Now That The NBE Is Shutout Of The NCG...

[cmhatter]

how are we shut out?

we just get less money

[Skingraft]

Solution:

Win 10 games a year consistantly and be picked up by a better conference.

[Joe]

OMG. The Sky Has Fallen and consistent BE conference hater Brett McMurphy Has confirmed it. Unfortunately for him, as usual, the facts don't support the conclusion. Quoting Brett is like looking at a broken wind vane to see how hard the wind is blowing in a hurricane. Even the quotes within his article, belie his conclusions. The BE is no worse off than let's say Notre Dame? Maybe that's why they are scrambling toward the B12. They haven't been ranked in 5 years while new NBE member Boise is 5th in the country. If Boise can make it into BCS bowls every year despite coming from some conference out west. Why is the BE doomed. We get a revenue source we have never had. The selection comm. composition will be determined by 12 conferences. All this talk about the Big 4 or 5 is paranoid.If the use the last 5 year ranking model to determine revenue distribution, we will have the biggest windfall we have ever had. Using Brett's numbers, here we go:

Playoff revenue est. between 400-500 MM. I use 500MM in my calculation for easy calculation and an optimistic approach.

Big East 2014 members have 130 ranking pts out of a possible 1635. Percentage of the take according to these assumptions.7.95 per cent , we round to 8.

8 per cent of the $500MM revenues equal $40MM. Divided by let assume 12 BE teams $3.33 MM per team.

This is all completely independent of our new TV deal. Are you aware of what our total payout for TV revenue was last year? $3.3 million dollars per school.The playoff revenue split will be greater than what we have been getting for everything each year. And we are going to instigate a bidding war in the fall for the last remaining CFB programming rights. My prediction here and now is that we get somewhere between 10 and 15 million per team. half of what the B12, SEC and P12 get. Far fetched I think not.

Now to the issue of the "selection committee. We use it for CBB and no one grouses that much. It probably has a tilt toward the Elite team, but not much. This selection committe has to be approved by a majority of 11 conferences and ND. They need 7 votes. If they put together a selection committee that isn't fair, it will fail miserably. The 5 Big conferences, even with ND can't get the votes to pass a bogus selection comm. I was pissed when I first heard about this but, it is growing on me as we speak. Sure, the rich get richer. But they were gonna get richer anyway. We may be barnacles on the Queen Mary but we are barnacles with 5 times more revenues than we had yesterday. After analyzing this, I could give a flying **** what BMM says about the BE. We are rich.They got my vote.

Oh and as to the BE being shut out of the NCG, that just flies in the face of the announcement. The top 4 teams by consensus will go. Means you have to play a tougher OOC schedule if you want to get there. tOSU can't schedule all the OH comm. colleges and expect to get in. It will probably improve the team play and level the playing field without giving guaranteed spots to anyone. I like it. BSU is gonna rock in this format. They won't have to climb over every swinging **** conference champion to get in the 4. We better toughen up if we expect to get to that level. time to put up or

The WAC is dead. There are only 10 conferences.

They have a representative at the meetings and a voting share in the Presidential Oversight committee.

That's because they're BCS members. Come 2014 they won't exist. There will be 10 conferences and ND

The vote is next week, Sherlock. Are you thick or what? I was talking about whether there were enough votes to pass the changes to the playoff format, not whether some conference was going to survive in the future, especially a conference which no one gives a flying fox about.

I was confused as to what you were talking about, considering you make 10 arguments at once. Don't get all defensive.

It's passing anyway. All conferences stand to make a lot more money then they are now.

[Bull94]

Will people quite saying the NBE is better than the old. It's not...this whole situation sucks.

swap wvu for boise state. I'll take smu, houston and ucf over syracuse and pitt any day. perception wise you may be right but this isn't the 40's or 70's anymore. pitt is mediocre at best and syracse has been god awful.

I'm not saying overall the conference is better but if you look at football success over the last 5-10 years then the NBE is better.

[Bull94]

Will people quite saying the NBE is better than the old. It's not...this whole situation sucks.

Over the last several years, the NBE teams have been at least as good on the field. There are less traditional "prestige" schools. That is why we want the system to be based on on the field performance rather than names. If it is based on the field performance, we have a fighting chance.

While there is a chance, it's not really much of one because, if I understand correctly, while computers will still be involved in rankings so the on the field performance will have value, the 4 playing for the MNC will be chosen by a committee so good luck with that.

would 8 teams be better than 4? absolutely. is 4 better than 2? without a doubt.

anybody who doesn't think the BCS polls were biased in favor of the power conferences is naive.

not only were they biased towards the power conferences(which honestly they should be-they play tougher schedules) but they were biased towards teams that were thought to be good before the season even started.

If you were not preseason top 10 then you were virtually eliminated from playing for a MNC.

we need to schedule tougher(helps our weak schedule) and we need to win. we will absolutely have a better chance, even with a biased selection committee, then we ever had in being one of 2 spots with a biased bcs poll.

[Joe]

Will people quite saying the NBE is better than the old. It's not...this whole situation sucks.

swap wvu for boise state. I'll take smu, houston and ucf over syracuse and pitt any day. perception wise you may be right but this isn't the 40's or 70's anymore. pitt is mediocre at best and syracse has been god awful.

I'm not saying overall the conference is better but if you look at football success over the last 5-10 years then the NBE is better.

You don't think Pitt or Cuse would have similar success in CUSA? Being honest. Again, go look at the games against quality opponents for the new CUSA teams and Temple.

There isn't much there. In fact, SMU lost 3 games this year by 30+ points. (granted they beat Pitt, who was on their 4th coach in 12 months)

[SilverBull]

When I look around the college football landscape it looks to me to be on the downhill slope, particularly for those outside of SEC, BIG 10, Big 12 and Pac 12. It looks to accelerate once the pay for play movement takes hold. Let's just win it this year so I can go ahead and die happy.

[Bull94]

Will people quite saying the NBE is better than the old. It's not...this whole situation sucks.

swap wvu for boise state. I'll take smu, houston and ucf over syracuse and pitt any day. perception wise you may be right but this isn't the 40's or 70's anymore. pitt is mediocre at best and syracse has been god awful.

I'm not saying overall the conference is better but if you look at football success over the last 5-10 years then the NBE is better.

You don't think Pitt or Cuse would have similar success in CUSA? Being honest. Again, go look at the games against quality opponents for the new CUSA teams and Temple.

There isn't much there. In fact, SMU lost 3 games this year by 30+ points. (granted they beat Pitt, who was on their 4th coach in 12 months)

possibly pitt but syracuse?? no way. they have been terrible since we joined the BE

syracuse beat tulane by 3 points last year.

the same 2-11 tulane that lost to duke by 21 and ARMY by 39.

they beat rhode island by 7. rhode freakin island.

listen I'm as disappointed as anyone about the defections but to say we aren't at least comparable, quality wise, in football is foolhardy.

I'm not big on rankings but according to sagarin's last year we are swapping #22 (WVU) for #9 (Boise State) and we are dumping #69(Pitt) and #86(Syr) for #15(Hou), #46(Temple), #51(SMU) , #77(UCF) and #70( SDState)

that's an upgrade in competition just going by the numbers.

[Joe]

Houston was awful when Keenum went down in 2010. Now they just lost their coach. They literally played no one last year.

Comparing those schools to a Cuse team that played Wake Forest and USC along with a BE schedule or a Pitt team that played Notre Dame, Iowa, and Utah plus a BE schedule is absurd.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Joe

[Bull94]

Houston was awful when Keenum went down in 2010. Now they just lost their coach. They literally played no one last year.

Comparing those schools to a Cuse team that played Wake Forest and USC along with a BE schedule or a Pitt team that played Notre Dame, Iowa, and Utah plus a BE schedule is absurd.

I didn't compare their records. I compared their sagarin's rankings and i believe he takes strength of schedule into account.

BTW all the games you mention were losses except against 6-6 wake forest. I'm sorry but saying you lost to a quality team doesn't prove you are a quality team.

syracuse(5-7) had a #55 schedule according to sagarin's. marshall (7-6) had a #56. I'd say syracuse would be expected to finish somewhere around marshall at 6th. pitt (6-7)had a #48 rated schedule while Tulsa(8-5) had a #45. I'd say they would finish a little below tulsa which was #3.