Are we as fans happy with the New BIG EAST?

[True Bearcat]

The New Big East will debut in September 2013. It has been a couple of weeks since another team has been announced. As Cincinnati Bearcat fans are we happy with what we will be seeing coming to Nippert Stadium in future football seasons?

The New Big East

Cincinnati
Connecticut
Rutgers
Temple
South Florida
Central Florida
Navy 2015
Louisville
Memphis
Southern Methodist
Houston
Boise State
San Diego State

[JDBEARCAT]

I would prefer to have kept WVA, Syr & Pitt but the new teams will add a new flavor to our league. If UofL stays, then I think this is the best league UC can compete in.
I look forward to going to Idaho, UCF, San Diego & Texas to see future games.
I also think they should invite S. Miss. They always seem to have a decent fb program.

[bobestes]

Not really, but we dont have many options.

[Binturong05]

So long as the monopolistic nature of the BCS remains intact, meaning Congress does not file and antitrust lawsuit, and as long as the Big East retains an automatic bid I'm fine with the conference.

[wall]

It might be good for the school, but I think it sucks for the fans, and the athletes families. The number of away games I'll be able to attend will be greatly reduced. If they would just do away with the automatic bids, all this politics would never have happened.
I can't even imagine what basketball is going to be like!

[08bearcat]

I am happy. Now that we added temple, we'll be in the eastern alignment. Happy for the guys to have a trip to California once during their time at UC.

Also going to make a lot of money.

[jplog]

This really depends on our ability to keep Louisville for the long haul. Without them it really looks shakey.

[GoUC11]

I'll be happier when they release the schedule around, oh you know....August.

Temple is officially in. We don't have a 12th opponent and we're more than halfway through March. A lot was out of our control...but this shaping up to be a huge cluster(fill in your choice of word)

['nati streets]

None of these teams fit the profile of what UC wants to be or should be Athletically or Academically....
But until fan support helps us realize the goals of our shared institution these are who we are going to be associated with.

(I mean think about the best graduates from BSU, Memphis, Houston, SDSU... Are they Sandy Koufax, Oscar Robertson, or even Kenyon Martin or Kevin Youkilis... did they graduate the only US President and Supreme Court Justice ever, or they guy that designed the Golden Gate Bridge, did they invent Benydryl or the oral vaccine for Polio?)

UC has a lot going for it historically both in academics and in sports. Sometimes the company we keep jades peoples perspective of our University.

[CaptainProbasco]

None of these teams fit the profile of what UC wants to be or should be Athletically or Academically....
But until fan support helps us realize the goals of our shared institution these are who we are going to be associated with.

(I mean think about the best graduates from BSU, Memphis, Houston, SDSU... Are they Sandy Koufax, Oscar Robertson, or even Kenyon Martin or Kevin Youkilis... did they graduate the only US President and Supreme Court Justice ever, or they guy that designed the Golden Gate Bridge, did they invent Benydryl or the oral vaccine for Polio?)

UC has a lot going for it historically both in academics and in sports. Sometimes the company we keep jades peoples perspective of our University.

I second that. The only schools that are in UC's league as a research institution are Rutgers, UConn, and maybe USF, and by most measures we're the tops of the bunch. Almost half the fb schools don't even pretend to be research schools, and don't get me started on the bball schools.

The only all-sports members that are in UC's league athletically are UL and UConn.

I liked the old BE, because all the fb schools were all at least semi-respectable, the bb schools meant annual trips to NYC, DC, or Chicago, and any downsides were more than worth it to be associated with Pitt (one of the top 25 research schools in the world). But we've lost Pitt, and these new members who make up over half the conference are not our peers in any way, shape, or form.

Alas, it seems like the best we can do for now. But if you're a big fish in a small pond, you can only grow so much before the pond is too small for you to grow any more.

[08bearcat]

I second that. The only schools that are in UC's league as a research institution are Rutgers, UConn, and maybe USF, and by most measures we're the tops of the bunch. Almost half the fb schools don't even pretend to be research schools, and don't get me started on the bball schools.

The only all-sports members that are in UC's league athletically are UL and UConn.

I liked the old BE, because all the fb schools were all at least semi-respectable, the bb schools meant annual trips to NYC, DC, or Chicago, and any downsides were more than worth it to be associated with Pitt (one of the top 25 research schools in the world). But we've lost Pitt, and these new members who make up over half the conference are not our peers in any way, shape, or form.

Alas, it seems like the best we can do for now. But if you're a big fish in a small pond, you can only grow so much before the pond is too small for you to grow any more.

This is why beating ohio state several times over the next 10 years when the opportunity presents itself is very important. We're ideally positioned to be a partner with ND for the big 10 or acc.

We're about 3-5 years from being equitable to Pittsburgh. Syracuse academically as an undergraduate institution is solid, but its research lags far behind UC. WVU doesn't do anything for academic credibility.

But as I've already said, its better to be the texas/oklahoma of a league that will have a coast to coast presence than squabbling with iowa state in the big12.

[JerseySean]

This is an awful league. It is not "East" (and, to be fair, Cincinnati, Chicago, Louisville, and Milwaukee hardly count as "East" either), it is not as strong in football, it still has Notre Shame in all sports outside of football, and it now has way too many basketball teams. This is being held together with thread and Elmer's to preserve football BCS status. Why do we have college athletes flying from New Jersey to San Diego, Boise, and Houston for league games???

The NCAA has been outflanked. They should have put an end to re-alignment the moment BC, Miami, and VT jumped Big East ship.

Rules?

1. No more than 12 conference members.
2. Must be within a similar geographic area -- to be defined
3. Historical affiliations can be honored (Northwestern should NOT be in the Big 10, but because they were a founding member, they can stay and continue to get their clocks cleaned by the likes of to$u, UM, Penn St., and even lowly Indiana)
4. NCAA controls football money rights to ensure equal/fair distribution (I know this, in particular, is HUGELY controversial, but let's face it -- this is all about the Benjamins)

But... the NCAA won't do this because they are spineless and weak.

I love my Bearcats. This league, however, is a sham. THIS LOOKS VERY SIMILAR TO THE CONFERENCE USA FOOTBALL CONFERENCE WE PLAYED IN!

Discuss...

[Leojrellim]

No, I'm not happy with it at all. I feel like it's just Conference USA again and not on the level with the Bigs. Through in Marquette and DePaul and 9 schools have CUSA roots.

[08bearcat]

I couldn't disagree more.

WVU is a perfect example of what a team with some resources can do in a league that's wide open. WVU as a state produced 1 FBS player in 2010. 1. Give kids a chance to showcase their talent in a wide open league, and you do well. We'll see how they can recruit in the big 12.

We have 2 more basketball teams than we did last year. And we added conference champions in Memphis and Temple. We added a historically relevant team in Houston.

All of the teams are positioned for tremendous growth, which will be spurred by a massive television contract.

At the center of this new league is the UC/UL pivot. And we stand to gain a ton from it.

We picked up strong football programs in the west, and we're now likely in the eastern half of the league, which will be easier to win, and a conference championship game will help build the league.

If we get to 2017 with Louisville, even with a plus one model, the Big East is very well positioned. It has been designed to make money, believe it or not, and because of its coverages stands to make more money per team than the ACC and the big12. Thats important for our facility growth.

[Big Herm]

I couldn't disagree more.

All of the teams are positioned for tremendous growth, which will be spurred by a massive television contract.

...[UC and UL] stand to gain a ton from it.

If we get to 2017 with Louisville...the Big East is very well positioned. It has been designed to make money, believe it or not, and because of its coverages stands to make more money per team than the ACC and the big12. That's important for our facility growth.

These are excellent points. I want to add that the general assumption has always been that the big conferences (SEC, Big12, B1G, PAC12) cannot be matched. However, major cracks in the dominance of these big conferences have been exposed in the last decade with the rise of power mids, team poaching among the power conferences, and the delicate delicate dance between rules compliance and getting ahead. All that is set to crumble if the BCS system changes. In my opinion, success as a program is no more guaranteed with the power conferences as it is with other competitive conferences, like the new BEast seems like it will be.

I don't want UC to move.