# Should the Y accept the invite to the Big East?



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Should the Y accept the invite to the Big East?
Why?
I tried to fit as many possible answers, but please share. 
I am personally really liking it so far and if they are willing to allow the ridiculously over acclaimed rebroadcast rights, I don't see a reason not to. It also mitigates the higher ups concern over dogging out on the WCC by leaving other sports there. I toured the BYUTV facility yesterday, pretty neat, but I don't think that should be a top priority in rebroadcast rights, is anyone familiar with a conversion story of someone stating that the midnight rebroadcast of a game was the most spiritual experience of their life? I don't get that one at all. Why a conference or network would care about that either is also odd to me.
And, of course, the Big 12, there never was an invite, discussions were in depth and two other teams were invited, they specifically passed on the Y already, why would that change in the future? I like that one best too, but they already declined due to rebroadcast issue and possibly Sunday play.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Unless Bronco Mendenhall, Tom Holmo, and Cecil Samuelson are members here, our opinions don't really matter. Nor do we have any idea how joining any conference accomplishes the goals that have been set for the athletic departments. BYU will do what they feel is best for their program. Independence has its benefits as well. BYU has a world wide fan base, and has a better draw than most people realize. There is no revenue sharing with independence, and BYU gets to keep all of its proceeds and doesn't have to split it up with a conference that has no other marquee members.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I say take the offer and run as long as the other schools are in also. Get a commitment first!


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Loke said:


> There is no revenue sharing with independence, and BYU gets to keep all of its proceeds and doesn't have to split it up with a conference that has no other marquee members.


As long as the basic needs are met for the team and the department, why do I or any other fan give a rat's petoot about just how much money the team earns from TV and bowls? The facilities are already top notch and its not as if tickets will become free due to other sources of income, so why I care? 
Recruiting would certainly be better with a BCS conference than independence and this great ESPN deal meant that the last two games were at 7 and 8 in November and the chances of the November schedule improving is very slim. Likely get a ND game in there eventually, but they are nothing worth bragging about either. 
It is indeed difficult to make a long term decision now, but the Big 12 is not happening, what else could become available? PAC 12 is also not happening, so what is there worth waiting for?


----------



## hnt4food (Oct 28, 2009)

The big east is a risky move right now. there bcs qualification in question and if they lose it BYU will be no better off than when they were in the mtn west. plus the buy out now is 13 mill and 27 month notice. that's an expensive risk to say we will just go back to an independent if the big east loses it auto qualification. and according to this article the bcs may drop the big bowls and only handle the national championship. http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... ources-say
If that happens byu is definitely better of as an independant


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I see no reason to go. It is not better than what they have now. And for what? A possible shot at a better bowl game? Really? 

As I learn more and more about the "big time" sports programs around the nation, the more I hope BYU is NEVER among them. The big time programs spend more on football than some universities spend. And in a proportional look at it, a BCS bowl payout is a small fraction of any athletic budgets. EVERY school that has won the national title in recent years is in trouble for cheating. Every one. And in all realty, thing have gotten to where only about 12-15 schools in the country can compete for a national title consistently. And those are the schools on probation, getting investigated, put on suspension, and still win 10 -12 games because they continue to cheat.

It may be a cop out, but I'm one BYU fan that says "enough is enough. Don't sell out on what is important to the institution just to TRY to get some overpriced bowl game." Though I've complained about the schedule this year, I was still at every home game with my kids. BYU games are still a great entertainment value - at LES, or on TV, or on-line at BYU-tv. It is still an excellent sports entertainment product. Big East affiliation will not change any of that.


----------



## stick_man (Sep 10, 2007)

Since the only real reason to join the BE would be easier access to a BCS game, I think they should secure an exit strategy first. Get an agreement that IF the BE loses it's AQ status, BYU has the option for a free out, no strings attached, no fees, no waiting periods, etc.

Before they agree to join, they should also have firm commitments from the other teams to make up the West division of the conference, with Boise State, Air Force, Navy, and SMU at a minimum committing to same deal.

I think that either Boise State or BYU could be deal breakers for the Big East expansion. Both would be needed to prevent a near guaranteed loss of AQ status.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> I see no reason to go. It is not better than what they have now. And for what? A possible shot at a better bowl game? Really?


It is far better than what they have now. These WAC teams are a joke and far inferior to the BE teams. A better bowl game? Is there a worse bowl game than the farmed arces bowl? Get to play a Conference USA team, seriously? 
Standards need to be kept, but to imply that one has to cheat to be competitive is a stretch. There is no sell out here in any way, form or function? What is being sold? They certainly will have a contingency about the others potentially in the division and I would certainly think that loss of the AQ could be negotiated in there also. 
Independence can't really get any better than it currently is, there is quite a ceiling on independence. What we have here is not even better than the MWC except getting rid of the Mtn. However, the Vegas bowl with a chance to play a PAC12 team sounds better than a conference USA, this year Tulsa and Houston look good, but normally the 5th PAC12 team would be better.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Huge - you can't judge the entire independent thing on this year alone. Holmoe had less than a year to strap together a schedule and took what he could get. It will get better. A couple things in BYU's favor right now are an odd number of teams in the Big 12. That means that all of November, there will be one team without a conference opponent. And sure, that will change. But this was a first year and we all knew it would be a dog. No one should be surprised at all that we ended the home season with compelling games against Idaho and NMS. I was at both games with my kids. And we toughed out the cold, and bad opponent. 

But right now, I think it would be a mistake to jump to the Big East, at least until after the January meeting of the conference commissioners when they revise the "new BCS." If the rumors are true that BCS will drop affiliation with all but the championship game, or possibly a 4-team play-off, then BYU would be foolish to join the Big East. In fact, I think if that is the case, you'll see several schools go independent in football. Why wouldn't they? 

One thing for BYU is they got sick of subsidizing the rest of the MWC and the WAC before that. No knock on the rest of those teams, but BYU's attendance, draw, bowl games, and TV support exceeded the rest of the MWC and WAC for 30+ years. At what point did they need to continue to share those revenues with UNLV, Wyoming, CSU, or the rest? In all reality, only Air Force and Utah in recent years has had any kind of functional following and revenue that wasn't dragging down the conference. In the same way that Texas subsidizes Baylor, Texas Tech and Kansas, BYU carried the other conference with very little help. (And before Ute Fan gets all upset, Utah was a dog until Macbride, but since then they stepped up to help out as well and have shown very well for the last 12-15 years). 

But if things go down with the new "BCS" of one or two games, and then the bowls go back to their traditional affiliations or whatever they can negotiate with individual schools, I can see teams like Texas, Nebraska, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, USC, Oklahoma, all going independent simply because they can double or triple their revenue if they do. And if that happens, then BYU is brilliant as the school that could foresee that and set the model. On the flip side, if the super conferences come along and BYU is left on the outside looking in, they are the fool. This creates an "all in" bet right now. And there is no harm is waiting things out just a little be longer to see what other cards are on the table.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> One thing for BYU is they got sick of subsidizing the rest of the MWC and the WAC before that. No knock on the rest of those teams, but BYU's attendance, draw, bowl games, and TV support exceeded the rest of the MWC and WAC for 30+ years. At what point did they need to continue to share those revenues with UNLV, Wyoming, CSU, or the rest? In all reality, only Air Force and Utah in recent years has had any kind of functional following and revenue that wasn't dragging down the conference. In the same way that Texas subsidizes Baylor, Texas Tech and Kansas, BYU carried the other conference with very little help. (And before Ute Fan gets all upset, Utah was a dog until Macbride, but since then they stepped up to help out as well and have shown very well for the last 12-15 years).
> 
> But if things go down with the new "BCS" of one or two games, and then the bowls go back to their traditional affiliations or whatever they can negotiate with individual schools, I can see teams like Texas, Nebraska, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, USC, Oklahoma, all going independent simply because they can double or triple their revenue if they do. And if that happens, then BYU is brilliant as the school that could foresee that and set the model. On the flip side, if the super conferences come along and BYU is left on the outside looking in, they are the fool. This creates an "all in" bet right now. And there is no harm is waiting things out just a little be longer to see what other cards are on the table.


In this scenario BYU will be scheduling 1 home game to 2 away games with those schools (and those schools can still buy there way out of the BYU home game - ask Wyoming about this). They would much rather schedule Citadel and the likes before scheduling BYU (as they can get more out of it like guaranteed win, full stadium at home, etc). I think BYU's head is getting too big for the rest of the body to hold up. C'mon how many times has Bronco or Holmoe said they don't want to schedule 2 for 1.

BYU is not as compelling as they were, plain and simple (let me clarify, BYU is very compeling to their fan base and a large portion of the LDS faith). They are not and will never be like Notre Dame where it is prestigious to schedule them (even as bad as Notre Dame is, you still get the WOW factor for playing them). Just my opinion.

Oh and BYU was a dog until Lavelle and has been a semi-dog since he left (with occasional great seasons and wins over Utah). And based on the Utah vs BYU game this year in provo, they are very close to bordering on full dog status again. :lol:


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

The major thing that this year's schedule has done for me, and that is show that three decades of BYU football has ALWAYS been built on beating crappy teams. The WAC dominance was against crappy teams. The MWC dominance was against crappy teams. And this year's team has dominated against crappy teams. Sure, BYU would be a big time team every year or two. Sometimes, they'd even beat two big time teams if they could schedule it. But we look at the good old days and recite the victory of Miami in '90, but ignore the losses to them in 88 and 89. We talk of beating Penn State, but forget we lost to them twice as well. The victory of Michigan for the title in '84 - was a 6-5 wolverine team. And rolling bad WAC teams this year - the same way that Boise State has done, are the exact reason they have gotten no serious national title consideration. 

Bottom line is BYU can put 55,000 butts in the stadium regardless of opponent. And when they travel, LDS/BYU fans in the region will buy out the compliment of tickets. And I guess that is OK. 

I think that if the BCS goes with the one game only, or the +1, then BYU will be fine with scheduling. I think that they will get to the point of 5-6 quality games a year, and 5-6 dogs. Which is about 2-3 quality games than they had as MWC or WAC members, or would have as a Big East member. Then again, if the super conferences emerge and BYU is not in, then we have a long time to look forward to quality match ups like San Jose State, Weber, and the mighty Vandals of Idaho. And BYU fans will still fill the stadium and tune in on BYU tv to watch it.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> The major thing that this year's schedule has done for me, and that is show that three decades of BYU football has ALWAYS been built on beating crappy teams. The WAC dominance was against crappy teams. The MWC dominance was against crappy teams. And this year's team has dominated against crappy teams. Sure, BYU would be a big time team every year or two. Sometimes, they'd even beat two big time teams if they could schedule it. But we look at the good old days and recite the victory of Miami in '90, but ignore the losses to them in 88 and 89. We talk of beating Penn State, but forget we lost to them twice as well. The victory of Michigan for the title in '84 - was a 6-5 wolverine team. And rolling bad WAC teams this year - the same way that Boise State has done, are the exact reason they have gotten no serious national title consideration.


You can insert the Utes in there as well (until recently when we started to beat the so called BCS teams). I agree 100% with what you said, and it pertains to both teams. I kind of miss the rivalry smack for this week. -)O(-


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

One thing worth considering in regards to this year, is BYU did play Ole Miss, Texas, Utah, Oregon State, and TCU. An SEC, two 12 Pacs, and 2 Big 12 teams, so that is five potentially decent opponents. And another scheduled game against Hawaii - that is only a couple years removed from playing in the Sugar Bowl. So that is just under half the schedule. Of course, they went 2-3 against that schedule too. The two downsides however, is only one of those was a home game where we got killed, and it was front loaded in the year. BYU has never played more than what I'd consider 5 quality opponents, or at least 5 BCS conference opponents. But the dogs have usually been scattered throughout the year - not reserved for the 2nd half of the season. Which will always be the problem with independence - as November is the heart of the conference schedule for everyone else except those bad programs willing to come to Provo for a paycheck.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

Just heard on Espn that BYU rejected the Big East offer. Apparently the tv contracts were the deciding factor. I don't blame them and think this is best for BYU. I do believe the Big 12 will eventually come calling and that would be alot better situation for BYU. I say ride the independance thing for awhile and see what happens. 
Its better than being involved in a conference that might not be a BCS conference in 2 years. 
I really don't think BYU and Boise could keep that conference afloat. Maybe if TCU would of stayed but not with just the 2. 
The Big 12 will try to get more teams, I don't see them sitting by while the other big conferences expand to 12 14 16 or whatever teams. I know they haven't been invited yet but BYU and Louisville or Houston would be good choices to join that conference.
Just my opinion and they way the college football landscape is changing at a rapid pace who knows what it will be 5 years 3 years or even next year will look like.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Well, the Big 12 is out. So I see the following options before BYU:
-Stay independent
-Move up - Big 12 is still an option
-Move back - MWC or WAC

I think the Big 12 is still an option. As Mike said, with other conferences adding teams, the Big 12 needs to get back to, well, 12. And as other schools sign on with the Big East, MWC, or Conference USA, they all are putting major liabilities - buy-out clauses and waiting periods - on themselves. BYU has none of that. They are free and clear to join whenever they can work it out.

MWC may or may not take BYU out. And until the MTN channel fiasco goes away, BYU would rather be independent. The MWC certainly doesn't look like it did last year - with Utah and TCU and probably Air Force and BSU gone after just one year, and then the addition of Nevada, Hawaii, and San Jose State. It is a conference BYU could dominate easily now, but also a conference that BYU "big timed" and left, so the welcome mat may not be out to them any more. And going back to the WAC - well the WAC in its current state is just pathetic. Might as well join the Big Sky

So independent. Upside - great TV deals, ability to schedule very good programs early in the year, and they call their own shots. Fans everywhere have total access to watch BYU football on ESPN channels, or BYU tv either live or delayed, and on-line. Downside is a dog of a schedule late in the year and no conference title to play for after they lose one or two of their first few games. 

I still think they land in the Big 12, if not this coming year, but the next year after that. That is, if any of the conferences stay in tact. If the BCS goes to only sponsoring the title game regardless of conference affiliations, I really think you'll see the super conferences blow up and major programs will model what BYU did - independent, and have their own TV network and national TV deals. Florida, Alabama, and LSU are going to tire quickly of sharing the TV revenue with 13 mediocre SEC teams. Texas already gets a disproportionate share of Big 12 money, and the other schools are fed up with that. And Nebraska is finding the Big 10 tougher than they thought, and now they are sending their revenue to Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, and the other Iowa school. 

If I had to make a prediction of what things will look like two years from now, I'd say BYU will be one of many independents and late season scheduling problems will be gone. Or, BYU will be part of the Big 12 - one of 4-5 super conferences.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> Downside is a dog of a schedule late in the year and no conference title to play for after they lose one or two of their first few games


Two more downsides-

The fans who buy tickets get hosed by having to show up late at night during the freezing winter. That plain sucks and I think attendance at games will drop off significantly, especially for the no-name games.

The other downside is that there is no choice of bowls to play to get into. The excitement of competing to get into such and such a bowl is gone. I remember wanting a trip to San Diego so bad the last couple of years. Now it's Fort Worth or bust! Well, I've spent years living in Texas and there's not much about Fort Worth that is worth much. Six Flags is fun, I guess...


----------

