Play Fantasy The Most Award Winning Fantasy game with real time scoring, top expert analysis, custom settings, and more. Play Now
Blog Entry

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

Posted on: December 6, 2011 5:32 pm
Edited on: December 7, 2011 10:03 am
 

Start with the fact the Big East has BCS membership only because of a hall pass.

The BCS commissioners awarded the conference a waiver to stay in the club in 2007 just, well, because. Back then, the Big East still had enough existing juice from its teams and power from its administrators to keep its nose under the BCS tent.

No more.

You don’t have to be told that the Big East hasn’t had a team ranked in the final BCS top 20 since 2009. Or had one team in the top 10 of the BCS since 2008. (The Big Ten has had seven.) Such things matter when a conference is being awarded an $18 million-$20 million bowl game each year just, because.

That’s why you may have noticed the Big East is expanding, to chase that magic BCS berth like it was a contact high. CBSSports.com’s Brett McMurphy reported Tuesday that Boise State, San Diego State, Houston, SMU and Central Florida will join the league in 2013.

The problem is no one really knows what it all means. Four of the five new schools are basically warm bodies to keep the Big East afloat. The league is hoping the fifth, Boise, can keep the conference in the BCS big time. Air Force and Navy may join later.

But there’s no certainty the BCS is even going to be around in a few years. Commissioners will spend most of the next year deciding what college football’s postseason will look like beginning in 2014 (when the current BCS contract expires). The question – now that there is a bit of clarity regarding Big East membership – is if the league is better off with this current expansion.

Short answer: No. Not even close. The schools that have left – West Virginia, Syracuse and Pittsburgh – have accounted for five BCS bowls in the 14-year history of the system. That’s more than twice as many as the new schools bring to the table, all of them by Boise State (two).

But what choice did the Big East have? After the latest ACC raid, it just needed a heartbeat.

Here is  breakdown between the old and new. Decide for yourself if the Big East is worthy of a BCS bid.

(Note: We are considering the “highest level of football” since 1973 when Division I was established by the NCAA. Boise State moved up to Division I-A in 1996. All ranking references are to the Associated Press and BCS.)

 

Boise State

Conference: Mountain West, first year

Age of program at highest level of college football: 16th year in Division I-A/FBS

Years in the BCS era that the Broncos ended the season ranked (1998-present): Seven

The last year the Broncos ended the season ranked: 2011

BCS bowls: two (2007 Fiesta, 2010 Fiesta)

 

San Diego State

Conference: Mountain West, 13th year

Age of program at highest level: 39th year in Division I/Division I-A/FBS

Years in the BCS era that the Aztecs ended the season ranked: None.

The last year the Aztecs ended the season ranked: 1977

BCS bowls: None.

 

Houston

Conference: Conference USA, 16th year

Age of program at highest level: 39th year in Division I/Division I-A/FBS

Years in the BCS era that the Cougars ended the season ranked: One (2011)

The last year the Cougars ended the season ranked: 1990

BCS bowls: None



SMU

Conference: Conference USA, sixth year
 
Age of program at highest level: 39th year in Division I/Division I-A/FBS

Years in the BCS era that the Mustangs ended the season ranked: None.

The last year the Mustangs ended ranked: 1984

BCS bowls: None.

  

Central Florida

Conference: Conference USA, sixth year  

Age of program at highest level: 16th year in Division I-A/FBS

Years in the BCS era the Knights ended the season ranked: One (2010)

The last year the Knights ended ranked: 2010.

BCS bowls: None.

 

The skinny on new teams

Average stay in current conference: 8.4 years

Average age of new programs at highest level of football: 29.8 years

Total seasons in the BCS era that ended with a ranking: Nine (average of 1.8 times per school)

Average length of time, in years, since last end-of-season ranking: 16.4 years

Last season ranked at the end of the season: Boise, 2011

Total BCS bowls: Two.

 

The skinny on departing teams (West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Syracuse)

Average stay in current conference: 20 years (Each year was a charter member in football.)

Average age of programs playing at the highest level of football: 39

Total seasons in the BCS era that ended with a ranking: 12 (average of four times per school)

Average length of time, in years, since last end-of-season ranking: four

Last season ranked at end of the season: 2011 (West Virginia)

Total BCS bowls: 5


Comments

Since: Nov 10, 2011
Posted on: December 6, 2011 11:18 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

CUSA will be fine with or without the merger with the MTN West. Losing Houston, SMU, and UCF isnt a big deal at all. The only bad part is the Florida location of UCF, but that can easily be replaced.



Since: Jan 7, 2009
Posted on: December 6, 2011 10:58 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

The real power resides with these people who run their conferences. The people who run the BCS. They are the ones that have to go. There are 110 schools in division 1. And 6 or 7 guys run the whole thing? How screwed up is that. These people don't have lifetime contracts, so you guys, grow a pair and eat the penalty, and fire these parasites. They make an incredible amount of money to oversee a system that has never worked. These few people telling 110 schools what they can or cannot do? Don't suggest anything, tell them it's a playoff, or their jobs. Just see how fast you get a playoff.



Since: Aug 19, 2006
Posted on: December 6, 2011 10:49 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

How about "The Big Orphans" ? Yea... that  might work.



Since: Nov 26, 2010
Posted on: December 6, 2011 10:41 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

I think you are calling UCLA a warm body.  Granted they are not and all time football power but they are really not simply a warm body.  Pretty sure any conference in the country would be happy to have them.



Since: Jan 17, 2008
Posted on: December 6, 2011 10:28 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

Here you go Dodd. Here's some numbers from somebody who actually did some research on something relevant, unlike how long a team has been in a conference. How about the Sagarin ratings for the last 5 and 3 years.  It shows virtually no drop-off in quality.  Chew on that.




Since: Mar 6, 2011
Posted on: December 6, 2011 9:56 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

The Pac 12 generally does not add schools that don't fit their profile of a research school.  Also, what is their incentive to add schools if they don't get top quality?  Its why they went after Oklahoma and Texas.  Plus, they look at the quality of the entire sports program.  You have to be strong in more than one sport to be considered for that league.  San Diego State?  Ha!  I don't think the Pac 12 will stoop as low as the Big East to get warm bodies.  The Big 10 and the SEC are all similar.  Quality over quantity.  Stick a fork in the Big East for years to come!



Since: Sep 28, 2010
Posted on: December 6, 2011 9:50 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of.  I will never watch Boise State or San Diego State play any team in the east.  These are the teams and divisions I would have created: 
Big East North Division: UCONN, Rutgers, Temple, Navy, Cincy and Louisville
Big East South Division: East Carolina, UCF, USF, Southern Miss (or Memphis), Houston, SMU

I could buy this alignment.  You would still have a lot of major markets and teams could build rivalries.

I hope the Big 12 eventually invites Lousville and Cincy so they can get out of this stupid and ridiculous conference.  UConn should pay the ACC to get into it.

Why did the Big East wait so long to invite UCF, Temple and Navy after Pitt and Syracuse left?  They may have been able to keep West VA.



Since: Jan 17, 2008
Posted on: December 6, 2011 9:39 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

Really Dodd? You think they're gonna do away with AQ's? So just what commissioners are going to vote for this besides the SEC? Do you think the ACC's gonna agree with this? The BE? who as a FOUNDING MEMBER of the BCS still gets a vote you know. How about the Pac 12. You think they want their AQ stripped away? It ain't happening my friend. And futhermore if Navy and Air Force join, the BCS won't have the balls to take away the BE bid. Can you say lawsuit?  Can you say federal investigation. Yes. I knew you could. 

Warm bodies? Like half of the Pac 12 who needed a special exemption so a 6-7 Pac 12 team could go to a bowl this year? Yet you and your media friends have no problem with that right?  So if you want to continue this BCS sham, too bad the BE is gonna be part of it.  Otherwise, maybe we could have an actual playoff, where football games decide who the champion is instead of sportswriters like you. 



Since: Jan 11, 2007
Posted on: December 6, 2011 9:34 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

Scrap it, take 12-20 conferences and have a draft of college teams.  Each conference would be balanced and make for exciting bowl games...



Since: Nov 25, 2011
Posted on: December 6, 2011 9:33 pm
 

Comparing old Big East to new Big East

CBS is the grand daddy of news networks, didn't you know that? Sports broadcasting came about because of its news team. ESPN is the baby of the broadcast world. And yes, it is infantile because it had no tradition of integrity. None. I was there when it started. Zilch. It is 100 percent preoccupied with ratings just like all networks. But it has no true news edge. At least CBS has some news edge. Look, ESPN has created cronyism beyond the pale in sports broadcasting. CBS is just following along because it has the NFL and a few big name properties. The BCS has lost control. There no longer is any attempt to promote the charade of the past 30 years that college football is a school sport. It is completely exploitation of our nation's youth for the fast buck. Some places really promote that exploitation. Michigan/Ohio State. Big deal up there because those are the very old schools. Alabama/Auburn. Big deal down there because it is one of the few industries that gives both consistent revenue and a feeling of exclusivity. Notre Dame because its just Notre Dame. USC the same. So many schools wanting that tradition. USF popped up with a team a decade ago. Other schools started pumping revenue into their puny machines and (voila!) Cincinnati, Boise State, Oregon.... It is now transparent when you have Michigan in the Sugar Bowl. Not because it is a good enough team contending for a top 5 spot but because its fan base commands that venue. It's why Alabama is at No. 2 instead of OSU. OSU has nowhere near the ability to draw money to New Orleans and half its fans will be watching basketball in January with no desire whatsoever to tune into football games. Nielsen Media's ratings figures are driving the advertising sales are driving the selection of teams in the bowls. It IS something to be disdainful about and we should all hold a New Orleans-style funeral for college football this year. And Dennis, my blurb here has more substance than your entire day's work. Good Day.



The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com