kshoe Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Someone tweeted to Burwell that he got the story of SLU being in wrong - Burwell's response: bryan burwell @realbburwell 4s “@larrywitness: @realbburwell Once again got the story wrong. They were not invited.” I did not get the story wrong... Look at what I said Thoughts? Burwell most certainly does not have the story wrong at this point. Burwell said in the next few weeks we may hear that SLU is joining the Big East as the 11th or 12th team and that it was possible they could join in 2013. How anybody could believe his statements are wrong at this point is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastBilliken Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Who cares? Burwell's reporting on this, like most things, has been mostly incomplete and lazy. No need to pile on and take this out on him as well. If you don't like the guy or his reporting, just don't pay attention.Ummm... what??? I was referring to Burwell's response... Get out of here. I wasn't the one that tweeted him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Burwell most certainly does not have the story wrong at this point. Burwell said in the next few weeks we may hear that SLU is joining the Big East as the 11th or 12th team and that it was possible they could join in 2013. How anybody could believe his statements are wrong at this point is beyond me. Yep, that is exactly how he stated it. Said that Fox was pushing for the 12 team league in 2013, and that if the new Big East can get itself situated within the next few weeks, that it was a legitimate possibility that SLU could be in the league by next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mobile-iken Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Burwell most certainly does not have the story wrong at this point. Burwell said in the next few weeks we may hear that SLU is joining the Big East as the 11th or 12th team and that it was possible they could join in 2013. How anybody could believe his statements are wrong at this point is beyond me. It's called panic kshoe...Like you, I wish everyone could just take a deep breath and calm down. We'll be fine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 KShoe, I agree with everything you have written on this topic. Nonetheless, I am still going to despise Creighton and Marquette until we are officially in the Big East. It just makes things easier to channel the uncertainty that way.I agree with that. I'd love to see Creighton get knocked out early, have Doug McD go pro and end up with 3 wins next year in the Big East. And speaking of Marquette, they are only 3 point favorites over Davidson. Has there every been a 3 seed with a point spread that tight before? Seems hard to imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 As I live a block away from DePaul, I am getting strong urges to go egg the ###### out of their campus...if only for the fact that they will be raking in tons of money for a product not worthy of even the Horizon League cellar... Read what Baylor did to TCU 's original campus in waco, then put the eggs down. I'd do more than just egg them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JettFlight5 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74924458/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Pine Jim Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 We should all take a cue from Pontius Pilate; wash our hands of this matter until after the dance. They're gonna look awfully stupid for leaving the National Champion out of their elitist little clique of 10.+1. And being led around by the nose by the likes of Marquette, DePaul, etc. just burns me up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74924458/ The so-called Catholic 7 schools have discussed other schools as potential future members, and DePaul athletic director Jean Lenti Ponsetto told the Tribune earlier this month that 12 schools seems to be the target number. "Twelve, to all of our minds, is pretty ideal," Holtschneider said. "But we don't need to get there right away." The balance of the league and a home-and-away schedule for each team might preempt any rush. "I don't think there's any timeline for 12," Ponsetto said in a phone interview Wednesday. "My own preference is we take our time and catch our breath at 10 and see how that goes. I love the opportunity to have a double round-robin (schedule). I love what that does for fans, I love how basketball focused that is. "I really hope we take a deep deep breath and evaluate this for a couple years before we make any decision to expand." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slubilliken09 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74924458/ To be fair, this is the DePaul athletic director saying things about there being "no rush" for 12. While they would prefer not to add two more, who cares? They're finishing 9th-10th next year anyway. I would be more interested to read things from Georgetown or Marquette. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 What is there to make of the UMass stuff saying that SLU and Dayton told them they were leaving the A10? I am not sure how I feel about all this - all the reports said it was going to be X, Butler and Creighton with us and Dayton coming on board in 2014 - so should I believe the reports and not worry or should I worry that the reports were only half correct? Man o man!The UMass stuff seems consistent with what is occurring. According to the UMass stuff, SLU and Dayton supposedly told the A-10 we'd be leaving before the 2014 season and A-10 told us they would impose sanctions on us including not being invited to the conference tournament. Of course, if they actually did that it would be a good thing as it would speed up our entry into the BE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastBilliken Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Well this isnt good:"I don't think there's any timeline for 12," Ponsetto said in a phone interview Wednesday. "My own preference is we take our time and catch our breath at 10 and see how that goes. I love the opportunity to have a double round-robin (schedule). I love what that does for fans, I love how basketball focused that is."I really hope we take a deep deep breath and evaluate this for a couple years before we make any decision to expand." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74924458/ Looks like the DePaul president is flat-out stating that they will be going to 12 teams. This should help alleviate any panic some are feeling about the announcement today. The fact is, the announcement today was never going to say anything about going to 12 teams in the near future, or make any mention about SLU or Dayton. But, it still seems like there are a bunch of people that were going to freak out anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 To be fair, this is the DePaul athletic director saying things about there being "no rush" for 12. While they would prefer not to add two more, who cares? They're finishing 9th-10th next year anyway. I would be more interested to read things from Georgetown or Marquette. Exactly, let's hear things from the leaders of nationally recognized universities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74924458/ Thanks for this link that everyone should read. DePaul's pres said in effect there will be additions. He didn't say who but at least gives us a glimmer of hope looking forward from Black Wednesday. Fr. B and May better be doing some serious schmoozing over the next 2-4 months. I still think someone from SLU should go to InBev and get them as strong supporters of having St. Louis in that league. I'm pretty sure the Busch's would have thrown their weight around w/ Fox Sports since they were so civic minded and always showed great support for SLU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Exactly, let's hear things from the leaders of nationally recognized universities. What I'd most like to hear from Marquette is that 75% of their endowment was invested w/ Bernie Madoff and they're only now coming clean now since their revenue base can't cover their operating costs and they've used up the balance of their endowment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 The UMass stuff seems consistent with what is occurring. According to the UMass stuff, SLU and Dayton supposedly told the A-10 we'd be leaving before the 2014 season and A-10 told us they would impose sanctions on us including not being invited to the conference tournament. Of course, if they actually did that it would be a good thing as it would speed up our entry into the BE.+1 It just seems we are missing something about the C7 going from 7 to 10 before going to 12. Fox wants 12. 12 to 16 is/has been the new norm for conferences. Balance schedules, etc. is just talk - justification of the real reasons -- money and control. Just seems like there is a legal reason(s) and/or financial reason(s) as it relates to the C7. Quite possibly, the new BE will require 2/3's votes to approve of new members and that going from 7 to 10 keeps the C7 in control (7 out of 10 super majority v. 7 out of 12 simple majority) even if/when X, BU and CU are added. If the Fox TV is the same per school whether its 10 or 12, then future revenue does not seem to be the hindrance. Prior Big East monies/naming rights/prior NCAA credits of the Big East could be at issue but an uneven split to keep most/all of the money among the C7 (and not share with X, BU and CU) seems to be relatively easy to write into the governing documents of the Big East. And if this can be written in for X, BU and CU, then the same can be written in for SLU and UD as well. All I can figure is that final resolution with the three (3) remaining football schools must still take place, that the C7 would prefer to wait to resolve these issues before adding X, BU and CU today but cannot (TV package, conference HQs etc must take place now w/o further delay. Quite possibly, the C7 must legally vote to disolve the Big East, form a new confernce by a certain date and then give notice to the Big East and the three (3) remaining football schools of their new conference before final resolution of the old BE can take place. This legal notice might now be possible as of today and that the C7 can then reach final resolution (by virture of having 7 of 10 votes as of today) but that the the C7 would lose such power/leverage if they added two (2) more teams today (SLU and UD). Again, have I missed the formal announcement but what is the status of the three (3) remaining football schools of the Big East?? Believe they are still members of the Big East and not considered independents. I presume there would not be any exit fees to the C7 if the C7 voted to disolve the Big East. Maybe the C7 will need to compensate these 3 football schools. I understand the C7 does not want to play them in sports next year but are they still members of the Big East v. independents? Another question: which entity are X, BU and CU joining?? The current BE or a new entity with the naming rights of The Big East?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenLaw Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Ummm... what??? I was referring to Burwell's response... Get out of here. I wasn't the one that tweeted him. What about Burwell's response? Someone tried to call him out for being wrong, and he said that technically, if you go back and look at what he said, he isn't wrong. There is nothing "in between the lines" to gleam, here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenFriar Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Not this. The old big east is gone. The football 3 have zero vote/say in anything. Uconn, Cinnci and USF are now in the "insert name here" conference. +1It just seems we are missing something about the C7 going from 7 to 10 before going to 12. Fox wants 12. 12 to 16 is/has been the new norm for conferences. Balance schedules, etc. is just talk - justification of the real reasons -- money and control. Just seems like there is a legal reason(s) and/or financial reason(s) as it relates to the C7. Quite possibly, the new BE will require 2/3's votes to approve of new members and that going from 7 to 10 keeps the C7 in control (7 out of 10 super majority v. 7 out of 12 simple majority) even if/when X, BU and CU are added. If the Fox TV is the same per school whether its 10 or 12, then future revenue does not seem to be the hindrance. Prior Big East monies/naming rights/prior NCAA credits of the Big East could be at issue but an uneven split to keep most/all of the money among the C7 (and not share with X, BU and CU) seems to be relatively easy to write into the governing documents of the Big East. And if this can be written in for X, BU and CU, then the same can be written in for SLU and UD as well.All I can figure is that final resolution with the three (3) remaining football schools must still take place, that the C7 would prefer to wait to resolve these issues before adding X, BU and CU today but cannot (TV package, conference HQs etc must take place now w/o further delay. Quite possibly, the C7 must legally vote to disolve the Big East, form a new confernce by a certain date and then give notice to the Big East and the three (3) remaining football schools of their new conference before final resolution of the old BE can take place. This legal notice might now be possible as of today and that the C7 can then reach final resolution (by virture of having 7 of 10 votes as of today) but that the the C7 would lose such power/leverage if they added two (2) more teams today (SLU and UD).Again, have I missed the formal announcement but what is the status of the three (3) remaining football schools of the Big East?? Believe they are still members of the Big East and not considered independents. I presume there would not be any exit fees to the C7 if the C7 voted to disolve the Big East. Maybe the C7 will need to compensate these 3 football schools. I understand the C7 does not want to play them in sports next year but are they still members of the Big East v. independents?Another question: which entity are X, BU and CU joining?? The current BE or a new entity with the naming rights of The Big East?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 What about Burwell's response? Someone tried to call him out for being wrong, and he said that technically, if you go back and look at what he said, he isn't wrong. There is nothing "in between the lines" to gleam, here. Burwell's correct. He did not say anything wrong. He does not need to admit that he got the story wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenLaw Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Burwell's correct. He did not say anything wrong. He does not need to admit that he got the story wrong. Exactly what I just said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Burwell's correct. He did not say anything wrong. He does not need to admit that he got the story wrong. The Tweet directed at him was very odd. I've never seen anyone overreact based on one of Burwell's columns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenLaw Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 What I'd most like to hear from Marquette is that 75% of their endowment was invested w/ Bernie Madoff and they're only now coming clean now since their revenue base can't cover their operating costs and they've used up the balance of their endowment. Wouldn't mind that, myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 Not this. The old big east is gone. The football 3 have zero vote/say in anything. Uconn, Cinnci and USF are now in the "insert name here" conference. Correct. UConn, Cincy and USF are now in a conference with the other football schools that were joining the Big East in the coming seasons (Memphis, Houston, SMU, Tulane, etc.) While they are probably still looking to join other power conferences, at the present time, they are not part of the new Big East (that split is already offical with this announcement) and are currently looking for a new name and commissioner for the conference they are currently alligned with. There are no more deals that need to be made with the new Big East. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Pelican Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 The Tweet directed at him was very odd. I've never seen anyone overreact based on one of Burwell's columns. Now THAT'S funny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.