From: kevink@fugitive.soac.bellcore.com (Kevin Klinge)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Miami and the Big East (was ANYONE INTERESTED IN GATORS' SCHEDULE)
Keywords: Miami, Big East, 92 Schedule
Date: 17 Apr 92 19:46:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: walter.1992Apr17.194626.6385
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bell Communications Research

In article <1992Apr17.184451.24754@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, lein@base.bellcore.com (John Leinaweaver) writes:
|> In article <1992Apr17.173012.2538@walter.bellcore.com>, kevink@fugitive.soac.bellcore.com (Kevin Klinge) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> Yeah, I guess Rutgers, Temple, WVU, and Va Tech (even though not an A10 school)
|> |> are really going to be hurt by sharing football revenue with the likes of
|> |> Miami and Syracuse, two teams who go bowling most years during the holidays.  
|> |> Some teams should be so unfortunate!
|> |> 
|> I wouldn't put down WVU so quickly, they're a well coached team that did a fair amount of bowling in the 80's (at least on par with Syracuse).  

I'm not putting WVU down, but it's ridiculous to think that they aren't
better off now for being in the Big East than they would be as an
independent.  For a team that hasn't beaten Va Tech in 3 or so years,
and had some so-so seasons since that one where they only lost one 
game, I don't currently put them on the same level as Syracuse, a team 
that only lost 2 games last year.

|> Let's look at basic questions, Why did the Big East Join with Rutgers, Temple,
|> WVU, ...?  Why not join in basketball as well?  Why did the east never form an all sports conference like the rest of the country?

I'm not about to rehash this argument from last year.  This is because the 
people from Penn State seem to remember things in post-Big East basketball 
times, when they were kept out of those hoops revenues.  And the other Big 
East basketball schools remember back in the pre-Big East basketball days 
when Penn State didn't want to share its football money.  Each side seemed 
to want this "all-sports conference" at different times, which is why both 
sides find it easy to point fingers.  I've heard plenty of the "well, we 
were willing in the 80's but then you weren't" or "you didn't want to talk 
back in the 70's so we went ahead with the basketball conference" arguments 
from both sides. 

But my point of view is from a school that had neither advantage (of a big 
football powerhouse or basketball alliance), so when you ask those basic 
questions, you really are asking them to the wrong party.  

I simply feel that Va Tech, Rutgers, Temple, and WVU are better off today 
being in at least a football conference than they were back when they were 
independents.  Your statement otherwise is what I objected to.  To say their 
football programs are not better off today being in the Big East conference 
is just not true.  

And like Bob Dieckmann mentioned, I can live with BE football today with 
the hope of an all-sports conference someday in the future.  In the case 
of football, something is better than nothing.  Recruiting, scheduling, 
revenues (including TV), and bowl possibilities look better through the 
eyes of the BE than through the eyes on an ever decreasing group of 
independents.

-- 

Kevin H. Klinge
Bell Communications Research
kevink@soac.bellcore.com

 \\\\    ////////////////////////      ||||\\      //||||
  \\\\  ////////////////////////        |||\\\    ///|||
   \\\\////       /////                 ||| \\\  /// |||
    \\\///       /////                  |||  \\\///  |||
     \\//       /////                  |||||  \\//  |||||
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college