In an article just posted on ESPN Mike Wilbon is somehow able to rip Syracuse for bailing on Big East.  He makes a litany of grievances against SU.  WIlbon says that Syracuse has destroyed the BE, has killed hoops tradition, and that SU football isn't worth a damn.  

Whoa.  I find it remarkable.  No that's not enough. INCREDIBLE that he can write this drivel in good faith.  Don't get me wrong, I like Mike Wilbon. I live in DC. I listen to him on 980 all the time.  He's funny, insightful, and otherwise a good guy.  But, he has crossed some imaginary line.  Here's a guy that bailed on the Washington Post.  An industry that he admitted today on PTI is dying. Where did he go? He went to ESPN.  ESPN is a growing media provider that provides more stability and money.  And he has the gall to rip us for doing the same thing.  

Cantor would have breached her fiduciary duty to SU if she had not moved us to the ACC.  If she had passed on an ACC invite, she would have been voted out the next day.  Why?  Because moving to the ACC gives us more stability,more money, better competition, and academic peers.    And where does this money come from?  ESPN.  Wilbon's employer.  When looking over the invite was Gross supposed to think: "Well, the ACC places Syracuse in a better financial situation, gives the athletic department stronger competition, protects our brand, and cuts travel. But, I really like playing Providence and Seton Hall each year.  So, I'm going recommend that Syracuse stays in the Big East."  

Wilbon also glosses over the fact that the Big East was formed to make money. College basketball was put on TV initially by the Big East to sell their product.  The Big East wasn't formed as a charity and has never existed for any reason other than to make money for conference members.  Also, the Big East has lasted for about 30 years.  Not exactly geologic time.  College basketball has been played for over 100.  Georgetown - Syracuse was borne from Thompson - Boeheim,.  This rivalry wasn't handed down from the mountain by Moses. Syracuse's biggest rivals used to be Cornell, St Bonaventure, and Holy Cross.  Is anyone really sad that we don't play Cornell in FB each year?  I guess Wilbon probably feels bad about that.  When we go to the ACC who knows will become our next one?  

College athletics are always changing.  Cantor has recognized that athletics always change.  Mike Wilbon has not. Thank God he's not our Chancellor or our AD. 

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/id/7001193/football-kills-big-east-basketball-tradition

I'm posting way, way, way more than usual.

It appears that Notre Dame's quest for football independence is coming to a glorious end. Inviting Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC is a convoluted and cunning way to force UND's hand into the ACC. Oh, and adding Syracuse and Pitt also destroys the Big East.

When Syracuse and Pitt were initially invited to the ACC over the weekend, my first thought was "thank you Baby Jesus that we won't have to play football in a new look MEAC in 2013."  My second thought was, "why in the world would Clemson, FSU, UNC, and Duke be on board with this move?"  By joining the ACC,  Syracuse's and Pitt get conference stability, increased revenue, and better leadership, academic peers, among other benefits.  But, what does FSU or Clemson or Duke really get from this move? Conference realignment is about football and increasing TV footprints to generate higher revenue streams.  So, to increase football revenue the ACC added two marginal (sorry SU) football schools that happen to have excellent basketball squads?   Inviting SU and Pitt would likely have little, if any, value-add in terms of football.  This low value-add would decrease revenue sharing among existing members.  There is an argument that  the ACC could make that by adding SU and Pitt is way to preempt the B1G from getting the jewels of the Big East.  This would also prevent the ACC from decreasing to 10 members if the SEC comes for Clemson/FSU/Miami.  But, if SU and Pitt were already in the B1G the ACC could get some combo of UConn/Rutgers/WVU and achieve the same goal if any ACC schools defected to the SEC. The Big East football members are sadly fungible assets.  

That was until last night.  Frank the Tank wrote back in June, 2010 that there is an option in clause in the Big East Contract.  When the conference re-negotiated its agreement in 2003 the basketball only schools placed an "option clause" in the new contract.  In essence, this  clause states that if two football members of the Big East leave, the basketball schools will exercise this option that splits the conference in two. Exercising the clause, thereby creates a new league and destroys the Big East.  If the conference is split, the basketball members even retain their NCAA payout credits from games played in the Big East. (Ed. note, if this is true, you've got to be fucking kidding me).  I don't know if this is correct, but it seems awfully coincidental that the ACC invited 2 BE football members when other options may have existed. 

So, if the Big East breaks apart where would UND park their Olympic sports?  The B1G and ACC sure as hell won't invite UND unless its in all sports.  Frank talks all about where UND would put their other sports, but for many reasons it won't be in the new "Catholic Conference."  So, this will force UND to join either the ACC or the B1G as full members to save their Olympic sports.  With Syracuse, Pitt, and BC all in the ACC it seems that Notre Dame would "fit" better in this league instead of the B1G.  

Then with the Big East no longer in existence, the ACC will be the only big time (and likley only BCS)  conference on the East Coast.  They don't have to compete any more with the Big East for TV viewership, recruits, sponsors, etc, etc.  This way, the ACC can now renegotiate the ESPN contract.  The ACC is now firmly in the drivers seat.  It feels great to be in a conference that is protecting its constituents rather than waiting for others to act. Standing alone, Syracuse and Pitt as individual schools don't add a thing in football. SU and Pitt are simply worth more as non-members of Big East, rather than anything else. So, by inviting them it crushes the Big East, likely forces UND to join, and gives the ACC hegemony over the East Coast.  

When NCAA President Mark Emmert said that the conferences were playing Monopoly and should slow down, this demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the realignment issue.  The conferences aren't playing Monopoly, they're playing Risk.  And the ACC just moved its pieces up and down the East Coast.  

I don't know that option clause exists.  But, I wouldn't be surprised. It seems like a Big East type thing.  It would also seem strange that the ACC just happened to invite two Big East fb schools.  Further, this option clause totally demonstrates the ineptitude of the Big East as a whole.  The Big East was really just a  house of cards. Pull out two cards and the thing collapses.  By allowing the conference to dissolve with a loss of two members shows that the football members had no power in this awful cabal. Of course, the basketball members had a mechanism to stay intact. The conference kowtowed to Providence and would do anything to protect the BB school's rights.  I'm thrilled that SU is now in the ACC instead scrambling (like UConn) to get out.  

sources: 

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2011/09/19/conference-realignment-chaos-its-on-like-donkey-kong/

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/06/13/the-real-reason-why-notre-dames-hand-might-be-forced/

This post really has nothing to do with Syracuse.  But I still think it's worth a brief fanpost.  On Saturday, USC beat Utah 17-14.  However, the PAC12 "adjusted" or "revised" the score upward to 23-14. Citing some miscommunication between the field officials and the scoreboard officials on the final play of the game, the PAC12 wanted the final score to reflect the outcome of the game. So, the PAC12 did what any reasonable conference would do: they changed score.  Oh.   According to the PAC12 a touchdown was scored, but not entered on the scoreboard. The new score simply reflects the actual call of the game. Now, this would appear to not be a problem, because after all USC still won the game.

BUT!  There was an 8.5 point spread in favor of USC.  When the PAC12 "revised" the score this shifted the outcome of the game for gambling purposes.  The new score made USC to be the winner, forcing some casinos to change the payouts.  I don't believe that the PAC12 had some stake in this game, but revising the score looks very, very odd especially considering the attendant gaming implications.

I know that college football has many, many rotten aspects.  Recruiting, pay-for-play, the BCS, the bowl system, Rutgers, the student-athlete myth, etc., etc.  However, I would have thought that of all things the final score of a game is to be protected and is not subject to corruption, I mean upward or downward adjustment.  This move sets some weird precedent.  Now, the conferences believe they can change a score because of a call or non-call on the field.  What's to stop any conference from adjusting the score after reviewing game tape hours later for a call or non-call.  The SEC could "review" Tennessee's Music City Bowl loss to UNC and then go ahead and revise the score to reflect UT as the victors.  If the conferences are now allowed to change scores of games, the NCAA is affirmatively saying to the BCS conferences "do whatever the hell you want.  We can literally do nothing to stop you."  I won't be surprised to see USC players in actual chariots next week after the PAC12 reviews some rule that allows each team to play football to "adequately reflect their mascot."  This is bullshit.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566890035565566.html

Does anyone have an ESPN insider account who can copy and paste the 2012 Syracuse Preview?   I guess there's a minimum word count for these things.

 blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah 

Go syracuse!  

The Big East is facing is greatest existential threat since its creation.  The Big 11 is likely to take 1-3 BE members. (Bet on 3). Once the three marquee teams are gone, then the BE will in all likelihood cease to exist.  I bet the remaining members will form some sort of a Catholic  basketball only conference and the football members will need to look elsewhere for a home.  Here's what the BE should have done after the 2003-2004 realignment.  

1.  Form a joint TV venture with the ACC.  Instead of sulking like a girl who didn't win prom queen, the BE should have looked to forming some type of a dedicated TV channel with the ACC.  The BE couldn't form its own TV channel in 2003 b/c it lost too many FB members, and it can't form one now b/c it still has too few FB members.  It's entirely possible that the BE and ACC could have developed a dedicated TV channel immediately after the realignment. This TV channel would could have had every major TV market on the East Coast.  Boston, NYC, Jersey, Philadelphia, DC, the state of North Carolina, Atlanta, and Miami.  Of course the TV network would have been imbalanced with some members receiving more coverage than others.  However, it would have been hard for the cable companies to pass up having the Eastern College TV Network from its basic sports tier (ECTVN).  The BE-ACC joint venture ECTVN would have been a juggernaut.  If there was a dedicated channel, then the status of BE would be far more certain than it is now.

2.  Bring up Texas Christian University.  Instead of trying to base a BCS conference on basketball, the BE should base it on Football.  TCU is a solid FB program, with decent academics.  It brings in the Dallas/Ft Worth metro area TV market and its massive hotbed of FB recruiting.  Many of you will think "TCU, but this is the BE!  TCU is a decidedly southern or even western school."  To that I say, "so what?"   Remember college athletics is about money. Not geography.  Not academics.  Money.  The BE could have expanded its TV footprint and added an excellent FB school at the same time.  TCU would have been a *much* better choice than say either DePaul, Marquette, or both which add nothing. Sorry MU and DePaul, but its true. Moreover, there would have been fewer ESPN heads and other sportswriters shitting on us as a weak conference. TCU would have immediately become competitive.  There no waiting around for a team like Villanova to develop. Marquette was never thought of as "east" but now plays in the BE.   Also remember that the Dallas Cowboys play in the NFC East.

3.  Bring up UCF.  Additionally the BE could have brought in UCF when it brought up USF, but for reasons unknown chose DePaul instead.  UCF is another solid FB program.  Not as good as TCU, but still competitive.  UCF and USF would have locked up the Central Florida TV market and again and expanded FB recruiting.  Both would have increased the cache of the BE conference. 

Barring some sort of act from God, I just don't see the BE existing in 2015.  Sure it could have some resemblance to its present state, but there's no way its going to retain its automatic BCS bid.  The BE is now doing way too little, way too late.

The NCAA approved two more bowl games for the next four years. This brings the total number of bowls to 35.  That means that 70 out of 120 FBS teams will playing some postseason bowl game. The NCAA/FBS is coming dangerously, dangerously close to having more bowl slots than eligible teams. 

What will the NCAA do when faced with the prospect of including a 5-7 team or canceling a bowl game?  Will the NCAA stick to their guidelines and cancel the bowl, thereby angering sponsors, boosters, ESPN, advertisers, etc.? Or will the NCAA make an "exception?" 

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5129612

For the first time in ages, no one from "The U" was selected in rounds 1-5 of the NFL draft.  The only U of Miami player chosen in this year's draft was inner linebacker Spencer Adkins as the third pick in the sixth round.  For those keeping score at home this was the 176th overall pick.  Remember that Syracuse's Fiammetta was picked higher in the fourth round.  Just shows how far the once great University of Miami has fallen.  Why was going to the ACC such a great idea again? 

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/26/no-canes-taken-yet/