Tranghese On WFAN at 3 PM | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Tranghese On WFAN at 3 PM

Status
Not open for further replies.
tzznandrew said:
Texas and the LHN happened.
Expand ...
If Baylor, Iowa St, and some other sub-par programs weren't profiting off Texas then you might be right. You can't blame Texas for trying to keep more of the revenue they generate for other programs.
 
The sports-analysis business is close-minded.
ESPN is telling them there is only so much money to go around. Isolate the weak hands, and you'll get the money you need to run your sports program. That's what the Presidents are looking at too.
If you're Rutgers and you're losing $35 million a year, you better hope you land a spot. Otherwise, it's time to reconsider what you're doing. That goes for all the schools crying about the haves and the have nots. If there's a limited amount of money in the pot, then you need to make a proper decision about budgets. And no one should go on about coach's salaries, because even if you deducted $3-$6 million from each school's budget to account for that farce, the bottom line would still be the same.
 
WingU-Conn said:
If Baylor, Iowa St, and some other sub-par programs weren't profiting off Texas then you might be right. You can't blame Texas for trying to keep more of the revenue they generate for other programs.
Expand ...

I think you can blame them though, and should. Florida has no problem sharing what they generate for the SEC with Vandy. Or Bama what they generate with Miss St. That's how a conference should work. If you don't treat everyone equally, the spurned are going to always keep their ear to the ground and loyalty is just lip service.
 
jrazz12 said:
Katz blaming the Big East's problems on the bball/non-bball split and the difference of interests. I think that's the common sense view, and why it needs to be split now
Expand ...
splitting now won't do any good. Pitt and Syracuse have already left. the BE for football is completely dead. what remains to be seen is if UCONN, RU, and WVU can get out, and if Texas, TTU, Oklahoma and Ok State go to the Pac 12, then the new conference will be something like L'ville, Cinci, USF, TCU, Kansas, K-State, ISU, Baylor and Mizzou.
 
jrazz12 said:
I think you can blame them though, and should. Florida has no problem sharing what they generate for the SEC with Vandy. Or Bama what they generate with Miss St. That's how a conference should work. If you don't treat everyone equally, the spurned are going to always keep their ear to the ground and loyalty is just lip service.
Expand ...

You're going to compare the big 12 to the SEC? Really? Vanderbilt is really the only program in that conference that isn't carrying their weight in football. Even when they are bad, the SEC schools have double the fans going to their games than Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas, K. State, etc, etc. The fanbases are larger, more rabid, and more loyal in the SEC than anywhere else.

the big 12 (like the big east) is top heavy, a couple national names, a couple average programs, and too many bad ones.

Which brings me back to my point. The Big East is sharing revenue equally are we not? Pitt and Cuse were being treated unfairly and that's why they left? They get basketball revenue, and football revenue. The basketball schools don't get football revenues. So who was being treated unequally or unfairly, and why is that the fault of the hybrid system?

I don't like the hybrid system, but it's not the reason the big east fell apart. If we dumped the basketball schools a few years ago, Pitt and Cuse still go to the ACC if offered. More money, more stability, period.
 
jrazz12 said:
Katz blaming the Big East's problems on the bball/non-bball split and the difference of interests. I think that's the common sense view, and why it needs to be split now
Expand ...

do you really think Cuse/Pitt would have stayed if we'd split 5 year ago and had an all sports conference with the inclusion of UCF/whoever else? i think we probably will split now, but not because it makes us any more stable, but b/c the bball onlies won't want to deal with this merry-go-round of conference realignment. it won't be a split, it'll be them leaving us.
 
.-.
Wing-U, It isn't about being treated "unfairly" or fairly. It is about where each side wants to go. The football schools want football to be the priority. they want to be able to expand as they see fit. They don't want to be forced into taking Villanova or nobody as some basketball schools have suggested. They have a different vision for their athletic programs and for the conference. Schools like Providence struggle to put teams on the field in virtually every sport but basketball and ice hockey. They don't fully fund the teams they do have. The football schools wanted the big East to be an all-sports conference comparable to the other major conferneces. the basketball schools wanted a basketball league. But even beyond that, there simply isn't a shared vision among the major public schools and the mostly smaller private ones. Using UCONN as an example, it viewed PC, St Johns et al as its peers when the big East began, athletically, academically. That simply isn't the case any longer. UCONN is much more like the Big 10 Universities, certainly the ACC ones than it is the urban Catholic schools that make up the majority of the Big East basketball side now. All of these factors have resulted in frictions that have led to this point.
 
For the Big 12, the issue was revenue and influence, and the fact that Texas dominated both.

For the Big East, the issue is the fact that we could do nothing to shore up our football league (TCU doesn't cut it), and the word of the day right now is "Survival". Some have said that the non-bball schools and ND were limiting the Big East in what we could add on the football side. Others have pointed to failures of Marinatto in adding football members. In either event, the prospects of Big East football were looking bleak, and Cuse and Pitt go to the ACC because it's a secure conference football wise.

The point could be argued that without the bball only schools, we make more aggressive moves (Maryland/Penn St/anything) to save the football side. I think it's a fair argument.
 
jrazz12 said:
For the Big 12, the issue was revenue and influence, and the fact that Texas dominated both.

For the Big East, the issue is the fact that we could do nothing to shore up our football league (TCU doesn't cut it), and the word of the day right now is "Survival". Some have said that the non-bball schools and ND were limiting the Big East in what we could add on the football side. Others have pointed to failures of Marinatto in adding football members. In either event, the prospects of Big East football were looking bleak, and Cuse and Pitt go to the ACC because it's a secure conference football wise.

The point could be argued that without the bball only schools, we make more aggressive moves (Maryland/Penn St/anything) to save the football side. I think it's a fair argument.
Expand ...

Yes. Penn State would have joined the 8 Big East football schools if we weren't tied to the Big EAst name and the basketball tourney in the Garden.

Lunacy.
 
businesslawyer said:
Yes. Penn State would have joined the 8 Big East football schools if we weren't tied to the Big EAst name and the basketball tourney in the Garden.

Lunacy.
Expand ...

I didn't say Penn St would have joined, I said you could make a move on them or others years ago without being tied down by Seton Hall and Depaul. Shown some kind of confidence and vision as opposed to sitting on our as$es like we actually did. And why would we have lost the Big East name and the tourney in the Garden? The 8 football schools would have taken the conference HQ with it.
 
jrazz12 said:
I didn't say Penn St would have joined, I said you could make a move on them or others years ago without being tied down by Seton Hall and Depaul. Shown some kind of confidence and vision as opposed to sitting on our as$es like we actually did. And why would we have lost the Big East name and the tourney in the Garden? The 8 football schools would have taken the conference HQ with it.
Expand ...

And how do you figure that exactly? YOu think we had the contractual power to make the basketball schools go away? We did not.

This is primarily about market power. This is not primarily about arrangements with basketball only schools.
 
businesslawyer said:
And how do you figure that exactly? YOu think we had the contractual power to make the basketball schools go away? We did not.

This is primarily about market power. This is not primarily about arrangements with basketball only schools.
Expand ...

This is all hypothetical. The original argument was that the football schools had different interests than the bball only schools. That point remains true. Even if we could not do something (as you point out, contractually), the point holds that we wanted to and that it was in our best interests as football programs to do something. And that was the original discussion: how the bball/football schools had a difference of interests that lead to Cuse-Pitt leaving.
 
.-.
jrazz12 said:
This is all hypothetical. The original argument was that the football schools had different interests than the bball only schools. That point remains true. Even if we could not do something (as you point out, contractually), the point holds that we wanted to and that it was in our best interests as football programs to do something. And that was the original discussion: how the bball/football schools had a difference of interests that lead to Cuse-Pitt leaving.
Expand ...

What do you think the football schools ever wanted to do that the basketball schools blocked?
 
businesslawyer said:
What do you think the football schools ever wanted to do that the basketball schools blocked?
Expand ...

We needed to add football programs, simply for purposes of inventory and security. Admittedly, I can't speak to anything in particular that we wanted to do that was rejected. But once we got to 16 bball schools, with an even 8-8 split, any more football schools sway influence and money more toward the football side.

And again, back to the original point, there was a difference in interests, whether it played out explicitly or not. We didn't add teams, the Big East as a football league was not secure, and Pitt and Cuse left because of that.
 
Take a look at this article from just a month ago:

http://espn.go.com/college-football...to-reaches-big-12-dan-beebe-acc-john-swofford

Big East Commissioner John Marinatto says he has been in constant contact with Dan Beebe of the Big 12 and John Swofford of the Atlantic Coast Conference in recent days and has suggested the three meet to discuss conference realignment.

Marinatto didn't reveal details about his conversations with his fellow commissioners but said Tuesday: "I thought it would be important for us to meet face-to-face and take the lead in trying to do things the right way."

Marinatto was just in completely over his head. He was having 'peace meetings' with Swofford as Swofford was negotiating with 2 of the Big East's top teams (and one of whom was the Big East executive leading the Big East). Wow!
 
UConnSportsGuy said:
Take a look at this article from just a month ago:

http://espn.go.com/college-football...to-reaches-big-12-dan-beebe-acc-john-swofford

Big East Commissioner John Marinatto says he has been in constant contact with Dan Beebe of the Big 12 and John Swofford of the Atlantic Coast Conference in recent days and has suggested the three meet to discuss conference realignment.

Marinatto didn't reveal details about his conversations with his fellow commissioners but said Tuesday: "I thought it would be important for us to meet face-to-face and take the lead in trying to do things the right way."

Marinatto was just in completely over his head. He was having 'peace meetings' with Swofford as Swofford was negotiating with 2 of the Big East's top teams (and one of whom was the Big East executive leading the Big East). Wow!
Expand ...
That's Tranghese's point. Loyalty, what loyalty ? Marinatto had no clue.
 
Tranghese had a really good point about the Pac-12, they went around touting their big play on expansion because they added Colorado and Utah, and that it a key factor in their big TV deal? No! Colorado and Utah barely made them any better than they already were. That was a load of horseshiit, that expansion was a blip on the radar compared to what they initially tried.
 
There is no BE conference anymore, the BE football schools are like a ship in the ocean without a sail and without a rudder, basically we have to wait for someone else to act and send out distress signals for some one to save our ship. No use wasting time with possible scenerios, just sit back and wait till the dust settles. I really hope we land in an AQ conference, really can't blame Cuse and Pitt for taking care of their own needs, JM and the BE didn't do their jobs and they get what they deserve, a basketball conference a bit better than the A-10. Best of luck to all of the remaining football teams, right now it's every man for himself.
 
.-.
freescooter said:
Wing-U, It isn't about being treated "unfairly" or fairly. It is about where each side wants to go. The football schools want football to be the priority. they want to be able to expand as they see fit. They don't want to be forced into taking Villanova or nobody as some basketball schools have suggested. They have a different vision for their athletic programs and for the conference. Schools like Providence struggle to put teams on the field in virtually every sport but basketball and ice hockey. They don't fully fund the teams they do have. The football schools wanted the big East to be an all-sports conference comparable to the other major conferneces. the basketball schools wanted a basketball league. But even beyond that, there simply isn't a shared vision among the major public schools and the mostly smaller private ones. Using UCONN as an example, it viewed PC, St Johns et al as its peers when the big East began, athletically, academically. That simply isn't the case any longer. UCONN is much more like the Big 10 Universities, certainly the ACC ones than it is the urban Catholic schools that make up the majority of the Big East basketball side now. All of these factors have resulted in frictions that have led to this point.
Expand ...

The poster I responded said it was about equality. I agree that it's not about equality but self interests and that was the point I was trying to get across to him.

As of the time Pitt/Cuse applied to the ACC, the football schools were able to split whenever they wanted. The football schools had as many votes as the basketball schools and wouldn't be forced into anything.

The football schools didn't leave and create their own conference because it wouldn't have been any more stable than the hybrid league. An all sports conference of UConn, Cuse, Pitt, Ville, USF, RU, WVU, and Cincy (and any combination of the non-BCS programs wanting an invite) would not be stable enough to keep anyone from going to the B1G or the ACC.
 
jrazz12 said:
The point could be argued that without the bball only schools, we make more aggressive moves (Maryland/Penn St/anything) to save the football side. I think it's a fair argument.
Expand ...

the only way to do that would have been to offer them a package that was more financially beneficial over the long term than their current one.

the only way to do that, would be to offer them an unfair share of any revenues.

which would have put us where the big 12 is now, and killed the big east anyway.
 
I listened to T on the fan. It was the best interview on the fan in a long time! Had no problem calling out ACC and even threw a jab @ BC
 
.-.
epark88 said:
MT killed it in this interview - a definite must-listen...
Expand ...

Agreed. Brutal weekend for MT and he didn't hide his disgust for the ACC and for the greed in college sports. Loved the interview.
 
Just listened to this. It was very good. He is correct that a major problem is that the BE football schools didn't win enough, but at the same time he ends the interview by saying he is going to help Providence. A case can be made they didn't win enough to earn their keep in such a great basketball conference. I hope I added the correct link to the interview.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/audio-on-demand/mike-francesa-1/#
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,160
Messages
4,555,220
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom