Tranghese talks UCONN, ACC and Boston College

[Hoophound]

everyone knows that Coack K was referring to PC and Seton Hall...

Kidding aside, I didn't understand when the article was originially published why the author thought Uconn and Rutgers... Rutgers? they have been the defintion of underachievers in the BE since they have been members. Their motto is "Do less with more".... Their slogan is "Over promise, under deliver"....

Under a bb lense, Uconn is an obvious ACC target. But would Rutgers really be the 16th team? from a BB perspective? I would think Louisville, but is that too far out of the ACC footprint? ignore academics...

A lot of people just presumed Rutgers because K loves to play in NYC when he can and Rutgers has adequate academics. It was probably UConn and Louisville he was referring to. Coack K knows UConn and UL (and JC & Pitino) deserve to play with the very best. He is a purist and he has respect for the elite few who are his peers/rivals. Love him or hate him, you have to respect Coach K, he certainly isn't running from the competition by lobbying for adding more super powers to his conference.

 

[CL82]

Actually I think I read that BC supported UConn joining Hockey East. If there's any indication that hockey is an entirely different animal, it's this.

Kind of support for the notion that fear is the BC motivator, not hurt feelings. They have no problem with us joining hockey east because they are confident that we aren't a threat to them in hockey. In everything else...

 

[IthacaMatt]

HA! When the PSU stuff came down, I told upstater I think, (not sure who I was writing back and forth with) that somwehre, Mike Tranghese is sitting in a corner, and telling anyone who will listen, that he was right about .....x.y.z......things. Blaudschaun was the guy, and it was in a little cafe in Newport probably a short walk from the press conference going on at the Viking. Classic.


I've been crystal clear, many times, that I"m not a Mike T fan. I simply don't believe that he really cares about football at all, beyond the fact that he knew that it was important to maintaining the Big East as the premier basketball conference.

Athletics people, should be running intercollegiate athletics, but it's not that way - university presidents are in charge, and in too many instances, university president's are subject to teh whims of the coaches of the football (and in some cases - basketball) programs at their schools, and that's a big branch of root system of all the problems that exist in intercollegiate athletics.

I disagree with Mike T on the demise of the bowl system, with a growing playoff. The demise will be in teh corruption of the bowl system, and the majority of meaningless bowls will go away. Instead of 35 bowl games, I'd rather see a 15 game playoff system for a champion (with revenue distribution similar to teh BCS) and another 12-15 bowl games for the non-qualifiers to the playoffs that still had great seasons. THose bowl games, would actually have to be viable, and not based on a corrupt money making system.

The bottom line, is that we all know that the ACC has had an inferior complex to Big East basketball for a long, long time, and that football was the tool by which they've done the most damage they possibly can to the Big EAst conference, adn in this last round, of the east coast basketball war, the big east is once again, coming to come out stronger and better, thanks to the timing of the television market, and the value of live sports broadcasting.

An interesting omission from Mike T in that interview is what happened in 2003 when the first raid took place. A split between the remaining football schools and basketball onlies nearly took place, with the discussion led by Jake Crouthamel. Tranghese offered to resign, but then everyone backed away from the split. Not sure where the remaining football teams would have gone at that point, as there was no place but to form their own all-sports league.

At the time, that would have been Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, Rutgers, Boston College (they hadn't gone Fredo yet), Temple was still a football only, IIRC, and they probably would have recruited 3 more schools with the 2 most likely being Cinci and Louisville, and the third being chosen among UCF, USF, E. Carolina or maybe the military academies. They might have invited UConn to step up to Div. 1, but I think that was a few years before you guys were ready to do so. If you had, that would have made a pretty nice league. Wouldn't likely get any BCS bids, but it would be a leaner and better conference than what has been left behind.

Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, BC, UConn, Cinci, Louisville and Temple. Not bad, and none of the schools. Too bad.

 

[SAMCRO]

An interesting omission from Mike T in that interview is what happened in 2003 when the first raid took place. A split between the remaining football schools and basketball onlies nearly took place, with the discussion led by Jake Crouthamel. Tranghese offered to resign, but then everyone backed away from the split. Not sure where the remaining football teams would have gone at that point, as there was no place but to form their own all-sports league.

At the time, that would have been Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, Rutgers, Boston College (they hadn't gone Fredo yet), Temple was still a football only, IIRC, and they probably would have recruited 3 more schools with the 2 most likely being Cinci and Louisville, and the third being chosen among UCF, USF, E. Carolina or maybe the military academies. They might have invited UConn to step up to Div. 1, but I think that was a few years before you guys were ready to do so. If you had, that would have made a pretty nice league. Wouldn't likely get any BCS bids, but it would be a leaner and better conference than what has been left behind.

Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, BC, UConn, Cinci, Louisville and Temple. Not bad, and none of the schools. Too bad.

UConn was already announced as joining the BE at the time of the raid. That was part of the reason the BE wanted to file the lawsuit in CT (I believe)The school and state had been making investments and commitments to upgrade FB when this all happened. We actually joined the BE a year ahead of schedule due to UM and VT leaving the year before BC did.

MT and the BE missed their window several years prior to that when they could have made a serious run at FSU, and maybe 2 or 3 other ACC teams (any non NC based schools) to join the BE in all sports. Instead, MT was doing the transparent thing in working to form a FB alliance between the ACC and the BE. Swofford had another idea in mind.

 

[ScottVib]

At the time, that would have been Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, Rutgers, Boston College (they hadn't gone Fredo yet), Temple was still a football only, IIRC, and they probably would have recruited 3 more schools with the 2 most likely being Cinci and Louisville, and the third being chosen among UCF, USF, E. Carolina or maybe the military academies. They might have invited UConn to step up to Div. 1, but I think that was a few years before you guys were ready to do so. If you had, that would have made a pretty nice league. Wouldn't likely get any BCS bids, but it would be a leaner and better conference than what has been left behind.

Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, BC, UConn, Cinci, Louisville and Temple. Not bad, and none of the schools. Too bad.

A couple of factual corrections as the minutes of these meetings have been widely available for years.

1.) UConn was already Division1A and slated to join the conference in 2005. The raid moved up they're joining to 2004.
2.) The split was proposed and had support, Tranghese didn't "offer" to resign, but instead stated that he would resign before siding with either faction.
3.) Louisville had already been tapped as a replacement and Cincinnati was seen as a shoo-in. The other candidates you listed were rejected flatly (including USF, until after BC left). Retaining Temple was also rejected which ultimately left open the slot that went to USF
4.) The remaining schools were still clinging to the theory of Notre Dame saving the football side. Instead Notre Dame proved instrumental in brokering the compromise which set things up as they were until the latest raid.
5.). Crouthamel lived up to his statement that he would resign if the split football-basketball conference remained.

 

[upstater]

Athletics people, should be running intercollegiate athletics, but it's not that way - university presidents are in charge, and in too many instances, university president's are subject to teh whims of the coaches of the football (and in some cases - basketball) programs at their schools, and that's a big branch of root system of all the problems that exist in intercollegiate athletics.

They ran intercollegiate athletics since forever. ADs are often former athletes, raised up in the departments, often beholden to coaches. I'd say in fact that these people are even MORE beholden to coaches than Presidents already are.

Remember, Cedric Dempsey, a sports person, was in charge of the MCAA a decade ago. When he left his job, he went to work for the Pump Brothers AAU scammers. Shows you what kind of mentality the leadership had at the time.

Myles Brand on the other hand, really seemed to put his principles into action at Indiana. The same cannot be said for mark Emmert who fired coaches for not winning at LSU and he presided over a cover-up of rapes by U. Washington football.

 

[businesslawyer]

this is correct. when were we ever behind bc in basketball?

Seriously? We were behind BC in basketball in the pre-Calhoun days of the Big East.

 

[businesslawyer]

the one thing Tranghese said that I agree with is that realignment has killed any chance of generating interest in college football in the northeast. There are millions of people, most of whom have significantly higher household incomes than those people who live in the south, that just don't care a all about college football. They care a lot about the Giants, Jets, Patriots, Cowboys, Bears and Packers. It's too bad.

Thi is where I think the admin at BC made a mistake with UConn. HAving a local rival increases the interst in your team dramatically. It is what drives college sports. Not having Duke play hoops on your campus every two years or FSU come every two years. Its playing a blood rival every year. BC has one potential blood rival...Uconn

This is a great post. And this is what the Big Ten may not have thought through enough. The issue was never were their members as popular in the Northeast as Big East members (yes) or were eastern college football audiences small or large (small). The issue was what if you took UConn and RU and Syracuse and one of MD, Pitt or BC and you had your midwestern football schools playing eastern schools on the east coast regularly -- would that have created a market that you could then sell to?

I still think the answer was that that plan had a good chance of working, but it may be too late now.

 

[pj]

This is a great post. And this is what the Big Ten may not have thought through enough. The issue was never were their members as popular in the Northeast as Big East members (yes) or were eastern college football audiences small or large (small). The issue was what if you took UConn and RU and Syracuse and one of MD, Pitt or BC and you had your midwestern football schools playing eastern schools on the east coast regularly -- would that have created a market that you could then sell to?

I still think the answer was that that plan had a good chance of working, but it may be too late now.

I've argued before and firmly believe that taking UConn/Rutgers to enter the NY/NJ/CT media market would be a very smart move for the B1G.

I think it would generate huge revenue for them, but (a) it wasn't clear until the last two years how much money there was in capturing big TV markets, and probably most college presidents only realized it in the last eight months; (b) most Big Ten schools feel a strong Midwest identity and don't feel a kinship to northeastern schools. So Nebraska -- small market, big football, midwest -- seemed a more natural add to them than UConn/Rutgers -- big market, small football.

If they could go back and do it again the result might be different. Now they are waiting to see how the dominoes fall I think -- Notre Dame, big state ACC schools, and UConn/Rutgers may all be in play for them.

 

[UConnDan97]

Hammer time!!

 

[uconndogs]

This is a great post. And this is what the Big Ten may not have thought through enough. The issue was never were their members as popular in the Northeast as Big East members (yes) or were eastern college football audiences small or large (small). The issue was what if you took UConn and RU and Syracuse and one of MD, Pitt or BC and you had your midwestern football schools playing eastern schools on the east coast regularly -- would that have created a market that you could then sell to?

I still think the answer was that that plan had a good chance of working, but it may be too late now.

I could not agree more with this. College football is a regional market for the vast majority of programs / fans. In the quest for immediate dollars this has been ignored. The interests of big swaths of existing and POTENTIAL fans have been ignored. We run our business with a laser focus on the customer over the long-term (i.e. we want them as a customer forever whether we have them now are hope to have them in the future). Once you take your eye off the customer you take on huge risks....HUGE!

One small example. I am a big college football fan, especially by New England standards. Along with UCONN, I have watched and attended a lot of BC and Syracuse football. I could give a rat's ass about either of those programs as they struggle at the bottom rungs of the ACC. Why would I care about them? What interest did they show to me as a college football fan? I think that without meaningful success on the field (competing for conference championships) they run the risk of limiting their regional support largely to their alumni base. That's not a good plan for private schools imo. If they struggle consistently, their stadiums will look just like Dukes, they will be almost filled when the Noles or Clemson come to town and empty otherwise.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Seriously? We were behind BC in basketball in the pre-Calhoun days of the Big East.

I don't blame anyone for forgetting the Dom Perno years, although he was a decent regional coach, and you guys had some pretty decent talent when he was there.

 

[huskymedic]

I don't blame anyone for forgetting the Dom Perno years, although he was a decent regional coach, and you guys had some pretty decent talent when he was there.

Dom Perno ~Wasn't he the announcer on Saturday Night Live and the Price is Right?

 

[CL82]

Perno was a nice guy but not one the best coaches at Connecticut. Still, I think that he went .500 against BC in his final year and the loss was in overtime. Just saying.

 

[ZooCougar]

the one thing Tranghese said that I agree with is that realignment has killed any chance of generating interest in college football in the northeast. There are millions of people, most of whom have significantly higher household incomes than those people who live in the south, that just don't care a all about college football. They care a lot about the Giants, Jets, Patriots, Cowboys, Bears and Packers. It's too bad.

Thi is where I think the admin at BC made a mistake with UConn. Having a local rival increases the interst in your team dramatically. It is what drives college sports. Not having Duke play hoops on your campus every two years or FSU come every two years. Its playing a blood rival every year. BC has one potential blood rival...Uconn

I agree that realignment has the potential to stifle any budding growth of college football in the northeast. But I also think that it may not make a difference either way. It's not like shifting Syracuse to the ACC will make much difference. They played BC every year for years and nobodu cared. If BC played UConn every year, it would be a huge game for UConn, BC would never admit it if it were big, but I am not sure anyone outside those two fanbases in the region would really give a damn. What I am saying is that it is not a given that UConn/BC game would galvanize the region and make us like Georgia/Florida. Of course I could be completely wrong and UConn/BC could become bigger than Jesus...

UConn will be fine either way as long as we can continue to get some compelling and respectable opponents into the Rent every fall. We 40,000 or more people that want to watch Divison I football and we need to keep that going. If the program can keep its nose clean, continue to recruit at a competitive level, win tons of games and stay on TV then UConn will be seen for what is. We want to be Utah, not Colorado State. Being left out of the power 5 doesn't have to be a death sentence.