xusandy wrote:For several years, I posted occasionally that letting UConn back in the BEAST was unlikely, and would be a big mistake if we ever to do it, and I still have a concern about "institutional fit" here.
Only time will tell if re-admitting UConn is a bad move for our other sports programs, academic reputations, shared "values" orientation, ability to govern without govt. interference, and other "fit" factors, but it sure looks like a winning move for men's basketball -- both on the court and in a bump to our presence in the Northeastern US market. For example, UConn vs. XU (second meeting all time last night, with neither program really caring about the other until now) now looks like a pair of sellouts next year!
I suppose we can all now start debating whether adding a 12th school, presumably one more geographically aligned with our midwestern members, is eventually gonna happen. If so, entering the St. Louis market is probably the best approach for expansion, even if it means we have to suffer with a weak SLU basketball program until they catch up. I do agree that there is absolutely no need to expand, unless/until the media outlets push us to that.
xusandy wrote:For several years, I posted occasionally that letting UConn back in the BEAST was unlikely, and would be a big mistake if we ever to do it, and I still have a concern about "institutional fit" here.
Only time will tell if re-admitting UConn is a bad move for our other sports programs, academic reputations, shared "values" orientation, ability to govern without govt. interference, and other "fit" factors, but it sure looks like a winning move for men's basketball -- both on the court and in a bump to our presence in the Northeastern US market. For example, UConn vs. XU (second meeting all time last night, with neither program really caring about the other until now) now looks like a pair of sellouts next year!
I suppose we can all now start debating whether adding a 12th school, presumably one more geographically aligned with our midwestern members, is eventually gonna happen. If so, entering the St. Louis market is probably the best approach for expansion, even if it means we have to suffer with a weak SLU basketball program until they catch up. I do agree that there is absolutely no need to expand, unless/until the media outlets push us to that.
marquettewarrior wrote:While I have disagreed many times with Stever over the years, his data and opinions regarding bids/seeding with the 11 team/20 conference games/round robin set up are sound. In theory, in order to maximize the number of bids with seeds (we have not had any issue getting bids), twelve teams appears to be the way to go.
handdownmandown wrote:The next move will IMO also be about burnishing the league’s national profile, as I think this one was.
It’ll be Gonzaga. Their AD is on record as saying the holdup is due to the BE not wanting to adopt a team that far out, and they’d go in a second.
There will be some sort of impetus to add them at some point, and those keeping them out will bend.
Bogg wrote:handdownmandown wrote:The next move will IMO also be about burnishing the league’s national profile, as I think this one was.
It’ll be Gonzaga. Their AD is on record as saying the holdup is due to the BE not wanting to adopt a team that far out, and they’d go in a second.
There will be some sort of impetus to add them at some point, and those keeping them out will bend.
Repeating myself, but Gonzaga individually and the Big East at the conference level should sign a four-games-a-year (2H/2A) scheduling agreement through 2025 where the Zags are used to offset the one team annually that won't be in the Big 12 challenge and the three teams annually who won't be in the Gavitt Games.
Return to Big East basketball message board
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 28 guests