Will the Big East be able to keep up with the P5 long-term?

[gosports1]

St Louis, Dayton, VCU, Denver. If they drop FB UMass and UConn. If they don't Wichita and I don't know someone in east holy cross or Quinnipiac?

I really don't want to go to west coast. Can Gonzaga move to Minneapolis, Upstate NY or Pittsburgh?

[Edrick]

the big east is in the top 2 or at the very least top 3 of conferences, that's not likely to change as they become more entrenched. Inertia in these things are a very real thing.

so the question is absurd. the SEC, for one, has only finished above the Big East one time in 10 years.

[billyjack]

The Big East will be fine. It's not a concern at all to me. And we're going to continue to improve our position too. It really comes down to the idea that the college football decision making world is populated by low-wattage dinosaur-like idiots.

Some thoughts in our favor (in addition to the many other ideas that people have mentioned on this site, like the football arms race requiring money be poured back into football, etc.)
1. Oliver Luck is considered to be a brain and a rising star in college football galaxy. The guy is spiteful and an idiot.
Among other things, he:
(a) announced that he was going to be biased in pursuing penalties vs Syracuse,
(b) completely agitated for the breakup of the old Big East,
(c) cut out West Virginia from the Big East to a conference 1500 miles away, then immediately within months complained that West Va's Big-12 rivals were too far away.
So the guy sows seeds of division, is arrogant with any power he wields, and is dumb and bold enough to announce his unfair biases from a position of authority. And this guy is considered to be one of the brains of college football. This is the lightweight type of guy that we are maneuvering against. I'm pretty confident that Val Ackerman, Stu Jackson and the 10 of us can outsmart this clown.

2. The Big-12 as a league can't even agree on what 2 schools they'd like to add to their conference. Let's step back... they can't even agree on whether or not they want to add any schools in the first place... or if they want to add 2 schools... or 4 schools... whether to go west, east, local... I mean, c'mon. This is a 10 school conference that should have similar goals and interests. And these 10, not only can't they decided on anything, but they can't even move in the same direction towards basic, simple goals.

3. ACC power brokers allowed themselves to be convinced, without apparently doing much research, that BC carries New England, and that Syracuse carries NY City... and that Pitt was really popular in the northeast corridor... so they're now saddled with deadweight football teams that get little to no press around here. Again, the people that make decisions in college football show poor judgment, and these are the guys that we have to outsmart... really, how difficult will that be?

4. The college football world has 5 so-called major conferences, yet designed a 4 team playoff. This means each year at least 1 conference is left out. Do you realize how stupid they have to be to do this? And all 5 "major" conferences agreed to this. Why not go to a 6 team playoff, 1 for each conference, plus a wildcard team?

So, the way I see it is, if the football establishment moved to screw over the Big East, the likelihood is that they (the overall national college football brain-trust) would be paralyzed by infighting and indecision and backstabbing, and prone to their typical dumb decision-making and knee jerk reactions.

And these are just quick simple thoughts off the top of my head. On top of this, there is so much untapped Big East potential that we've mentioned countless times.

[whiteandblue77]

The Big East will be fine. It's not a concern at all to me. And we're going to continue to improve our position too. It really comes down to the idea that the college football decision making world is populated by low-wattage dinosaur-like idiots.

Some thoughts in our favor (in addition to the many other ideas that people have mentioned on this site, like the football arms race requiring money be poured back into football, etc.)
1. Oliver Luck is considered to be a brain and a rising star in college football galaxy. The guy is spiteful and an idiot.
Among other things, he:
(a) announced that he was going to be biased in pursuing penalties vs Syracuse,
(b) completely agitated for the breakup of the old Big East,
(c) cut out West Virginia from the Big East to a conference 1500 miles away, then immediately within months complained that West Va's Big-12 rivals were too far away.
So the guy sows seeds of division, is arrogant with any power he wields, and is dumb and bold enough to announce his unfair biases from a position of authority. And this guy is considered to be one of the brains of college football. This is the lightweight type of guy that we are maneuvering against. I'm pretty confident that Val Ackerman, Stu Jackson and the 10 of us can outsmart this clown.

2. The Big-12 as a league can't even agree on what 2 schools they'd like to add to their conference. Let's step back... they can't even agree on whether or not they want to add any schools in the first place... or if they want to add 2 schools... or 4 schools... whether to go west, east, local... I mean, c'mon. This is a 10 school conference that should have similar goals and interests. And these 10, not only can't they decided on anything, but they can't even move in the same direction towards basic, simple goals.

3. ACC power brokers allowed themselves to be convinced, without apparently doing much research, that BC carries New England, and that Syracuse carries NY City... and that Pitt was really popular in the northeast corridor... so they're now saddled with deadweight football teams that get little to no press around here. Again, the people that make decisions in college football show poor judgment, and these are the guys that we have to outsmart... really, how difficult will that be?

4. The college football world has 5 so-called major conferences, yet designed a 4 team playoff. This means each year at least 1 conference is left out. Do you realize how stupid they have to be to do this? And all 5 "major" conferences agreed to this. Why not go to a 6 team playoff, 1 for each conference, plus a wildcard team?

So, the way I see it is, if the football establishment moved to screw over the Big East, the likelihood is that they (the overall national college football brain-trust) would be paralyzed by infighting and indecision and backstabbing, and prone to their typical dumb decision-making and knee jerk reactions.

And these are just quick simple thoughts off the top of my head. On top of this, there is so much untapped Big East potential that we've mentioned countless times.

Nice

Regarding your "the football arms race requiring money be poured back into football" statement, you forgot to mention that often when football schools pour football money into basketball (and name the basketball arena after a football coach), they still can't manage to win one stinkin' NCAA tournament game during the entire time said arena is in use:

[NJRedman]

the big east is in the top 2 or at the very least top 3 of conferences, that's not likely to change as they become more entrenched. Inertia in these things are a very real thing.

so the question is absurd. the SEC, for one, has only finished above the Big East one time in 10 years.

It's an off season hypothetical, lighten up francis.