Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="upstater, post: 4343726, member: 153"] Crouthamel is actually on record that they did vote in 1982 FOR adding PSU. But he also said he voted against the earlier attempt to add PSU because PSU wanted no revenue sharing for football. There were multiple attempts to add PSU, not just one. Going back to the start of the conference, it was a discussion between 3 schools that kicked it off, Syracuse, Georgetown and PC. A year or so after formation, it was UConn and Gavitt that negotiated with PSU and Patrerno. That attempt was thwarted by Syracuse and BC because of PSU's revenue sharing demand. A year or two after that, PSU came up for a vote again, and at that point, Syracuse voted for them. You can see a reference to the middle vote in this article: [URL="https://www.syracuse.com/vintage/2018/07/they_wanted_to_hurt_us_penn_state_ends_rivalry_with_syracuse_in_1988.html"]'They wanted to hurt us': Penn State ends rivalry with SU in 1988[/URL] There's actually a lot more to it. PSU claims it had Maryland, Rutgers, West Virginia and Pitt with it, but before Paterno started talking to UConn and Gavitt, he was trying to pull BC and Syracuse into an all sports conference. Crouthamel claims that the discussions with PSU only occurred as a defensive maneuver to ringfence Paterno's idea of a conference. When the BE pulled Pitt into the conference, a school that Paterno thought he had on his side, that's when the bad blood started, because that effectively ended Paterno's attempts and forced PSU to apply for conference membership. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,523

Messages: 4,399,931

Members: 10,214

Latest member: illini2013