ESPN College Football

I tried my best to keep expansion talk out of the mailbag this summer, since so much of it is hot air and we keep going around in circles about it.

But because Big East coaches talked about it last week in Newport, and there was that New York Post report about possible interest in Maryland and Boston College (since shot down by both schools), it's still a hot topic for you guys. So today's mailbag will be all expansion, all the time, and then let's agree to talk about actual football as much as possible going forward. Deal?

One other aside: Next week, ESPN.com is going to be looking at villains in college football, including the top villains for each team. Since the Big East is light on history in some quarters, I'm asking for your help here. Who is the top villain for your team? It can either be a player, coach or opposing program. Send me your suggestions by clicking the mailbag link underneath my ugly picture, and I'll credit the best responses in my post next week.

Now, let's get crazy with the cheez whiz ... er, expansion talk:

CTFaninNJ writes: You have to see what Desmond Connor proposed in the Hartford Courant. Pie in the sky? Maybe. But this looks like a win-win for the Big East, Big Ten or the ACC. The Big East better move on this idea first before the ACC and Big Ten or Big 12 merge.

Brian Bennett: Connor suggested a 20-team "super league" consisting of the eight Big East football schools and the 12 ACC members. The conference would basically rule the eastern seaboard. I credit Des (who does a great job of covering UConn, by the way) for thinking outside the box here, and the idea of these ginormous leagues is one that has been discussed among administrators.

I just don't see how it would work in football. Connor proposed four five-team divisions and 10 league games. Well, how on earth would you determine a champion? And that leaves you only two nonconference games. That makes it much harder to schedule guaranteed home games and cupcakes that you can count toward bowl eligibility (which every team wants). The Pac-10 is already struggling with nine conference games. Let's say you made two 10-team divisions and played everybody in your division with a title game. Well, then it's like you're never even in the same league with the other division unless you make the championship game.

It's not an outlandish idea, but there are certainly a lot of kinks that would have to be worked out. Makes more sense in basketball to me than it does in football.

Tsalem M. from New York writes: I have to disagree concerning East Carolina University. The institution would be a great addition to the Big East because: 1) football tradition exceeding half the present Big East teams; 2) attendance exceeds half the Big East teams' 3) hoops will see a major turnaround in the next two years; 4) television market spans from Virginia Beach to Raleigh to Myrtle Beach; 5) footprint in the heart (as in dagger) of ACC country; 6) rabid (traveling) fan base; 7) academically on par with half the Big East schools; 8) Sandra Bullock, Emily Proctor and Kristen Dalton, Miss USA -- no explanation needed!

Brian Bennett: I still don't think East Carolina brings enough prestige or cache. I mean, how many casual fans can even tell you where the campus is? And I think you're giving the basketball program a little too much credit; it's pretty brutal. I sure like point No. 8, though.

Gary P. from Cincinnati writes: The Big East should add Central Florida as the 9th football school. Notre Dame or Penn State are not going to join. I don't see any other high profile schools on the East Coast that the conference can recruit, so why not ask UCF which has the potential to become a high-profile member. New stadium, good TV market, good player recruitment state, good state support in facilities and finances, fifth-largest university in the nation, sound academics, rivalry with South Florida, Louisville, Cincinnati ...

Brian Bennett: This Orlando Sentinel article agrees with you, Gary. South Florida has always been opposed to the idea of adding its geographic rival to the league, but as that story I just linked points out, the Bulls may be softening on the idea. I think that Orlando would be a good market for the Big East, though another school in Florida could encroach on recruiting for a lot of current schools. The problem is that it's another program you have to hope takes a huge leap forward in basketball, and the Knights haven't exactly been tearing things up of late on the gridiron, either. And UCF has a rivalry with Louisville and Cincinnati? Since when?

Bob V. from Washington, D.C., writes: Did you actually talk to any BC fans? I coordinate all the game watches for BC alumni in DC, and have never, EVER heard anyone express displeasure with the ACC or a desire to return to the Big East. BC's biggest Big East rivals were Miami and Virginia Tech and the Clemson series has been a hugely popular success. Besides that, academically the ACC is a much stronger fit. Why would we want to play Louisville and Cincinnati? This is not the first time you have raised this, and not the first time your column seems completely out of touch with facts and reality.

Brian Bennett: Ah, yes, the storied rivalry that is Boston College vs. Clemson. I bet that gets pretty heated at the ol' office water cooler, because so many BC and Clemson fans work in adjoining cubicles. It's been known to tear families apart. And enjoy your bowl trips to Boise and Nashville, even after you play in that hugely popular ACC title game. That move to the ACC has worked wonders for the Eagles, all right.

Rodney from New York writes: With all this talk of expansion and the importance of recruiting, why doesn't the Big East go after a Texas school as a football-only member? A school like TCU, SMU, Rice or Houston could make sense in the Big East and all of those teams would love a better crack at a BCS game. The Dallas and Houston TV markets are huge and would be a big boost for national Big East football presence. There are only four road conference games a year so travel expenses/geography are less of an issue in just football. It would also really open up the state of Texas as a recruiting ground for the Big East.

Brian Bennett: Eh. I just don't like the idea of going that far outside your geographic footprint (as my sarcastic comments in the previous answer probably made clear). It just doesn't create rivalries or a lot of interest. And I seriously doubt that a Big East presence would make much of a dent in a state that is owned and operated by Texas and the Big 12.

Jason from Charleston, W.Va., writes: There is one key issue I think that has gone unmentioned in all this. The Big East is balanced right now with eight in football.

Brian Bennett: Not sure what you mean by balanced, Jason. There's no tournament, so it doesn't matter if there's an even number of members. Nine teams means eight conference games, and everybody would still play everybody for a true champion. And maybe there'd be fewer ties like there are no, when a bunch of teams finish 5-2 or 4-3 or 3-4.

Matt from New York City writes: The Big East panicked, understandably so, when the ACC raided BC, Miami and Virginia Tech. The league moved quickly to make the Big E
ast a basketball powerhouse, and the mission has been accomplished. However the league is now seeing the repercussions of adding schools like Marquette and DePaul, as at 16 teams, the Big East is struggling to expand their nine-team football conference. My solution is as follows: Boot any non-football playing school from the Big East, with the exception of Villanova and perhaps Seton Hall, as they are tied so closely to the roots of the league. By eliminating Marquette, DePaul and yes, Notre Dame, the league could add three teams into the fold that could compete in both sports. My ideal scenario has the league grabbing BC back from the ACC (if possible) and Memphis and UCF from Conference USA. This would keep the basketball strong, and I believe would ultimately reap dividends in football as well.

Brian Bennett: I think the league did pretty well in adding its football members, who have all proven worthy. Marquette has also been a nice addition in basketball. DePaul, though, is clearly a disaster and was a mistake. It's one that could and should be fixed. As for the other basketball-only schools, you're also talking about St. John's, Georgetown and Providence, who form the heart of the league's tradition and history (don't forget where the league office is located, or the school where all three commissioners used to work). So that won't happen. I am, as I've said before, in favor of removing DePaul and Seton Hall if it will help make the football side better.

Ethan from Scarsdale, N.Y., writes: I really don't think that the Big East possesses enough reasons for a team (like Miami) to leave their BCS conference, yet I don't think a team like Memphis or East Carolina makes sense for the Big East because they need more football prestige. For these two reasons, I don't think the Big East will add another team in the near future. Do you agree?

Brian Bennett: And I think you hit the nail on the head, Ethan. Look, we all know the Big East could really use another team. There just doesn't seem to be a perfect candidate right now. The worst thing the league could do is gamble on a program it thinks will eventually be an upgrade, because that would water things down at a time when people are already criticizing the overall quality of the conference. Know this: the league office is full of smart people who are aware of all these issues.

And now let's lay this issue to rest for a while and get back to actual football.