker line-up, AND still carries
all the inherent weaknesses of the split membership of the Big East.

Post by Pauli G
At any rate, I wish you (VT) the best. It's BC that gets my venom.

BC and Miami both deserve it. Miami may have been wronged, but they
were also sneaking around like the rats they are.
I wish UConn the best. At this point, that looks like UConn building
a program quickly enough, and good enough, that the Big Televen
chooses them instead of Pittsburgh, Syracuse, or a mytically and
suddenly rational Notre Dame.

My God, Sam; your hate has completely unhinged you.

I'm not saying that'll HAPPEN. I'm saying that's what would be best
for UConn.

What would be best for me is Bill Gates suddenly dying, and I'm
somehow his sole beneficiary, on the same day every hawt chyk in the
world finds me utterly irresistable. I'm not holding my breath for
that one, either.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Pauli G]

Post by Samuel Fang

Post by Pauli G
That's what gives me hope for UConn, even if the Big East is greatly
weakened right now. Connecticut, with no pro teams, has always
supported UConn's bouncyball program even when they sucked, and it's
looking (fingers crossed) like there is a lot of excitement and
support for D1 football.

Sure, and I can understand that hope. However, the Big East VT joined
in the 1990s was a lot stronger than the Big East UConn is joining.
The New Big East is considerably weaker in marquee value, weaker in TV
contract negotiating power, has a weaker line-up, AND still carries
all the inherent weaknesses of the split membership of the Big East.

Post by Pauli G
At any rate, I wish you (VT) the best. It's BC that gets my venom.

BC and Miami both deserve it. Miami may have been wronged, but they
were also sneaking around like the rats they are.
I wish UConn the best. At this point, that looks like UConn building
a program quickly enough, and good enough, that the Big Televen
chooses them instead of Pittsburgh, Syracuse, or a mytically and
suddenly rational Notre Dame.

Sam, I would keel over dead with shock if the Big Ten ever came
calling to Connecticut...it ain't EVER going to happen. That being
said, I was one of those Big East romantics who followed BE basketball
from day one and wanted to keep the conference the same, even it it
meant mixed membership. Now I say blow it up, establish a
football-only breakaway conference, and take your chances that way.
Sooner or later either Pitt or Cuse are going to be tempted by another
conference, so start taking steps NOW to make the football schools
happy (of course this is much akin to closing the barn door after the
herd is already out).

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, ***@hotmail.com (Pauli G) ?
<snip>

Post by Pauli G

Post by Samuel Fang
I wish UConn the best. At this point, that looks like UConn building
a program quickly enough, and good enough, that the Big Televen
chooses them instead of Pittsburgh, Syracuse, or a mytically and
suddenly rational Notre Dame.

Sam, I would keel over dead with shock if the Big Ten ever came
calling to Connecticut...it ain't EVER going to happen. That being
said, I was one of those Big East romantics who followed BE basketball
from day one and wanted to keep the conference the same, even it it
meant mixed membership. Now I say blow it up, establish a
football-only breakaway conference, and take your chances that way.
Sooner or later either Pitt or Cuse are going to be tempted by another
conference, so start taking steps NOW to make the football schools
happy (of course this is much akin to closing the barn door after the
herd is already out).

I don't think it's going to happen either. I'm just saying that's
what would be best for UConn.

And yes, the Big East should breakaway. That isn't likely to happen,
IMO. The leadership of the Big East is simply incapable of making
those kinds of decisions. The Big East is a whiner's conference: Mike
Tranghese will bitch and whine about how other conferences are taking
away his teams, BUT WILL DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.

The PERFECT time to discuss a breakaway Big East would have been 14
months ago, when there was still a chance Miami would stick around.
Put a proposal on the table to phase Big East football schools away
from the basketball schools, and *maybe* Miami would have stuck it
out. Instead, all Tranghese & Co. did was bitch, whine, and sue
(which has been singularly ineffective).

From all the people who've met him, Mike Tranghese is a very smart
man. From his actions, he's a complete moron, as are the ADs at many
of the leftover Big East schools.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Dave Christian]

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

I'm not from VT. I'm staying.

[Pauli G]

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

So long peckerheads.

[Pauli G]

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

VT in the ACC I can see. Miami in the ACC I can see. It's BC that
gives me pause. Is there another Catholic college in the ACC or are
they the first? Makes no sense, not that I'm sorry to see them leave.
Too bad they didn't stick around for UConn to begin to lay yearly
beatings on them, because it was in the cards.

young growing program >>>>>>>>>>> program living on past glories (ahem
Flutie).

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

VT in the ACC I can see. Miami in the ACC I can see. It's BC that
gives me pause. Is there another Catholic college in the ACC or are
they the first? Makes no sense, not that I'm sorry to see them leave.
Too bad they didn't stick around for UConn to begin to lay yearly
beatings on them, because it was in the cards.
young growing program >>>>>>>>>>> program living on past glories (ahem
Flutie).

There are no Catholic universities (other than BC, once they join) in
the ACC. Then again, they'll also be the only university north of the
Mason-Dixon line.

BC's inclusion into the ACC makes no sense whatsoever. I think it
came down to either BC or Syracuse, since both were already vetted by
the ACC as being "qualified", and Syracuse simply wasn't showing
enough interest.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Dave Christian]

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

VT in the ACC I can see. Miami in the ACC I can see. It's BC that
gives me pause. Is there another Catholic college in the ACC or are
they the first? Makes no sense, not that I'm sorry to see them leave.
Too bad they didn't stick around for UConn to begin to lay yearly
beatings on them, because it was in the cards.
young growing program >>>>>>>>>>> program living on past glories (ahem
Flutie).

VT makes sense geographically.

Miami is a bunch of mercenaries. Whatever...

BC?? Go figure.

[Pauli G]

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

VT in the ACC I can see. Miami in the ACC I can see. It's BC that
gives me pause. Is there another Catholic college in the ACC or are
they the first? Makes no sense, not that I'm sorry to see them leave.
Too bad they didn't stick around for UConn to begin to lay yearly
beatings on them, because it was in the cards.
young growing program >>>>>>>>>>> program living on past glories (ahem
Flutie).

VT makes sense geographically.
Miami is a bunch of mercenaries. Whatever...
BC?? Go figure.

I can see why BC did it (UConn's shadow? - ie. the investment that UC
is putting into the football program), but not so sure of the ACC's
reason.

I do have a sneaking suspicion that BC will become (already is?) the
redheaded stepchild of the ACC. Not southern, a Catholic school, huge
geographic anomaly in regard's to the ACC's footprint (can't wait to
see how that impact's BC's travel expenses), etc

[Dave Christian]

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

VT in the ACC I can see. Miami in the ACC I can see. It's BC that
gives me pause. Is there another Catholic college in the ACC or are
they the first? Makes no sense, not that I'm sorry to see them leave.
Too bad they didn't stick around for UConn to begin to lay yearly
beatings on them, because it was in the cards.
young growing program >>>>>>>>>>> program living on past glories (ahem
Flutie).

VT makes sense geographically.
Miami is a bunch of mercenaries. Whatever...
BC?? Go figure.

I can see why BC did it (UConn's shadow? - ie. the investment that UC
is putting into the football program), but not so sure of the ACC's
reason.
I do have a sneaking suspicion that BC will become (already is?) the
redheaded stepchild of the ACC. Not southern, a Catholic school, huge
geographic anomaly in regard's to the ACC's footprint (can't wait to
see how that impact's BC's travel expenses), etc

I am particularly interested in seeing what it will do to BC recruiting.

UConn (and other NE schools) may benefit from BC playing no games (aside
from home games) regionally.

Some schools can get away with it (Miami, in football-rich Florida, for
example). We'll see if BC can.

[Pauli G]

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Pauli G

Post by Dave Christian
VT should have been in the ACC long ago.
Good luck, goodbye.

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.

VT in the ACC I can see. Miami in the ACC I can see. It's BC that
gives me pause. Is there another Catholic college in the ACC or are
they the first? Makes no sense, not that I'm sorry to see them leave.
Too bad they didn't stick around for UConn to begin to lay yearly
beatings on them, because it was in the cards.
young growing program >>>>>>>>>>> program living on past glories (ahem
Flutie).

VT makes sense geographically.
Miami is a bunch of mercenaries. Whatever...
BC?? Go figure.

I can see why BC did it (UConn's shadow? - ie. the investment that UC
is putting into the football program), but not so sure of the ACC's
reason.
I do have a sneaking suspicion that BC will become (already is?) the
redheaded stepchild of the ACC. Not southern, a Catholic school, huge
geographic anomaly in regard's to the ACC's footprint (can't wait to
see how that impact's BC's travel expenses), etc

I am particularly interested in seeing what it will do to BC recruiting.
UConn (and other NE schools) may benefit from BC playing no games (aside
from home games) regionally.
Some schools can get away with it (Miami, in football-rich Florida, for
example). We'll see if BC can.

a friend who coaches at a smaller university has friends on the UConn
staff, so I get some (very little) inside info. UConn is already
targeting and getting recruits that BC is also recruiting.

I think BC was whoring for the ACC so badly for two reasons: they saw
that the BE was going to be a weaker conference and wanted out, and I
also think there was an element of them needing to put some sort of
distance between themselves and UConn. While still in it's infancy,
UC is devoting millions to the program (new stadium, multi-million
dollar on-campus practice facility about to begin construction), has a
good coach, has had some on-field success, has some pretty good
players (at least for a new program). Hell, I've even heard
scuttlebutt that there are ALREADY rumblings about them adding more
seats to brand new Rentschler Field.

I think BC must have seen all of this and gotten nervous. A private
school can't compete with a state school once the state decides to put
it's financial support into something. To his credit, Lew Perkins (AD
who has since left) got the administration and state to realize that
D1 football was not a luxury, it was a neccesity. The only downside
is that it took him so long to do so, because things could have been a
lot different if UC was a bit futher along with this football upgrade.
There are two big dogs in New England football right now (with
rumblings that UMass will upgrade someday soon), and I think the old
dog got nervous when he saw the new dog coming (not that I can blame
them for going to a better football conference...although I wonder why
the better football conference would want them).

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Pauli G
a friend who coaches at a smaller university has friends on the UConn
staff, so I get some (very little) inside info. UConn is already
targeting and getting recruits that BC is also recruiting.
I think BC was whoring for the ACC so badly for two reasons: they saw
that the BE was going to be a weaker conference and wanted out, and I
also think there was an element of them needing to put some sort of
distance between themselves and UConn. While still in it's infancy,
UC is devoting millions to the program (new stadium, multi-million
dollar on-campus practice facility about to begin construction), has a
good coach, has had some on-field success, has some pretty good
players (at least for a new program). Hell, I've even heard
scuttlebutt that there are ALREADY rumblings about them adding more
seats to brand new Rentschler Field.

I think this has some merit. Point 1 especially, but Point 2 is very
reasonable.

The fact of the matter is that college football is regional. There
aren't enough really good IA prospects in New England to more than one
really good collegiate football program, or maybe two solid ones.
Even with a leavening of recruits from outside the region, you can't
long survive on the numbers of kids coming out of the region if you
have to share it with one or more regional schools.

Post by Pauli G
I think BC must have seen all of this and gotten nervous. A private
school can't compete with a state school once the state decides to put
it's financial support into something. To his credit, Lew Perkins (AD

I respectfully partially disagree with that. VT and UVa, for example,
are both IA schools whose athletic programs get no help from the
state. Period. Unlike, say, Pennsylvania and Penn State, who SAY
they don't get any state money, but very well do.

VT and UVa are able to get away with it because of the fairly large
number of graduates it puts out, and that many of those grads are
willing to shovel a lot of money into the programs. A private school
like BC simply can't compete when neither its alumni base nor the
state legislature is willing to spend hand over fist on their
athletics.

Post by Pauli G
who has since left) got the administration and state to realize that
D1 football was not a luxury, it was a neccesity. The only downside
is that it took him so long to do so, because things could have been a
lot different if UC was a bit futher along with this football upgrade.
There are two big dogs in New England football right now (with
rumblings that UMass will upgrade someday soon), and I think the old
dog got nervous when he saw the new dog coming (not that I can blame
them for going to a better football conference...although I wonder why
the better football conference would want them).

Nobody knows. BC will decidedly be the red headed stepchild. I truly
think it was just a matter of needing that 12th team for the
championship game, and BC having already gone through the vetting
process.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, ***@hotmail.com (Pauli G) ?

<snip>

Post by Pauli G
I can see why BC did it (UConn's shadow? - ie. the investment that UC
is putting into the football program), but not so sure of the ACC's
reason.
I do have a sneaking suspicion that BC will become (already is?) the
redheaded stepchild of the ACC. Not southern, a Catholic school, huge
geographic anomaly in regard's to the ACC's footprint (can't wait to
see how that impact's BC's travel expenses), etc

Expediency, expediency, expediency.

The ACC had already vetted BC's finances, athletics, and academics.
Both BC and Syracuse were already pre-approved, like all those credit
card applications you get in the mail.

If the ACC went outside of BC and Syracuse, it'd have to go through
the entire vetting/acceptance dance, the "do you like me or not before
I ask you out" middle school dance crap.

Now, that'd be worth it, if the school were of sufficient stature.
Remember, this time last year there was wild speculation about schools
from the University of South Carolina to the University of Florida,
depending on who you listened to. Those schools were obviously not
interested in leaving the SEC.

The next tier of schools would have been the likes of WVU, Pittsburgh,
etc. Now, I think there'd have been a good chance those schools would
have accepted if the ACC had offered, but what exactly would put those
schools above BC or Syracuse?

Between BC and Syracuse, BC was the obvious choice: they really,
really, really wanted into the ACC. Syracuse was playing too coy
about whether they would come in or not, and so they were left on the
outside.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Kurt Brown]

Post by Samuel Fang
and good riddance.
Even if Virginia Tech never goes to another bowl game, even if Tech
becomes another Duke, even if Tech NEVER WINS ANOTHER GAME IN ANY
SPORT WHATSOEVER AGAIN, it'll all have been worth it to screw you out
of the millions each school is going to be losing.
After a solid DECADE of doing everything short of pulling Tech's pants
down and ass-raping us on the 50 yardline during Homecoming, the Big
East schools came to Tech with words like "brotherhood" and "loyalty"
and "togetherness".
Bullshit.
After including VT in the original Big East Football Conference, the
Big East hasn't done a single favor for Tech. Everything Tech has
gotten out of the Big East, Tech has EARNED through TECH'S sweat,
TECH'S blood, TECH'S tears, and yes, TECH'S money.
Starting with full round-robin conference play in 1993, the Big East
decided that Tech should play, in conference, AT Miami in back-to-back
years. Of course, Tech got a generous consolation prize: Temple at
home for two years. Gee, the turnstiles were spinning for those
games.
In 1994, when the football teams went to the rest of the Big East to
include the football-only schools in the conference for all sports,
the Big East left out VT and Temple. This, after Syracuse publicly
proclaimed that it was all or nothing: if the basketball schools
didn't accept the entire roster of football schools, the football
schools would all leave to form their own conference.
Thanks for hanging with us there, fellas.
Then, AFTER Tech picked up the conference's flag in
Alliance/Coalition/BCS games the next two years, Conference
Commissioner Mike Tranghese started SHOPPING Tech to other
conferences. In 1998, TRANGHESE approached the ACC to get the Big
East football schools included into a new, ACC football conference,
with the other sports memberhip staying the same.
Gee, thanks, Mike. Because we LOVED being in the A-freakin-10 for
non-football sports.
Finally, in 1999, the Big East magnaminously extends an invitation to
Virginia Tech to join the Big East for all sports. The cost? A $2.5
million entrance fee (to be paid over 10 years), no conference revenue
sharing in non-football sports for the first 5 years (at roughly $1.3
million a year).
Look it up. That's the STEEPEST price EVER paid by ANY school to join
ANY sports conference in the HISTORY of college athletics. Let alone
the price paid by a manna-bringing school to fully join a sixth-rated
conference.
When UConn decided to join the conference for football (UConn, being
an all-sports-but-football member, could walk in without having to go
through a vote, according to the football conference charter),
everyone rejoiced (except Temple). Tech fans were pumped: we'd
finally have a chance to fix our schedule. Tech's schedule was weak
because of conscious decision, yes, but it was also weak because of
the twin problems of 1.) NEEDING to schedule 6 home games, and 2.) the
unbalanced Big East/UVa schedule, that made Tech's "permanent"
schedule a rotation of 3 home games on odd-numbered years and 5 home
games on even-numbered years. You figure it out. At the same time,
Pittsburgh and Syracuse approached the Big East about rescheduling
Tech: they didn't want to have to play VT and Miami on the road on the
same years.
Guess who got what they wanted? VT's schedule was twisted around like
a pretzel to try to make sure Pittsburgh and Syracuse were satisfied,
while Tech was stuck with the same 3-5 split, just with new faces.
At the end of the 2000 season, when VT finished the season 10-1 and
was OBVIOUSLY deserving of a BCS bowl spot, where was Big East
Commissioner Mike Tranghese? His counterpart at the PAC-10 was loudly
and publicly announcing that Oregon State deserved a spot in the
Fiesta Bowl. Where was Tranghese with his hossanas for HIS
conference's team? Quietly happy that he didn't speak up, and
therefore anger Notre Dame?
On the other hand, as soon as Tech got a bowl bid Tech probably didn't
deserve (the '01 Gator Bowl), Tranghese quickly and decisively
instituted reforms to make sure *THAT* never happened again.
Now, did the Big East help VT? Sure. By including Tech in the
conference, Tech gained a lot of benefits. But no more than Rutgers
or Temple. Shit, Rutgers got a LOT more help than VT did, and look
what they've done with it. Could VT have made the strides in football
that it did without the Big East? No. But the Big East Football
Conference would NOT have had what success it did have without VT's
hard work. Tech EARNED everything it got from the Big East, EXCEPT
the slaps in the face.
People will say VT would have brought nothing to the Big East
basketball conference in '94, and *did* bring nothing in '00. The
latter is true, the former is not. Tech, in the '95-'96 basketball
season, went to the NCAA tournament, losing to eventual champion
Kentucky in the second round by the slimmest margin Kentucky won by
all tournament (not saying much, but it's true: Kentucky just plain
steamrolled everyone that year). If Tech were included in the first
round of expansion, TECH VERY LIKELY WOULD HAVE MADE CONTRIBUTIONS IN
BASKETBALL, TOO.
Thanks for relegating our men's basketball program to the basement,
fellas. That 5 seasons of A-10 level recruiting did wonders for our
roundball program.
And what did VT do for the Big East during this time? Oh, nothing
much. Tech was the only team, other than Miami, to win a bowl game as
Big East conference champion. Tech, while WVU was wiffing on being
bowl eligible, was the only reason *any* bowl games beyond the
Alliance/Coalition/BCS and the Gator would even LOOK at including Big
East schools (the only reasons the Gator looked were Tech and the
*chance* to pick up Notre Dame). In case nobody's noticed, Tech and
WVU were the only Big East schools that brought more than a few
thousand fans to a bowl game. The Music City Bowl might not have been
all that big a deal, but it put almost a hundred thousand dollars into
the pocket of every Big East school, and the only reason it stuck
around after that inaugural year was because of the number of fans
Tech brough with us. Notice how quickly they dropped the Big East
after Syracuse and BC brought pitiful representation in '99 and '01,
respectively?
Now, was the Big East legally within its rights to do all of these
things? Absolutely. But when you've been spending that long, toying
with a school that NEEDED these things from you and screwing them over
for as much money as you possibly could get out of them, and THEN
approach them hat in hand to not ditch your sorry asses at the first
chance, SCREW YOU.
I have friends who go to/have gone to schools like Syracuse, WVU,
Pittsburgh, etc. I wish them all the best. But for the athletic
programs of those schools, have fun being surpassed by the MWC and
CUSA in the next few years. I'll be sitting here watching your
shittiness with pride and joy.
--
Samuel Fang
"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

Go VT and take Boston College with you.

By the way, don't let the door hit on the ass
On the way out.

Kurt

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Kurt Brown <***@twcny.rr.com> ?

<snip>

Post by Kurt Brown
Go VT and take Boston College with you.
By the way, don't let the door hit on the ass
On the way out.

Funny, that's the same thing wife-beaters say when their old lady
leaves them for the women's shelter.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Samuel Fang]

@webtv.net says...

The Big East may be down now, but what
conference wouldn't be after something like this? It still has a BCS
football bid, probably contrary to the expectations of some who were
involved in the raid. The Big East will be back, and it will not need
you. So good riddance to you as well.

But remember that football is only 1 half of the Big East equation.
The Big East basketball conference is, as a result of this, much
stronger than before.

Yes, but for how long? There's a reason why those statistics you hear
every March are true (90%+ of Sweet 16 teams are in BCS conferences,
etc.): football money means more money for basketball, or at least
more money for the Olympic sports which means less of a drain on
basketball.

ABC/ESPN are already in heated negotiations right now to DRASTICALLY
slash the Big East's football contract, and the BEFC's TV contract was
already the least lucrative of all the "Big 6" conferences. The Big
East lost two of its biggest TV draws, its biggest road game draw
(many schools only sell out when Miami visits), its most consistent
fan base (VT has usually sold more home tickets than Miami, despite
Miami having a much larger stadium), and its best bowl game traveller.

Granted, BC doesn't exactly take anything away from the Big East.

Basketball TV contracts, excluding the NCAA tournament, don't come
anywhere NEAR the kind of revenue you get from football TV contracts.
Simply put, very few regular season games mean jack in college
basketball, when a zero-win team can technically enter the conference
tournament, win it, and enter the NCAA Tournament on the automatic
bid.

Yes, I know not every Big East school gets into the conference
tournament. I *am* a Tech fan, after all.

There's nothing wrong with being a mid-major. Get used to the idea of
being one, though: it'll hurt less when it happens.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Dave Christian]

Post by Samuel Fang

@webtv.net says...

The Big East may be down now, but what
conference wouldn't be after something like this? It still has a BCS
football bid, probably contrary to the expectations of some who were
involved in the raid. The Big East will be back, and it will not need
you. So good riddance to you as well.

But remember that football is only 1 half of the Big East equation.
The Big East basketball conference is, as a result of this, much
stronger than before.

Yes, but for how long? There's a reason why those statistics you hear
every March are true (90%+ of Sweet 16 teams are in BCS conferences,
etc.): football money means more money for basketball, or at least
more money for the Olympic sports which means less of a drain on
basketball.

The Big East basketball conference was a power well before the
football conference was even a jingle in an AD's pocket.

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Samuel Fang

@webtv.net says...

The Big East may be down now, but what
conference wouldn't be after something like this? It still has a BCS
football bid, probably contrary to the expectations of some who were
involved in the raid. The Big East will be back, and it will not need
you. So good riddance to you as well.

But remember that football is only 1 half of the Big East equation.
The Big East basketball conference is, as a result of this, much
stronger than before.

Yes, but for how long? There's a reason why those statistics you hear
every March are true (90%+ of Sweet 16 teams are in BCS conferences,
etc.): football money means more money for basketball, or at least
more money for the Olympic sports which means less of a drain on
basketball.

The Big East basketball conference was a power well before the
football conference was even a jingle in an AD's pocket.

This is true. And the WAC was a power in college football, until the
Alliance/BCS system was put into place (and their own stupidity in
over-expanding, of course).

The Big East built itself as a basketball power in the 1980s. In 1995
conferences were able to start negotiating their own TV contracts for
football (before then, it was all through the CFA). THAT is when the
big money started seriously coming in to college football.

The situation that allowed a basketball-only league to flourish no
longer exists. To be a truly successful basketball league (as opposed
to having one or two good teams who happen to be in the same league)
you need football money.

The Big East is losing a LOT of football money.

Other conferences (like the ACC) are getting MORE football money.

Not all that football money is spent on football. That means more
money for basketball (usually indirectly: basketball would no longer
have to support men's track, for instance, because football is now
covering it) and that leads to success on the court.

The occassional St. Joe's or Gonzaga notwithstanding, the true powers
in college basketball are from football money conferences. That isn't
a coincidence.

Nobody's going to say the A-10 or the WCC are basketball power
conferences, despite the performances of St. Joe's and Gonzaga.
Without football money, the Big East will eventually look at a lot
like those conferences.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Dave Christian]

Post by Samuel Fang
Nobody's going to say the A-10 or the WCC are basketball power
conferences, despite the performances of St. Joe's and Gonzaga.
Without football money, the Big East will eventually look at a lot
like those conferences.

Unlikely. Good luck in the ACC.

[Bryan S. Slick]

[Dave Christian (***@nc.rr.com)]
[Thu, 08 Jul 2004 02:53:44 GMT]

:In article <***@4ax.com>,
:***@vt.edu says...
:>
:> Nobody's going to say the A-10 or the WCC are basketball power
:> conferences, despite the performances of St. Joe's and Gonzaga.
:> Without football money, the Big East will eventually look at a lot
:> like those conferences.
:
:Unlikely. Good luck in the ACC.

The Big East of 2004 could very well have the first BCS team not ranked
in the Top 25. Heh.

[Samuel Fang]

Has Mike Dahmus *plonked* you, Bryan S. Slick

Post by Bryan S. Slick
[Thu, 08 Jul 2004 02:53:44 GMT]
:>
:> Nobody's going to say the A-10 or the WCC are basketball power
:> conferences, despite the performances of St. Joe's and Gonzaga.
:> Without football money, the Big East will eventually look at a lot
:> like those conferences.
:Unlikely. Good luck in the ACC.
The Big East of 2004 could very well have the first BCS team not ranked
in the Top 25. Heh.

I think they'll manage to stay in the Top 25. Even probably the Top
15. 50/50 proposition on the Top 10, IMO, though.

It's just that 3 or 4 years down the line, the Big East is going to be
slowly dropping down in exposure and prestige, both of which are
important to recruits.

ABC/ESPN's new contract with the ACC requires the ACC to have more
Thursday night games, *and* to increase exposure on Saturdays. Guess
whose slice of marquee time that's coming out of?

That means to gain exposure (or even maintain it) the Big East has to
become a fixture of Wednesday and Friday night games. Not one or two
a year for the conference, but possibly once a week for the
conference.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Samuel Fang]

Post by Dave Christian

Post by Samuel Fang
Nobody's going to say the A-10 or the WCC are basketball power
conferences, despite the performances of St. Joe's and Gonzaga.
Without football money, the Big East will eventually look at a lot
like those conferences.

Unlikely. Good luck in the ACC.

Care to tell me why you think that won't happen? Between the loss of
revenue, expose, the likelihood of the Big East becoming a permanent
fixture on Wednesday and Friday nights, I have a hard time seeing how
the Big East WON'T become a mid-major conference.

Oh, probably not to the level of a I-AA mid-major, but still to a
mid-major.

And thank you for your good luck wishes.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo

[Samuel Fang]

Samuel, I know about the case with VT, but what did the Big East
promise Miami and not deliver?

The Big East, in particular Syracuse, promised Miami both in 1994 and
in 1999 (the last time the ACC came calling) that the issue of a
"breakaway" Big East Football Conference would be seriously discussed
and explored.

I give Miami all the credit for this: it would have shored up the
single weakest part of the Big East: the kludged membership roster.

There has CONSISTENTLY been a complete lack of effort to rationalize
the Big East's membership. There a FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF BIG
EAST MEMBERS!!! What kind of conference can have two members play
each other in every sport, but as out of conference opponents in all
of them????

Water under the bridge, but Penn State was the answer to the BE's
problems. I can't fault Miami or VT for thinking the grass is
greener and leaving, yet I'm not convinced that the future is that
bleak for Big East football. College athletics is volatile, and
yesterday's doormats can become tomorrow's winners in a short time.
When you think about it, there are many schools that have a football
reputation, but haven't exactly done much on the field lately.

This is true. However, continued success on the field REQUIRES money.

Take MLB, for instance: lots of people point to the Marlins
(effectively small market), Angels (small market), and Diamondbacks
(small market) winning the World Series to be examples of why money
doesn't matter. However, each of those teams are on an up-and-down
cycle, year after year. They might win a World Series, but they'll
shortly go down the drain when their free agent players come onto the
open market and are bought out by the Yankees. The Yankees may not
win the World Series every year, but they're CONSISTENTLY at the top
of the game.

Every once in a while, Tulane or Marshall or Fresno State can put
together a magical season in the mid-majors, and get a lot of hype.
And the year after, they'll be 8-4 or 4-8, and nobody will care. The
same is true for major conference teams, of course, except that when
Tennessee is 8-4 or 4-8, people still care. There are still butts in
the seats, and there is more consistency there than in the mid-majors.

The Big East is bringing in schools that are losers in the financial
department (well, Louisville was the best of the mid-major bunch, to
give them their just due) that don't make up for the loss of exposure
that Miami and VT represent. That's why ABC/ESPN is renegotiating the
contract, after all, and why the next contract is very likely to be
even lower than the current renegotiated one.

Published reports right now say that the current deal will be
renegotiated from $15 million a year to $7.5 million a year. Now,
that doesn't mean a $1 million drop for the leftover Big East schools:
the Big East's revenue sharing was set up so that the more you're on
TV the more money you get. That means Miami and VT were taking a
larger chunk of that $15 million, so it's not as big a drop as those
numbers might indicate initially. But it's STILL a fairly big drop in
revenue of at least a few hundred grand a year.

On a somewhat related note, you had mentioned that Uconn has the
potential to become the BE's new whipping boy. I do fear that, but we
came to the football table so late that we did not have a choice and
had to take what was given us. Hopefully our team continues to have
success so that we can earn some respect, both in the conference and
nationally (I think even Uconn fans are surprised that we have had so
much success thus far considering we are still in our D1 football
infancy).

Take a look at the entrance contract. While the Big East still has
the BCS spot, UConn doesn't get any of the money from the BCS. UConn
doesn't start getting BCS money until after the BCS comes up for
renewal, and there's a good chance that the system will change, the
Big East will get lumped with the mid-majors, or both.

I'm sorry to say this, but in ten years we might look back and say
UConn would have been better served to enter CUSA or the MAC instead
of the Big East. UConn SHOULD have jumped on the IA football
bandwagon back in the late 80s/early 90s. It would have taken either
Temple or VT's spot in the newly formed Big East Football Conference,
and might have been in a good position today. As it is now, they
jumped in the pool just in time for a lot of the water to go down the
drain.

--
Samuel Fang
***@vt.edu

"Slower cars are friends, not food."
- Finding Nismo