Big East Conference Expansion Ideas and Discussion

[marquette]

I'm a SLU Law alumnus

Not that it's really relevant to this conversation, but it always strikes me as a bit funny how many lawyers post on these kinds of boards (law student here, btw).

[NJRedman]

As part of this discussion, I think it's worth revisiting the reason for the Big East's existence in the first place.

1. "East" is in the conference's name for a reason. At the time the conference was founded, there was no history in the region of basketball success on the part of big public universities as there was in thee rest of the country. The only public school to have won a national championship up that time was CCNY, which had since downgraded their program. Penn State and Rutgers had each been to only one Final Four in school history. The basketball history of this region was very much a history of the success of private schools, many of them Catholic.

2. After a 2nd round of betting scandals in the early '60's, the prominence of Eastern basketball had declined for almost a decade with only Princeton going to a Final Four before St. Bonnies' Final Four in 1970. There was some renewed success in the 1970's but the ACC had established itself as the dominant power in the old Eastern regional. The Eastern basketball powers were mostly independent and disorganized. New NCAA requirements in the mid '70's encouraged conference formation for basketball.

3. Dave Gavitt's vision was that Eastern basketball prominence could be restored if a group of schools who had basketball as their top priority could form a conference that would create a platform from which these schools could market themselves. Perhaps the #1 item on the agenda was to keep big recruits at home by providing them with a competitive conference in which games would be played in big arenas. For decades the East had been losing its top local recruits to other regions, which made it extremely difficult for them to compete with other national powers.

While a lot has changed, much of what existed before remains the same in the East. Midwest private schools will always compete in the shadow of the Big Ten. While the ACC and the Big Ten have made inroads into the Northeast, only Syracuse and Pitt are schools that are consistently prominent in national competition. But neither of them is in the Boston-Washington corridor that defines the region. UConn has emerged as a big state school that is a nationally prominent basketball power, but they are relegated to the AAC which has an uncertain basketball future and has little presence in the region.

I have no complaint with the addition of Midwest schools to the conference. BUT the conference cannot become primarily a Midwest conference and maintain Gavitt's vision along with the potential for success which that vision offers. The East is a region without a college sports identity. The Big East gave it that. Even with the changes on the college sports landscape and the balkanization of the region, it is the one region with a significant population where a successful, high profile conference can still capture the imagination of the region's sports fans.

At a minimum, the Big East MUST maintain balance between East and Midwest. Without that, it becomes the Atlantic 10, a second tier conference playing in someone else's shadow. That can still be a good conference, but it is not the Power 6 conference that the Big East historically has been and would like to still be. Adding both St Louis and Dayton tips the balance to the Midwest and leads the conference down that path of becoming another version of the A10.

People can talk about institutional fit 'til the cows come home, but to me the fit that really matters is geographic fit. Not enough attention is paid to rivalries. What made the old Big East so successful is the same thing that makes the Big Ten successful. When alums went to work in the morning, they'd talk over their morning coffee or over their after work beer about how their alma maters had done against each other the night before. In New York, it was the Big East; in Chicago it was the Big Ten.

Richmond should not even be up for discussion. Not ever. I don't care how big their endowment is, their enrollment is only around 3,000. The only way a school that small should be considered would be if they had a run of success which couldn't be denied (think Butler) or dominated their city/market in a way that made them the premier sports attraction in town (think Providence). Richmond is neither of these. VCU is the only candidate south of DC that should be considered and they should be strongly considered IMO.

UMass has forced itself into the conversation with its recent success resurrecting memories of past history. Football is a major draw back and a problem, but it still is not a football school and it's location is perfect. Despite the fact that they are both public institutions, IMO the conversation should be about VCU and UMass as the addition in the East. There really is no one else that can upgrade the identity of the conference in the regional consciousness in the way that either of those two can. They are big schools with lots of alums and they will attract lots of attention. Let Dayton and St Louis battle it out in the Midwest for that spot.

In summary, IF the conference is going to continue to sponsor a marquee tournament in Madison Square Garden, they need to have a major presence on the Eastern seaboard. IF the conference is going to recruit the best basketball players in the country coming our of the big cities in the East, then they need a major presence on the Eastern seaboard. Despite the increased presence of the ACC and the Big Ten, the region is still wide open. The opportunity is there. I hope they don't blow it.

I'm sorry but what the hell are you talking about? If we have 7 mid-west schools and 5 eastern schools we'll be the A-10? That makes no sense. Are the 5 northeastern schools going to up and move to the midwest? GTown in Detroit? Nova in Pittsburgh? St. John's in Desmoines? Seton Hall in Cleveland? Providence in Peoria? Geographic balance would be nice but it's not a make or break for the league.

[cm5yz6]

Another great, unsolicited monologue from Mr. Marsh in which we find out that Richmond and dayton should not be considered. But wait UMass' recent success has allowed them in the conversation - by recent success do you mean being ranked through just over a half of the recent season? or are you looking back on that storied active 14 year streak of not making the NCAA tournament? Goodness that speech is hilarious. Hey I think Davidson won two days ago, based on their "recent success," should we consider them? And by the way, if you are measuring it based on whether the alums will be at local bars discussing their alma maters, a very large proportion of Richmond's alums start jobs in Philly, DC, or NYC. Thus, the alums will be able to intermingle better than a school where their alums do not go to Big East cities. The majority of your comments are comical and always lead to the idea that we should consider vcu and team x (which really is just a candidate slightly worse than vcu, so everyone will agree to cvcu). Time to move on.

[Jet915]

SLU fits the Big East in all areas perfectly except basketball. It's good to see them doing well this year, but there will always be the naysayers saying that the players are Majerus' players. That's a valid argument. The key is if SLU can sustain success after Majerus' players are gone.

That's a fair criticism, and one that will have to play out. Are you guys at Creighton getting the doomsday (post-Doug) predictions too?

On this board we certainly are, but it's justified. Although we won't challenge for the Big East title next year, I think we'll surprise some peeps. Good thing is, we aren't auditioning for the Big East anymore.

[MackNova]

Seeing as Creighton has been unable to make a deep run in the tournament WITH Doug, I think that's a valid concern. But overall, I think Creighton will be fine. I have more concerns about Butler without Stevens. I never had concerns with Xavier.

Saint Louis is my #1 choice if we expand and deem Gonzaga too far out of the way.

Part of me doesn't want to expand right away because I want to keep spots available in case the D-I football situation goes absolutely nuclear, and some good basketball programs become available (UConn for instance). I also like the true round robin.

I also worry about the ramifications of adding two long-time "mid-major" teams in terms of national perception.

However, adding two teams eventually would help get more teams into the tournament, and hopefully get less teams crowded around .500.

[NJRedman]

Seeing as Creighton has been unable to make a deep run in the tournament WITH Doug, I think that's a valid concern. But overall, I think Creighton will be fine. I have more concerns about Butler without Stevens. I never had concerns with Xavier.

Saint Louis is my #1 choice if we expand and deem Gonzaga too far out of the way.

Part of me doesn't want to expand right away because I want to keep spots available in case the D-I football situation goes absolutely nuclear, and some good basketball programs become available (UConn for instance). I also like the true round robin.

I also worry about the ramifications of adding two long-time "mid-major" teams in terms of national perception.

However, adding two teams eventually would help get more teams into the tournament, and hopefully get less teams crowded around .500.

You mean like Butler, Creighton and Xavier?

[BillikensWin]

SLU fits the Big East in all areas perfectly except basketball. It's good to see them doing well this year, but there will always be the naysayers saying that the players are Majerus' players. That's a valid argument. The key is if SLU can sustain success after Majerus' players are gone.

That's a fair criticism, and one that will have to play out. Are you guys at Creighton getting the doomsday (post-Doug) predictions too?

On this board we certainly are, but it's justified. Although we won't challenge for the Big East title next year, I think we'll surprise some peeps. Good thing is, we aren't auditioning for the Big East anymore.

To be honest, SLU isn't either. No one is.

As much as fanbases would like it (and appreciate good basketball), there is zero chance of expansion.

[Xudash]

Seeing as Creighton has been unable to make a deep run in the tournament WITH Doug, I think that's a valid concern. But overall, I think Creighton will be fine. I have more concerns about Butler without Stevens. I never had concerns with Xavier.

Saint Louis is my #1 choice if we expand and deem Gonzaga too far out of the way.

Part of me doesn't want to expand right away because I want to keep spots available in case the D-I football situation goes absolutely nuclear, and some good basketball programs become available (UConn for instance). I also like the true round robin.

I also worry about the ramifications of adding two long-time "mid-major" teams in terms of national perception.

However, adding two teams eventually would help get more teams into the tournament, and hopefully get less teams crowded around .500.

You mean like Butler, Creighton and Xavier?

Do you honestly want to go down this road. Do you honestly believe St. John's program holds a candle to Xavier's program in any regard - facilities, fan support, success - over some meaningful period, which probably should factor in more current time than the era of canvas hightop Converse basketball shoes?

[BillikensWin]

Seeing as Creighton has been unable to make a deep run in the tournament WITH Doug, I think that's a valid concern. But overall, I think Creighton will be fine. I have more concerns about Butler without Stevens. I never had concerns with Xavier.

Saint Louis is my #1 choice if we expand and deem Gonzaga too far out of the way.

Part of me doesn't want to expand right away because I want to keep spots available in case the D-I football situation goes absolutely nuclear, and some good basketball programs become available (UConn for instance). I also like the true round robin.

I also worry about the ramifications of adding two long-time "mid-major" teams in terms of national perception.

However, adding two teams eventually would help get more teams into the tournament, and hopefully get less teams crowded around .500.

You mean like Butler, Creighton and Xavier?

Do you honestly want to go down this road. Do you honestly believe St. John's program holds a candle to Xavier's program in any regard - facilities, fan support, success - over some meaningful period, which probably should factor in more current time than the era of canvas hightop Converse basketball shoes?

This could get real, real ugly. I don't think that's the idea.

[friars321]

This is a complicated discussion but I think it boils down to a couple things.
A. If this league is about building the most powerful basketball only conference- then add VCU and Wichita St and you are all set.
B. If the private, religious, and educational standards are to be upheld- the add Richmond and St. Louis.

I would be in favor of option A. We have enough of a nuclues with the private+catholic schools where I think we can take on 2 outsiders. VCU and Wichita would be different. But they are Basketball only, perennial top 25 programs, have a national brand, and cement the league as legit. It really depends on what the presidents + fox can agree on or deem most important.