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

Tranghese On WFAN at 3 PM

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,258
Reaction Score
5,006
What would you like Dixon to do? He could trash the whole thing and live in a messy house? He has to spin it and bite his tongue. No one with any sense, except maybe Boeheim, will trash the situation. Notice that Calhoun hasn't....

Calhoun can't trash everyone because we want into the ACC. Boeheim, however, ....

My guess is that if UConn does not join the party you may hear Jimmy B say something. But he's going to play nice for now for the same reason Calhoun is.
 

jrazz12

BEast mode
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,191
Reaction Score
4,980
I did not see either interview, but it is a bit hypocritical for the EsPN anchors to be angry when the company they work for has their fingerprints all over this.

That's what was interesting also. Forde came right out and called out ESPN for helping facilitate this mess. Then some moron ex-media exec tried saying this wasn't about TV
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,258
Reaction Score
5,006
I did not see either interview, but it is a bit hypocritical for the EsPN anchors to be angry when the company they work for has their fingerprints all over this.


Why? You think the suits in New York are consulting with the talent in Bristol about these decisions? Please. Ley isn't a hypocrite -- he's a hero for, rightly or wrongly, putting his responsibilities as a journalist in front of worrying about his employer's interests. If we had more hard news reporters and analysts doing this, we'd have a stronger country.

You think a Limbaugh, a Olberman, is so stupid that they never see the other "side" as being in the right on anything? Of course not. But they put their ratings, and their pocketbooks, ahead of any responsibility as a journalist or an American.
 

IMind

Wildly Inaccurate
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
1,868
Reaction Score
2,616
Texas and the LHN happened.
The Long Horn Network didn't occur until after PAC-10 already invited Texas, etc. The LHN was ESPN's half assed attempt to keep the Big 12 together. The Big 12 was in trouble long before the LHN.... it has nothing to do with having some basketball schools in your conference... it has more to do with having crappy TV deals. The Big 12 had one of the crappiest.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,240
Reaction Score
22,532
You think a Limbaugh, a Olberman, is so stupid that they never see the other "side" as being in the right on anything? Of course not. But they put their ratings, and their pocketbooks, ahead of any responsibility as a journalist or an American.

Limbaugh doesn't pretend to be a journalist, and he is in an opinion business. Why would he talk about his opinion being wrong, when he believes it to be right?

I agree with you on Bob Ley though and the rest. Network execs don't ask them for permission before making decisions.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,240
Reaction Score
22,532
Texas and the LHN happened.
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.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,265
Reaction Score
46,337
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.
 

jrazz12

BEast mode
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,191
Reaction Score
4,980
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.

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.
 

EricLA

Cronus
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
14,983
Reaction Score
81,464
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
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.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,240
Reaction Score
22,532
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.

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.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
2,044
Reaction Score
1,870
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

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.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
12,388
Reaction Score
19,747
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.
 

jrazz12

BEast mode
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,191
Reaction Score
4,980
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.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,258
Reaction Score
5,006
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.

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.
 

jrazz12

BEast mode
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,191
Reaction Score
4,980
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.

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.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,258
Reaction Score
5,006
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.

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.
 

jrazz12

BEast mode
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,191
Reaction Score
4,980
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.

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.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,258
Reaction Score
5,006
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.

What do you think the football schools ever wanted to do that the basketball schools blocked?
 

jrazz12

BEast mode
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,191
Reaction Score
4,980
What do you think the football schools ever wanted to do that the basketball schools blocked?

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.
 

UConnSportsGuy

Addicted to all things UCONN!
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,044
Reaction Score
5,738
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!
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
1,672
Reaction Score
5,260
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!
That's Tranghese's point. Loyalty, what loyalty ? Marinatto had no clue.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
5,782
Reaction Score
15,762
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.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
10,671
Reaction Score
11,888
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.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,240
Reaction Score
22,532
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.

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.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,240
Reaction Score
22,532
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.

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
643
Guests online
3,114
Total visitors
3,757

Forum statistics

Threads
156,806
Messages
4,064,957
Members
9,943
Latest member
HassanDawg


Top Bottom