RE: Louisville a lock for Big East if...

[Shinkle, Randy]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Macomber [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 3:35 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] Louisville a lock for Big East if...
>
>
> > New C-USA North:
> >
> >     Charlotte
> >     Cincinnati
> >     DePaul
> >     Memphis
> >     Saint Louis
> >     Temple
> >
> > New C-USA South:
> >
> >     Houston
> >     South Florida
> >     Southern Miss
> >     TCU
> >     Tulane
> >     UAB
>
> Ugh...a mid-major conference for sure.  (Digger was right)
>
> Sorry, I don't like it.  Although it would be nice for us to 
> automatically
> be conference champions or runners up every year in BBall and Fball.
>
> Football wise, we would never be in a BCS position or have a 
> seat at the
> table of whatever takes its place.
> Basketball wise, is that 2 bids every year?  Maybe 3?
>
> Yes, it is tolerable, and many of those programs do have room for
> improvement.  But I'm afraid if we don't get on board with a 
> big conference
> now, we will never be on equal footing.


Compare it to C-USA before the ECU/TCU expansion.  In UC's division, Memphis takes Louisville's place and Temple takes Marquette's place.  TCU fills in for Memphis in the other division.  Not terribly different; the imbalance in strength between the divisions remains.

No, it's not a BCS conference.  Neither is the current C-USA.  The thing is, the ACC and Big East may have unwittingly set the stage for the demise of the BCS and the rise of a playoff.  If that were to happen, I'd like UC's chances to make a football playoff from this conference better than from an expanded Big East, even though UC's program would probably grow stronger over time in the Big East.

I'm very hopeful about UC moving to a bigger stage, and I think it's much more desirable, but I'm not inclined to throw in the towel (yet) if it doesn't happen.


> The one thing I do not understand is - why is there a 12 team 
> minimum for a
> championship game?  It's an added bonus game, everyone 
> wins... What does it
> matter if there is 10, 11, or even 8 teams?


A very good question that has never been addressed.  I have seen some comments indicating this may be challenged at some point.

Randy '78


> (trying to make shorter posts)
> Jon M
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shinkle, Randy" <address@hidden>
> To: <address@hidden>
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:02 PM
> Subject: RE: [UC Basketball] Louisville a lock for Big East if...
>
>
> > Brett,
> >
> > My initial reaction is similar to yours, but after a bit of 
> reflection,
> I'm not quite so concerned.  See below for further comments.
> > Randy '78
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Brett Pappas [mailto:address@hidden
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:47 AM
> > > To: address@hidden
> > > Subject: RE: [UC Basketball] Louisville a lock for Big East if...
> > >
> > >
> > > Can you imagine if the Big East took Louisville, Central 
> Florida and
> > > East Carolina for the football side and then took 
> Marquette and Xavier
> > > to fill out the basketball only side of their proposed 16 team
> > > conference?
> > >
> > > What would UC do then? The thought of Xavier being in the Big
> > > East while
> > > we are left in a pathetic conference of leftovers for football and
> > > basketball would be a nightmare.
> >
> >
> > Well, let's look at the C-USA that would be left:
> >
> >     Army (football only)
> >     Charlotte (non-football)
> >     Cincinnati
> >     DePaul (non-football)
> >     Houston
> >     Memphis
> >     Saint Louis (non-football)
> >     South Florida
> >     Southern Miss
> >     TCU
> >     Tulane
> >     UAB
> >
> >     Totals:  9 football, 11 basketball
> >
> > You're right, that doesn't look so great for basketball, 
> but the football
> wouldn't be too bad.  Basketball would be helped a lot if 
> Charlotte, DePaul,
> Houston and UAB could get back to being regular NCAA 
> candidates.  Also, look
> at what could happen if the conference were to add, say, Temple:
> > New C-USA North:
> >
> >     Charlotte
> >     Cincinnati
> >     DePaul
> >     Memphis
> >     Saint Louis
> >     Temple
> >
> > New C-USA South:
> >
> >     Houston
> >     South Florida
> >     Southern Miss
> >     TCU
> >     Tulane
> >     UAB
> >
> > No, it's not as intriguing as the expanded Big East, but 
> it's tolerable.
> When you consider the real possibility that the Big East 
> would subsequently
> split (a la the WAC) and the football side would want to get 
> to 12, then UC
> is right back in the mix and the above is only temporary.
> > And I couldn't possibly care less what conference Xavier is 
> in.  They will
> always be Xavier, and UC will always be UC.
> > > Before you say there is no way they take ECU and UCF 
> ahead of us you
> > > need to realize that according to this story, it will be the
> > > 5 remaining
> > > football schools deciding which all sports teams to take. UCF
> > > would be a
> > > good choice if they want to keep a florida school that 
> has promise in
> > > football and ECU would be a toss up when factoring in 
> their proximity
> > > and success in football.
> >
> >
> > My suspicion is that the choice is really either (a) UC and 
> ECU or (b) the
> 2 Florida schools.  If only 1 Florida school is taken, they 
> become a real
> loner, and look what has happened with Miami in that role.  
> If the Big East
> really wants to preserve a Florida connection (for 
> recruiting, access to
> bowls, etc.), then they need to take both.  But, by doing so, they're
> betting on "potential" in a big way, because up to now UC and 
> ECU combined
> are significantly better across the board in *every* sport, including
> football.
> > If the choice is UC and ECU, there are sensible travel partners:
> >     Cincinnati / Louisville
> >     Connecticut / Rutgers
> >     East Carolina / Virginia Tech
> >     Pittsburgh / West Virginia
> > If it's UCF and USF, Louisville becomes paired with 
> Virginia Tech, which
> is a stretch.
> > > Who would VaTech want? If you are WVA or Pitt, is it a
> > > positive to have
> > > UC join (rivalry) or a negative (recruiting).
> >
> >
> > I really think the recruiting angle is overblown.  Lots of 
> schools recruit
> Florida without having a conference member there.  I believe 
> access to the
> bowls in Orlando and Tampa is the greater concern.  Outside 
> of that, I can't
> think of *any* reason why *all* the Big East schools wouldn't 
> prefer UC.
> > > I am not saying that I believe we are on the outside looking
> > > in, in fact
> > > I would give us the edge. I just don't think we are a sure thing.
> > >
> > > --Brett
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wedinger, Keith [mailto:address@hidden
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 8:30 AM
> > > To: address@hidden; address@hidden
> > > Subject: [UC Basketball] Louisville a lock for Big East if...
> > >
> > > Check out:
> > > http://espn.go.com/ncaa/news/2003/0611/1566706.html
> > > <http://espn.go.com/ncaa/news/2003/0611/1566706.html>
> > >
> > > Hopefully, UC is also being seriously considered.  Stay tuned for
> > > further
> > > turmoil.
> > >
> > > J. Keith Wedinger
> > > Senior Software Developer
> > > Sterling Commerce