Geno Auriemma thrashing Notre Dame for not joining in football

[businesslawyer]

Wait a second. How about someone demonstrating why the BE was better off having ND? They ran into the BE open arms after they decided not to join the Big 10 for all sports. Where did ND compete in O sports before it came to the BE? Why didn't they just stay there unless the BE offered a better opportunity? Why have the BE FB coaches been pushing the BE to get a once and for all answer from ND, re: joining for FB? I'm sure you'd disagree but one could make the argument that ND needed the BE just as much if not more than the BE needed ND.

What major conference would have accepted ND if the BE hadn't?

Assuming none, which is a profound statement in itself, what other conference would have added ND?

Funster: I have said this before but will say it again. WHO CARES ABOUT ND? I don't. They would have been worse off without the Big EAst for other sports, no question. But not having let them in would have hurt them, but it wouldn't have helped UConn or the Big East. So why am I supposed to care about helping ND as opposed to what is in UConn's best interests?

 

[Carl Spackler]

I believe that the leadership in this conference, specifically Tranghese in the past, just completely despised college football as a sport, and the conference itself was completely disinterested in football until the early 90's when it became necessary for survival and inclusion among the big boys club of athletic conferences. I'm not sure why Tranghese doesn't like football so much.

I can understand completely disliking the BCS system, i hate it. It's corrupt. I would love to see a post season system in general around college football. A playoff system of the 11 1-A conference champions play post season games to determine a national champoins. But I'm not in a position to try to change anything.

But you know who was? You know who could have pulled the strings? Tranghese was. He was a commissioner when Notre Dame came in 1995 when all the big time former independents in football were joining conferences, after the SWC had disbanded.... and he was commissioner AND chairman of the BCS in 2003-2004 when the first big east conference raid by the ACC happened.

So if you want to find out why Notre Dame was never squeezed by the big east, in or out, Tranghese is the guy to ask. That's the fact.

And you know what really pisses me off about Tranghese (and Jeff Jacobs - no surprise) - in the paper the other day - Tranghese is quoted as saying that the big east football teams did not win enough, and Jacobs let it go.

WTF? Miami, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Syracuse......they didn't win enough b/w 1991-2003? The ducking big east as a football conference had a national champion in 2001.

LESS THAN 10 YEARS AGO THE BIG EAST CONFERENCE PRODUCED A NATIONAL CHAMPION FOOTBALL TEAM.

let that sink in.

Tranghese had zero, and I mean ZERO - respect for the power that college football holds in the intercollegiate athletic world, or he would have done something - besides let Notre Dame continue to play round ball and little ball with the big east, while they got fat on their own with the pigskin and the big east was getting plundered. That's my opinion.

I hope that Friar Tuck has taken the lessons learned in the past decade and he's not of the same mold that Tranghese is.

Lastly, the esteemed counselor is looking for a theory as to how the big east would have been better off without Notre Dame, than with Notre Dame.

The answer is simple. The conference would be more stable for the schools that played division 1-A football, knowing that their leadership is behind them 100%.

 

[The Funster]

It is not a "dumb idea" to think that the hybrid nature of the BEC contributed to its disadvantage. But it would be a mistake to think the hybrid nature was a bigger issue than the lack of relative market power of the football schools.

If it was just about lack of market power, why did Miami, VT, BC, Pitt and Syracuse get poached? Could it be that the hybrid nature of the league contributed to a perceived lack of market power or that, as a conference, the BE was just weak and schools were just waiting to bail?

 

[Rumrunner]

http://mobile.nj.com/advnj/pm_104353/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=IHVTf4St

Article from Newark Star Ledger with his comments.

``In this whole thing, it's only one sure thing, Notre Dame doesn't play football in our league and that's a bone of contention with a lot of us,'' Auriemma said. ``They don't play in our league and they never want to play in our league. To a lot of us, it's a huge problem.

``They've been in our league 18 years (actually 17), something like that. How long are we going to date before we decide this just ain't working? I'm not happy about it. That's not the opinion of the University of Connecticut, the Big East conference, my president, my athletic director. That's just Geno Auriemma's opinion. I'm pissed about it.

 

[sportsart]

You guys missed the best line in the article.

"I love Jesus and I'm not even a Republican"

The guy should take Letterman's slot when he retires.

 

[The Funster]

Funster: I have said this before but will say it again. WHO CARES ABOUT ND? I don't. They would have been worse off without the Big EAst for other sports, no question. But not having let them in would have hurt them, but it wouldn't have helped UConn or the Big East. So why am I supposed to care about helping ND as opposed to what is in UConn's best interests?

OK, I must have missed the "I don't care about ND" sentiment. You amde it clear with that post You feel ND's effect on the BE was a net neutral. I think it contributed negatively to the BE's perception both by other conference and by it's own conference members. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[businesslawyer]

If it was just about lack of market power, why did Miami, VT, BC, Pitt and Syracuse get poached? Could it be that the hybrid nature of the league contributed to a perceived lack of market power or that, as a conference, the BE was just weak and schools were just waiting to bail?

I don't understand your argument. Why did the ACC want those schools? Because it thought it could generate more money, stability and market power by expanding (and, in the first expansion, actually strengthen their football conference). Why did those schools accept offers? Because they thought they could get more money, stability and prestige. I apologize for missing your point, but I am fairly certain I am.

 

[businesslawyer]

OK, I must have missed the "I don't care about ND" sentiment. You amde it clear with that post You feel ND's effect on the BE was a net neutral. I think it contributed negatively to the BE's perception both by other conference and by it's own conference members. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Fair enough. But, obviously, the member institutions, football and catholics, all looked at everything and thought it was in their interest.

 

[Danzz]

We wouldn't have gotten some of those bowl games without capitulation to ND.

You can pretend that the Big East was always strong and never needed ND, but history tells us otherwise.

The BE never needed ND (not sure what history you are referring to) but they were a good addition for sports other than football. Their independence in football is well documented and they will make decisions in the best interest of ND. No surprise there just as Uconn will dump the BE if we get an invite to the ACC and WVA, Cinn. and Louisville will jump to the Big 12 if they are invited.
Would the BE have been better off without ND? Probably. It was insane to allow them a vote on football issues but it is unrealistic for the BE to expect ND to salvage the BE.

 

[The Funster]

BL, the ACC wanted those schools because they brought value. The schools left because the hybrid model did not reciprocate their value, instead it brought instability. Part of that instability was the ND situation. Maybe not from the get go but by at least 2008 the FB schools were fed up with the ND situation and asked the BE to address it. The conference didn't.

In summary, one can conclude that the ACC valued the schools that left more than the Big East did.

 

[businesslawyer]

BL, the ACC wanted those schools because they brought value. The schools left because the hybrid model did not reciprocate their value, instead it brought instability. Part of that instability was the ND situation. Maybe not from the get go but by at least 2008 the FB schools were fed up with the ND situation and asked the BE to address it. The conference didn't.

In summary, one can conclude that the ACC valued the schools that left more than the Big East did.

You have any support for the statement that "the FB schools were fed up with the ND situation and asked the BE to address it." Not fans, not coaches, but athletic departments and administrations? Because I have never heard anything like that from anyone other than fans.

 

[flyonthewall]

ND by the numbers...I have no idea of what ND adds to the BE for BB but the analysis is simple. Say each BE BB team gets $2 mil per year from TV contracts, or 32 million assuming 16 teams. If ND left and the payoff went below 30 million then they add value, if not then they do not. The ppl in the BE must think that ND would/does add value for BB but for the next point.

I always assumed part of the BE's willingness to take ND in a hybrid arrangement was that the BE thought that would position them as the first choice if ND ever decided to join for FB. In hindsight the BE should have told ND you are in for all but FB on the condition if you ever want to join a conference for FB it has to be the BE with some sort of pennalty attached.

As far as ND adding anything to the bowl tie-ins I do not have the time to do an analysis but with so many bowls looking for teams and with the last two years seeing the possibility of sub 500 teams having to be invited to fill slots I don't see how any of the better bowls that have BE tie ins could do much better with another conference. The second place BE team is likely to be a better team than say 7, 8 or 9 in the SEC, B1G.

 

[noeynox]

The silly thing is that people on here crap all over the instability of the Big East... and the football/basketball hybrid... but the only way UConn would ever have been able to upgrade to a BCS conference is with the Big East. UConn is still the only school to go from I-AA/FCS to a BCS game. It just wouldn't have been possible anywhere else... so before you get in your time machine and form a eastern football super-conference or block Notre Dame... think about that. It's just silly to try to blame this on Notre Dame. The same reason Notre Dame is able to park their non-football sports in a high level conference is the same reason UConn was able to upgrade.

Haven't read the entire thread, but this is wrong. Boise was 1aa/in the Big Sky conference as well.

 

[nadav]

How about all people associated with Uconn Athletics stop talking trash about other institutions for a while, it can't help. Geno is a great coach and a funny man, but he clearly is in over his head when talking about realignment issues.

 

[nycscooby]

That was a great post until the end. So let me try one more time to be as clear as possible.

1. Given the choice between all-in and all-out in the Big EAst, we know for a metaphysical fact that Notre Dame would elect all out. They have said that, and, given they could all-in to the Big Ten, there is no rational reason they should have committed all-in to the Big East.

2. Unless you disagree with 1., you need to set forth a clear reason as to why the Big EAst would be in better shape today if Notre Dame were all-out. Because, having nothing to do with you, this argument continues on and not one poster has hypothesized even a stupid reason as to how the Big EAst would be better off.

I agree with point 1 but had I been in the BE offices 20 years ago, I would have made ND make that decision then. Clearly, ND gained far more from the relationship than did the league in my opinion.

As to 2, I think it is not an unreasonable opinion that admitting ND the way the league did negatively impact the BE's perception/reputation and, together with the artificial football/basketball split, contributed to its target status and general instability. Obviously, I have no direct knowledge but I have to believe that ND's non-FB presence may have also hurt the BE in different ways as for example, contributing to a larger divergence of interests amongst the members or perhaps increasing the possibility of factions amongst the members (ND is much different in athletic marketing and spending than say Providence), or even a higher degree of difficulty to get things decided because of the sway it has with the media and public. Finally, is it unreasonable to assume that the theoretical possibility of ND someday joining for FB could have influenced certain decisions in the league office? Do you think it not reasonable to assume that ND could have used this over and over to influence league decisions?

 

[businesslawyer]

ND by the numbers...I have no idea of what ND adds to the BE for BB but the analysis is simple. Say each BE BB team gets $2 mil per year from TV contracts, or 32 million assuming 16 teams. If ND left and the payoff went below 30 million then they add value, if not then they do not. The ppl in the BE must think that ND would/does add value for BB but for the next point.

I always assumed part of the BE's willingness to take ND in a hybrid arrangement was that the BE thought that would position them as the first choice if ND ever decided to join for FB. In hindsight the BE should have told ND you are in for all but FB on the condition if you ever want to join a conference for FB it has to be the BE with some sort of pennalty attached.

As far as ND adding anything to the bowl tie-ins I do not have the time to do an analysis but with so many bowls looking for teams and with the last two years seeing the possibility of sub 500 teams having to be invited to fill slots I don't see how any of the better bowls that have BE tie ins could do much better with another conference. The second place BE team is likely to be a better team than say 7, 8 or 9 in the SEC, B1G.

Better on the field. Does not sell more tickets.

 

[Uptop]

I believe that the leadership in this conference, specifically Tranghese in the past, just completely despised college football as a sport, and the conference itself was completely disinterested in football until the early 90's when it became necessary for survival and inclusion among the big boys club of athletic conferences. I'm not sure why Tranghese doesn't like football so much.

I can understand completely disliking the BCS system, i hate it. It's corrupt. I would love to see a post season system in general around college football. A playoff system of the 11 1-A conference champions play post season games to determine a national champoins. But I'm not in a position to try to change anything.

But you know who was? You know who could have pulled the strings? Tranghese was. He was a commissioner when Notre Dame came in 1995 when all the big time former independents in football were joining conferences, after the SWC had disbanded.... and he was commissioner AND chairman of the BCS in 2003-2004 when the first big east conference raid by the ACC happened.

So if you want to find out why Notre Dame was never squeezed by the big east, in or out, Tranghese is the guy to ask. That's the fact.

And you know what really pisses me off about Tranghese (and Jeff Jacobs - no surprise) - in the paper the other day - Tranghese is quoted as saying that the big east football teams did not win enough, and Jacobs let it go.

WTF? Miami, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Syracuse......they didn't win enough b/w 1991-2003? The ducking big east as a football conference had a national champion in 2001.

LESS THAN 10 YEARS AGO THE BIG EAST CONFERENCE PRODUCED A NATIONAL CHAMPION FOOTBALL TEAM.

let that sink in.

Tranghese had zero, and I mean ZERO - respect for the power that college football holds in the intercollegiate athletic world, or he would have done something - besides let Notre Dame continue to play round ball and little ball with the big east, while they got fat on their own with the pigskin and the big east was getting plundered. That's my opinion.

I hope that Friar Tuck has taken the lessons learned in the past decade and he's not of the same mold that Tranghese is.

Lastly, the esteemed counselor is looking for a theory as to how the big east would have been better off without Notre Dame, than with Notre Dame.

The answer is simple. The conference would be more stable for the schools that played division 1-A football, knowing that their leadership is behind them 100%.

++1

Moderators,

Is there any way you can bronze or gold plate this masterpiece?

When Oregon was promoting Joey Harrinton for the Heisman they placed a billboard of him in Times Square. NYT writer, Bill Rhoden wrote an article saying how brazen and disrecspectful to Big East turf the billboard was and challenged Tranghese to counter punch. I believe Rhoden suggested placing a "Big East Football" billboard in Birmingham, AL. Tranghese never put his gloves on.

The acc has always been the #1 enemy. For MT to offer up his football members to play in the acc is the STUPIDEST idea in the history of college athletics. It showed the enemy and the rest of the nation just how unstabled the conference was. And we've been backpeddling ever since. STUPID!

 

[businesslawyer]

I agree with point 1 but had I been in the BE offices 20 years ago, I would have made ND make that decision then. Clearly, ND gained far more from the relationship than did the league in my opinion.

As to 2, I think it is not an unreasonable opinion that admitting ND the way the league did negatively impact the BE's perception/reputation and, together with the artificial football/basketball split, contributed to its target status and general instability. Obviously, I have no direct knowledge but I have to believe that ND's non-FB presence may have also hurt the BE in different ways as for example, contributing to a larger divergence of interests amongst the members or perhaps increasing the possibility of factions amongst the members (ND is much different in athletic marketing and spending than say Providence), or even a higher degree of difficulty to get things decided because of the sway it has with the media and public. Finally, is it unreasonable to assume that the theoretical possibility of ND someday joining for FB could have influenced certain decisions in the league office? Do you think it not reasonable to assume that ND could have used this over and over to influence league decisions?

O.K. -- I give you credit. You have offered a reason. Look, I must admit, I find it bizarre that anyone thinks that we're weakened in terms of "prestige" or "perception" by one hoops only who plays football somewhere else in a conference which has seven other hoops onlies, but will readily admit that we are now at least to a difference in opinon.

 

[nycscooby]

As I wrote, ND's deal could have allowed ND to use the proverbial FB carrot to influence the league and possible contribute to its instability; or at a minumum, prevent the league from formulating cohesive strategic plans because that theoretical carrot was always present. I do think the FB/BB dichotomy was by far the largest contributor to this instability but I can't ignore this possibility with ND.

 

[HuskyHawk]

O.K. -- I give you credit. You have offered a reason. Look, I must admit, I find it bizarre that anyone thinks that we're weakened in terms of "prestige" or "perception" by one hoops only who plays football somewhere else in a conference which has seven other hoops onlies, but will readily admit that we are now at least to a difference in opinon.

I'm with BL on this, but I can acknowledge this one tiny thing. If we rejected ND, we would have forced their hand long ago. The entire conference structure would likely be more stable today. Whether UConn or the BE would or would not be better off is impossible to tell.

 

[Carl Spackler]

++1

Moderators,

Is there any way you can bronze or gold plate this masterpiece?

When Oregon was promoting Joey Harrinton for the Heisman they placed a billboard of him in Times Square. NYT writer, Bill Rhoden wrote an article saying how brazen and disrecspectful to Big East turf the billboard was and challenged Tranghese to counter punch. I believe Rhoden suggested placing a "Big East Football" billboard in Birmingham, AL. Tranghese never put his gloves on.

The acc has always been the #1 enemy. For MT to offer up his football members to play in the acc is the STUPIDEST idea in the history of college athletics. It showed the enemy and the rest of the nation just how unstabled the conference was. And we've been backpeddling ever since. STUPID!

I remember that. Vividly.

The idea of bringing a college football championship game back to new york city? makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. The fact that the new york yankees organization is actually promoting college football again!!

Big east football promoted in Times Square in December....with the christmas lights all around.

BUT - I think I'd be a hell of a lot more comfortable with big east leadership, if they actually do get this thing to 12 teams....and then more importantly....

Set up an entirely new, and distinct leadership of the football conference in New York City. Commissioner of big east football to be determined, and hired completely outside of the big east altar boy track through providence. New offices, new staff.
Football business gets conducted entirely independant of Marinatto's office, but under the umbrella of the big east conference.

If marinatto follows in the footsteps of Tranghese though? I don't want to think about it.