ESPN College Football

... then I suppose having a postseason football game in the New York area is good enough for the Big East.

The NFL's decision Tuesday to award the 2014 Super Bowl to New Meadowlands Stadium prompted a lot of debate as to whether such a game should be played in a cold-weather climate. Of course, we've already talked about that issue in this very space, as the Big East signed on to play in the New Era Pinstripe Bowl at Yankee Stadium beginning this season.

My take on it has been that the Pinstripe Bowl is a good idea, because New York City is such an attraction, especially at that time of year. Fans can enjoy Manhattan, go to the game on Dec. 30 and stick around for New Year's festivities in Times Square if they choose.

Then again, I usually sit in the press box. The recorded high in New York City last Dec. 30 was 32 degrees, with a low of 19. (At least it didn't snow). If you have to sit outside in freezing weather for four hours to watch a game, you might not be as excited to walk around the streets of Manhattan afterward.

The Pinstripe Bowl could actually serve as a good test case for the Super Bowl. If there's snow and ice for this year's game, expect people to raise concerns about holding the NFL's marquee event in similar conditions.

On the flip side, what's better than watching football in the snow -- at least on hi-def TV? This could provide a unique postseason atmosphere. And if it's good enough for the Super Bowl, it should be good enough for a Big East bowl, too.

Good news. This is the final Friday until late April when we won't have some actual football practice somewhere in the Big East to discuss. But there's always plenty to talk about around here.

To wit:

Ignacio from NYC writes: Just this week there's been unforseen chatter coming out of Notre Dame stating that now apparently the university has had a change of heart and is now interested in joining the Big 10. Based on those rumors, if in fact the rumors are true, do you think that will automatically place Notre Dame as the new addition to the Big 10 at the expense of the other schools that were originally being considered? My view is, if that's the case, all the other schools might as well put their suitcases away and call it a day. Your thoughts?

Brian Bennett: I think you may be jumping ahead a bit, Ignacio. What Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said was that seismic changes in conference realignment could force Notre Dame to abandon its independence. What he's saying is that if the Big Ten and other leagues go to these 14- or 16-team type super-conferences, being independent will no longer allow the Irish to compete financially.

What must be inferred also, however, is that Notre Dame sees how much money the Big Ten Network is creating for that league and realizes it can probably make more money in a conference now than it has with its own NBC contract. So Notre Dame may be more open to the idea of joining that conference than it has in the past. I still don't think it will happen, but fans who want the Big East to keep its current eight members should keep their fingers crosses, send letters to Notre Dame and maybe say a few rosaries that the Irish join the Big Ten and prevent that league's grubby paws from raiding the Big East.

John from Boston writes: All this talk about expansion has got everyone pretty interested it seems. I'm surprised, though, that West Virginia never gets mentioned. I've even always thought that the ACC really missed a great opportunity during their expansion. WVU in my opinion would have been a much better fit than BC, even more so with their rivalries with Maryland and VT. They have the football passionate fans and the SEC like following that I would think any conference would drool over. What gives? Is "big city presence" really that much better than passionate state-wide following? Did the ACC gain much from BC in the form of huge Boston TV contracts? The SEC seems to do fine without the huge city schools.

Brian Bennett: TV markets are easily the biggest part of this, which is why Rutgers seems like the leading Big East candidate to join the Big Ten right now. Just getting a network like the Big Ten Network picked up on a cable provider ensures millions of dollars in revenue. Let's remember that the Big Ten and the Pac-10 are the only leagues so far to say publicly that they're considering expansion. West Virginia is just not much of a fit geographically or culturally with the rest of the Big Ten. The Mountaineers would be a much better fit in the ACC or the SEC. Who knows? If we are indeed headed for seismic change, perhaps those will become options.

John from Saylorsburg, Penn., writes: I know this would never happen, but I think the Big East and Big 12 should tell their schools not to schedule any basketball games in a four-day period around the Pinstripe Bowl. Then the two teams attending could bring their basketball teams also. They could play at Madison Square Garden or St. John's. Both conferences are big in basketball, so I think this would go over well. It'd give ESPN a game to televise also. Fans could go to both games. It would be unique in bowl games.

Brian Bennett: It will never happen that way because of scheduling and television arrangements. But could the Pinstripe Bowl have a small basketball event, like the Orange Bowl does? Sure. You might not have the same teams, but you could perhaps get a Big East/Big 12 doubleheader that would surely draw fans. MSG is a big selling point. The Big East should take advantage of all that New York has to offer for this game.

John G. from Lehigh Valley, Penn., writes: Why does the Big East agree to bowl match-ups that before they even are played make the Big East look like an inferior conference? For example, in every bowl affiliation the conference has, they are playing a much lower seed from another conference.

Brian Bennett: John, the league is trying to get the best bowl partners it can, with the best possible matchups. Credit the Big East for upgrading to a Big 12 opponent in the Pinstripe Bowl instead of a MAC team in the International Bowl, and for keeping the ACC opponent the same for the Champs Sports arrangement. The Big East would like to play higher-profile teams, but it can only take the best deals it is offered. It's still an uphill climb in many ways for the Big East.

Chris from Pitman, N.J. writes: First off, it would really make my day to see my question in your mailbag Friday. It's the little things in life that make me happy. Anyway, I was wondering how important it is for Rutgers to be playing in this inaugural bowl at Yankee Stadium? I almost feel like aside from a BCS bowl game, this would be the best possible bowl game for Rutgers. To prove itself in NYC, and that the market naturally belongs to us. Imagine a sea of red at Yankee Stadium on the night before New Year's Eve on national television. If that doesn't get us over the hump as far as national recognition, I fear it may never happen and we've been living a dream the last few years.

Brian Bennett: Chris, I'm happy to make your day, though you may want to aim a little higher in the future. Rutgers should aim higher as well. The Scarlet Knights should shoot for the BCS, and if not that, playing the Champs Sports Bowl as the No. 2 Big East bowl team (an achievement they've never gained) or even in the Meineke Car Care Bowl against a solid ACC team would be worthy accomplishments. I don't know that playing in a mid-tier (at best) bowl game against a possible No. 7 Big 12 team is going to turn anybody's heads. It's probably more important that the game gets Rutgers in order to sell tickets in Year One.

Grant J from Louisville writes: You made two slight references to Radiohead in your mailbag from March 9th. "Big Fish Eat the Little ones" and "High and Dry." Very, very cool. Also, do you think we can actually fill that new bowl we've added to Papa John's Cardinal Stadium this year? What does Charlie Strong and the gang need to do most (other than, you know, win some games) to put butts in the seats THIS season?

Brian Bennett: There were actually three Radiohead references in there, Grant, if you'll read the top again. It's all part of my plan to make Thom Yorke a regular reader of the Big East blog (and maybe get him to sing "Country Roads" at a West Virginia game). Anyway, I think there will be a natural curiosity and excitement factor with Strong there, and I expect sellouts for the opener against Kentucky and probably when West Virginia comes to town. For those seats to be consistently filled this year, Louisville needs to be competitive and have an exciting style of play (and nice weather wouldn't hurt, either). Long term, though, it's going to take winning more games.

Pete from N.J., writes: Just wanted to mention the Huskies aren't the only team with a living mascot! West Virginia has real HUMAN BEING! The Mountaineer! Anyway, I don't know if you would count it, but the real Rutgers Scarlet Knight Mascot (not the cartoon version) rides a horse on the sidelines during games.

Brian Bennett: Touche. Though to me, there's a big difference between a dude (or woman) wearing a Mountaineers outfit/riding a horse and an actual Husky. There's costuming and then there's DNA. I can dress up like a leprechaun for St. Patrick's Day, but I'm not going to be one. (But I'll leave that to my redheaded friends).

I used to do surgery, on girls in the '80s. But gravity always wins.

So now I stick to mailbags:

Andrew from California writes: The Yankee, I mean Pinstripe, Bowl will place the No. 4 Big East team against the Big 12 No. 7. Here are what the matchups would have been over the past years: 2005 -- USF (6-5) vs Missouri (6-5); 2006 -- USF (8-4) or Cincinnati (7-5) vs Missouri (8-4); 2007 -- USF (9-3) or Rutgers (7-5) vs. Colorado (6-6); 2008 -- Rutgers (7-5) vs replacement. 2009: Rutgers (8-4) or UConn (7-5) vs. Iowa state (6-6).

It's OK most years. We will see.

Brian Bennett: Thanks for that research, Andrew. A couple of things to remember about the New Era Pinstripe Bowl, its official name now. While the matchups might not be sexy every year, this basically replaced the International Bowl in the Big East's lineup. And playing a Big 12 team, even a mediocre one, is much, much more interesting than facing the MAC in Toronto. Also, while it is officially listed as taking the No. 4 Big East team, we know that after the BCS game, there's no real slotting system. Bowls and leagues work to make the best fit in each game. You'd better believe that Rutgers, UConn and Syracuse will be pushed hard for that game every year in which they're eligible.

And finally, there will be some years when the Big 12 doesn't have enough eligible teams to send one to this bowl. Notre Dame can then replace the Big 12 in that scenario. While lots of stars would have to align -- the Irish would have to be bad enough to miss the BCS and other big bowls but just good enough to make the postseason in the same year that the Big 12 comes up short -- a Big East vs. Notre Dame matchup in New York would certainly be enticing.

---

T.J. from Cincinnati writes: Two-part question: 1. How many Big East teams deserve to be ranked in the preseason Top 25? Who? 2. How many Big East teams WILL be ranked in the preseason Top 25?

Brian Bennett: I've said this before, but I believe as of right now, four Big East teams deserve to be ranked, all in the 15-to-25 range: Pitt, Cincinnati, West Virginia and UConn. I think, though, that only Pitt and Cincinnati will be ranked. UConn still lacks name recognition for national voters, and others may be scared off by West Virginia's quarterback situation or give too much weight to the Gator Bowl loss.

---

Paul M. from Boston writes: With all this expansion talk, many people bring up schools that really do not bring much to the table. Since Temple is on probation for football, and they just had a bowl season, why not invite them to join the conference for all sports and give DePaul the boot? That combined with Villanova stepping up to Division I would give a great football and basketball rivalry in Philly. A third team could be Boston College, and now is the time to approach them about rejoining the Big East. They are doing bad in football and horrible in basketball in the ACC.

Brian Bennett: I can't imagine two teams from the same city competing in Big East football, but that would be a lot of fun. Can you imagine the fight for recruits, not to mention attention and maybe even stadium dates? Works in Los Angeles, but I don't think this is the same situation at all. I wouldn't say BC is doing badly in football, because it has reached the ACC title game a couple of times. Clearly it's knocking heads in ACC basketball against some powers, but it wouldn't be any easier in the monstrous Big East for hoops. Boston College is the program that fits the league so perfectly as an expansion target, but who knows if it would be willing to come back. Not if there's no major financial incentive to do so.

---

Jim from Pittsburgh writes: I for one, hate the singing of "Sweet Caroline." But, in its defense, the students suggested it to the PR department and they ran with it. It's really for the students, and that's what's important. They love it. The other fans -- I mean in a city that plays Styx Renegade as their go-to song to pump up the crowd, it is a mixed bag. It's hard to tell if the players get into it, as it is rather corny and waaaaay too long, but they do seem to respond to the way the crowd is pumped up after the song.

Brian Bennett: Good times never seemed so good. I've been inclined to believe they never would.

---

Mike L. from Hillsdale, N.J., writes: Being a Rutgers fan, I can safely say that we as whole want to join the Big Ten. The reasons though, outside of the obvious perk of more money, is that we're afraid of what will happen to the Big East if we don't go. Let's say, for example, that Pitt gets the invitation instead. Well there goes the auto-BCS bid straight into the hands of the Mountain West, assuming that they keep all of their teams.

If Rutgers does go, however, it would be best for all parties involved. The Big Ten gets the NYC presence that they so desperately seem to want (Don't kid yourself, there is a Rutgers fan-base in New York that is only going to grow with more passionate RU alum graduating every year). Rutgers gets more money, a better recruiting pull and would most likely block Penn State from poaching Greg Schiano when the time comes. The Big East would not like losing Rutgers, but out of the teams that are in contention from the Big East, RU would easily be the most replaceable since we don't exactly have a long tradition of winning in almost anything.

Brian Bennett: I agree with a lot of what you say, Mike. It's every school for itself when it comes to the expansion free-for-all. Big fish eat the little ones, as a band I'm somewhat fond of once said. I don't think it's necessarily gloom and doom for the Big East if only Rutgers leaves. The league would still have tradition-rich schools like Syracuse, Pitt and West Virginia and several big TV markets. It would just have to add a quality replacement or two to keep things going.

---

Jason from Spring Lake, N.J., writes: Drop Seton Hall, an original member? You are a total idiot who knows nothing about the Big East and its tradition, you red-headed dork.

Brian Bennett: First of all, I don't have red hair. (Not that there's anything wrong with that; two of my best friends are self-proclaimed gingers). Second of all, who cares if Seton Hall was an original member? What matters is what the school is contributing now. We're talking about a program that hasn't been to the NCAA men's basketball tournament since 2006 and whose athletic department is in such disarray that it gave a lengthy contract extension to this guy despite a million red flags. The Pirates don't do much in any other sport, either; last year in the Directors' Cup standings -- which ranks teams based on the performance by all sports -- Seton Hall finished 270th, or one spot out of last place (and one spot behind Stony Brook).

Look, I'm not on a campaign to bash Seton Hall. But if the Big East needs to get stronger by expansion, it's going to have to get rid of some dead weight in the process. And DePaul and Seton Hall are the first two schools that should get cast away. Sticking with an underperforming school solely because it was a founding member is a good way to get left high and dry when all the dust clears, and the Big East can't afford that kind of thinking.

Are you excited for the Pinstripe Bowl?

Yep, that's the official name of the new Big East postseason game at Yankee Stadium. We had been referring to it as the Yankee Bowl until today. New Era Cap Co. Inc. is the title sponsor.

How does that name strike you? At least it's not a totally corporate affair (no offense, Papajohns.com and Meineke Car Care bowls). I think I would have preferred something that emphasized the New York/Northeast locale rather than simply the design of the Yankees uniforms. But, hey, at least you know what the appropriate dress is for the occasion.

The other significant news item is that this year's inaugural game will be held Dec. 30. That gives fans a chance to stick around the next day for New Year's Eve in the city if they so choose. The game will be televised on ESPN for the next six years.

I have a sneaking feeling that Rutgers is going to end up in the first Pinstripe Bowl. But whichever Big East team makes it there, I hope its fans own some pinstripe suits.