Name Battle Getting Nasty

The home for Big East hoops

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby flyerlax06 » Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:28 pm

Do people really think that MSG wants the ACC? The ACC rotates their tournament. MSG will not be a part of a rotation. I think they would rather have the BE7 and the new members. I also think keeping MSG is more crucial than keeping the name. Both would be ideal for me but if I had to pick only one I want MSG.
User avatar
flyerlax06
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:48 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby Jet915 » Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:41 pm

flyerlax06 wrote:Do people really think that MSG wants the ACC? The ACC rotates their tournament. MSG will not be a part of a rotation. I think they would rather have the BE7 and the new members. I also think keeping MSG is more crucial than keeping the name. Both would be ideal for me but if I had to pick only one I want MSG.


They want the ACC as it stands now and only if they stay permanently which is a big if.
User avatar
Jet915
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5832
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby flyerlax06 » Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:57 pm

Jet915 wrote:
flyerlax06 wrote:Do people really think that MSG wants the ACC? The ACC rotates their tournament. MSG will not be a part of a rotation. I think they would rather have the BE7 and the new members. I also think keeping MSG is more crucial than keeping the name. Both would be ideal for me but if I had to pick only one I want MSG.


They want the ACC as it stands now and only if they stay permanently which is a big if.


It's not going to happen. The ACC is perfectly content to rotate their tournament. There is also the elephant in the room that if the ACC starts getting poached then what is even left after the dust settles there?
User avatar
flyerlax06
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:48 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby BillEsq » Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:42 pm

doesn't the acc have a deal in place in charlote for a while? i don't think that the MSG thing would come up right away. That said a rotation between MSG and Chicago/Indy would be nice. If you want to play in the cradle of basketball here in the ville we got Freedom Hall if you like history or the state of the art Yum Center available.
BillEsq
 
Posts: 812
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:30 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby flyerlax06 » Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:55 pm

BillEsq wrote:doesn't the acc have a deal in place in charlote for a while? i don't think that the MSG thing would come up right away. That said a rotation between MSG and Chicago/Indy would be nice. If you want to play in the cradle of basketball here in the ville we got Freedom Hall if you like history or the state of the art Yum Center available.


MSG is not interested in being in a rotation. They want to be the dedicated arena.
User avatar
flyerlax06
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:48 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby Bluejay » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:09 pm

Jet915 wrote:
flyerlax06 wrote:Do people really think that MSG wants the ACC? The ACC rotates their tournament. MSG will not be a part of a rotation. I think they would rather have the BE7 and the new members. I also think keeping MSG is more crucial than keeping the name. Both would be ideal for me but if I had to pick only one I want MSG.


They want the ACC as it stands now and only if they stay permanently which is a big if.


As long as Duke and North Carolina are the big dogs of the ACC, MSG is never going to be a permanent site for the conference tourney. Even a rotation is questionable...

(And yes, I've heard the rumors about No. Carolina)
User avatar
Bluejay
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby xman » Thu Feb 28, 2013 9:21 am

Odds are that the C7 get the name right now. The new league will take a smaller portion of the exit fees being paid by the other schools leaving in exchange for the name "BIg East".
xman
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:30 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby The Partisan » Thu Feb 28, 2013 10:23 am

The C7 should make a good firm take-it-or-leave-it financial offer to the BE regarding the name. The name has very little value to the football schools. C7 says "here is our offer"...."you don't like it, then you can keep the name" (and we keep our money)
The Partisan - Villanova '89 - Go Cats!
User avatar
The Partisan
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby The Partisan » Thu Feb 28, 2013 10:27 am

One more thing....the name "Big East" has a negative value, as far as I am concerned, for the football schools. I mean really, they want to stay the Big East? So, as I said in my post above...give them a good offer and if they don't bite, the C7 walks away from the name.
The Partisan - Villanova '89 - Go Cats!
User avatar
The Partisan
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: Name Battle Getting Nasty

Postby SixTwentySix » Thu Feb 28, 2013 11:28 am

The Partisan wrote:One more thing....the name "Big East" has a negative value, as far as I am concerned, for the football schools. I mean really, they want to stay the Big East? So, as I said in my post above...give them a good offer and if they don't bite, the C7 walks away from the name.


I was thinking the same thing. The name would be cool to have, given its basketball roots, but it's neither here nor there. I'd be happy either way. No need for them to over pay for something they shouldn't have to.
Villanova
User avatar
SixTwentySix
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:02 am

PreviousNext

Return to Big East basketball message board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 24 guests