My grandmother used to say, "If wishes were fishes we'd all cast nets."

Don't let wishing for what never came to pass drive you to distraction.

CardinalJim Wrote:

esayem Wrote:

CardinalJim Wrote:

esayem Wrote:In '79? I don't believe I have EVER heard/read that before. I wanna hear The Omni Carrier voice in. I never heard Louisville in '79. I heard Rutgers (which is fact) who denied, and Holy Cross, (hearsay which I have not been totally sold on) but that is it. Sounds like Louisville lore...

Figures a tarhole would question Big East fans about Big East Teams on a Big East Messageboard. Why not take your ass back over to that ACC sess pool and leave us to discuss our conference. Hows that for Louisville lore?

Louisville fans know it's a fact if you choose to acknowledge it or not. Must of us here don't give a sh*t what you or any of the other mouth breathers that call the "Dean Dump" home care.
CJ

Blasphemic Jim rears his ugly head...

Still here Tarhole?

4 sho cardnull

For what it is worth, BC Athletic Director Gene DeFillipo is supposed to be one of the people on record who claims that Villanova voted against Penn State joining the Big East in 1982, but that scumbag certainly is not known for always telling the whole truth either.

omnicarrier Wrote:

esayem Wrote:In '79? I don't believe I have EVER heard/read that before. I wanna hear The Omni Carrier voice in. I never heard Louisville in '79. I heard Rutgers (which is fact) who denied, and Holy Cross, (hearsay which I have not been totally sold on) but that is it. Sounds like Louisville lore...

First I am hearing about this. Doesn't mean it wasn't considered. The history I have always heard was that Providence, St. John's, Georgetown, and Syracuse got together and decided to invite four other teams - one in Boston, one in Philly, one in Connecticut, and one in New Jersey - to form the Big East conference. I have never heard anyone other than UConn mentioned for the Connecticut spot.

As for the others -

Boston - it came down to BC and Holy Cross (supposedly Syracuse insisted on BC, so Holy Cross, though considered, was reportedly never actually offered)

Philly - it came down to Temple or Nova. Temple was the first one approached and they declined. Nova agreed, but could not begin the first year.

New Jersey - Rutgers was offered first and when they declined, Seton Hall was selected.

I do know that Jurich and Tranghese talked in 2002 (yes 2002, not too long after Miami had won the NC) about Louisville joining the Big East and that in order to keep Miami (remember, Shalala had given Tranghese a list of concerns she wanted addressed) Mikey T asked him if he could get expansion to 16, who he might recommend for football school #10. The answer reportedly surprised and intrigued our soon to be retired commissioner - South Florida.

Of course, had Rutgers and Temple accepted way back in the beginning, Penn State would have been voted into the Big East back in 1982.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:
I was enrolled at UConn in 1979 and never heard a word until today about LU getting initial consideration. Based on the original league's geographical footprint it makes no sense. What I have always heard is that Holy Cross initially declined, opening a spot for UConn.

Regarding Shalala's demands, did it include dropping Temple? I've always assumed Miami was behind that.

TRest1 Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:

esayem Wrote:In '79? I don't believe I have EVER heard/read that before. I wanna hear The Omni Carrier voice in. I never heard Louisville in '79. I heard Rutgers (which is fact) who denied, and Holy Cross, (hearsay which I have not been totally sold on) but that is it. Sounds like Louisville lore...

First I am hearing about this. Doesn't mean it wasn't considered. The history I have always heard was that Providence, St. John's, Georgetown, and Syracuse got together and decided to invite four other teams - one in Boston, one in Philly, one in Connecticut, and one in New Jersey - to form the Big East conference. I have never heard anyone other than UConn mentioned for the Connecticut spot.

As for the others -

Boston - it came down to BC and Holy Cross (supposedly Syracuse insisted on BC, so Holy Cross, though considered, was reportedly never actually offered)

Philly - it came down to Temple or Nova. Temple was the first one approached and they declined. Nova agreed, but could not begin the first year.

New Jersey - Rutgers was offered first and when they declined, Seton Hall was selected.

I do know that Jurich and Tranghese talked in 2002 (yes 2002, not too long after Miami had won the NC) about Louisville joining the Big East and that in order to keep Miami (remember, Shalala had given Tranghese a list of concerns she wanted addressed) Mikey T asked him if he could get expansion to 16, who he might recommend for football school #10. The answer reportedly surprised and intrigued our soon to be retired commissioner - South Florida.

Of course, had Rutgers and Temple accepted way back in the beginning, Penn State would have been voted into the Big East back in 1982.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:
I was enrolled at UConn in 1979 and never heard a word until today about LU getting initial consideration. Based on the original league's geographical footprint it makes no sense. What I have always heard is that Holy Cross initially declined, opening a spot for UConn.

Jake Crouthamel's detailed history of the Big East says Boston College was chosen over Holy Cross, UMass, and Boston University. Then Connecticut was added.

I suppose it was possible that after BC was chosen, they then looked at HC, UMass, and UConn - but it seems to me they were targeting the major cities of the northeast or in the case of Connecticut and New Jersey, teams that could carry those states.

I don't think it was a coincidence that they wanted UConn and Rutgers due to the above, whereas a team 'in' the heart of Boston was preferable to one in Worcester or the state flagship of Massachusetts.

Quote:Regarding Shalala's demands, did it include dropping Temple? I've always assumed Miami was behind that.

No, the dropping of Temple movement actually began after the 1996 season (long before Shalala was at Miami) when the football conference instituted minima that included averaging 25K in attendance and playing in an adequate stadium. The Owls were given five years to meet the criteria. After the 2001 season they were voted out, but the Owls threatened a lawsuit, pointing out that Rutgers was not meeting the minima attendance criteria either.

In 2002 a settlement was negotiated which allowed Temple to stay for the 2003 and 2004 seasons.

Cheers,
Neil

There more to the story than that Omnicarrier. Temple meet all the criteria set up by the BE.
2001 atten was 22,000, 2002 atten was 25,000.
New stadium was opening up in '03
Temple was also told to be more competive
by 2000 Temple was winning 4 games a yr Also won 4 games in '01 & '02.
Late '90 Temple was 3-3 vs Bos Coll & Pitt
Finally beat WV & VT
Temple finshed up vs Rutgers & Conn, 7-2 in BE.
Also beat Syc 2 out of last 3 yrs.

As you can see FB program was going in right direcetion & no telling where program would be if BE didn't pull rug out from under them.
Believe me, there alot of Temple fans who think Temple was stunting Rutgers & possiable
Conn growth. That is the reason they were booted.

Think about it, Temple got up to 25,000 in Vet, What would atten be in new stadium
with 500 ballclub & Penn St & Villanova coming in 1st yr.

templefootballfan Wrote:There more to the story than that Omnicarrier. Temple meet all the criteria set up by the BE.
2001 atten was 22,000, 2002 atten was 25,000.
New stadium was opening up in '03
Temple was also told to be more competive
by 2000 Temple was winning 4 games a yr Also won 4 games in '01 & '02.
Late '90 Temple was 3-3 vs Bos Coll & Pitt
Finally beat WV & VT
Temple finshed up vs Rutgers & Conn, 7-2 in BE.
Also beat Syc 2 out of last 3 yrs.

As you can see FB program was going in right direcetion & no telling where program would be if BE didn't pull rug out from under them.
Believe me, there alot of Temple fans who think Temple was stunting Rutgers & possiable
Conn growth. That is the reason they were booted.

Think about it, Temple got up to 25,000 in Vet, What would atten be in new stadium
with 500 ballclub & Penn St & Villanova coming in 1st yr.

Temple was voted out right after the 2001 football season. It didn't matter that they MIGHT meet the criteria in the future. All that mattered was that in the five years from 1997-2001 they did not.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

templefootballfan Wrote:There more to the story than that Omnicarrier. Temple meet all the criteria set up by the BE.
2001 atten was 22,000, 2002 atten was 25,000.
New stadium was opening up in '03
Temple was also told to be more competive
by 2000 Temple was winning 4 games a yr Also won 4 games in '01 & '02.
Late '90 Temple was 3-3 vs Bos Coll & Pitt
Finally beat WV & VT
Temple finshed up vs Rutgers & Conn, 7-2 in BE.
Also beat Syc 2 out of last 3 yrs.

As you can see FB program was going in right direcetion & no telling where program would be if BE didn't pull rug out from under them.
Believe me, there alot of Temple fans who think Temple was stunting Rutgers & possiable
Conn growth. That is the reason they were booted.

Think about it, Temple got up to 25,000 in Vet, What would atten be in new stadium
with 500 ballclub & Penn St & Villanova coming in 1st yr.

Temple was voted out right after the 2001 football season. It didn't matter that they MIGHT meet the criteria in the future. All that mattered was that in the five years from 1997-2001 they did not.

Cheers,
Neil

I think you're off on your dates...I believe this took place following the 2000 season, not 2001.

I know there were stories in the Courier-Journal and Louisville Times about Louisville and Big East membership in the late 70's. Next week I'm going to send one of my co-ops to the Louisville Free Public Library to review the microfiche copies of the morning and evening papers from that era. I'll have them copy and scan in anything they find. Matter of fact I'll have them pull any Big East related story from that time. It will help put this to rest and it gives them something to do...LOL

Anyone have any idea when the first discussions of formation of the Big East began? It would help if we had starting point.
Jim

MichaelSavage Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:

templefootballfan Wrote:There more to the story than that Omnicarrier. Temple meet all the criteria set up by the BE.
2001 atten was 22,000, 2002 atten was 25,000.
New stadium was opening up in '03
Temple was also told to be more competive
by 2000 Temple was winning 4 games a yr Also won 4 games in '01 & '02.
Late '90 Temple was 3-3 vs Bos Coll & Pitt
Finally beat WV & VT
Temple finshed up vs Rutgers & Conn, 7-2 in BE.
Also beat Syc 2 out of last 3 yrs.

As you can see FB program was going in right direcetion & no telling where program would be if BE didn't pull rug out from under them.
Believe me, there alot of Temple fans who think Temple was stunting Rutgers & possiable
Conn growth. That is the reason they were booted.

Think about it, Temple got up to 25,000 in Vet, What would atten be in new stadium
with 500 ballclub & Penn St & Villanova coming in 1st yr.

Temple was voted out right after the 2001 football season. It didn't matter that they MIGHT meet the criteria in the future. All that mattered was that in the five years from 1997-2001 they did not.

Cheers,
Neil

I think you're off on your dates...I believe this took place following the 2000 season, not 2001.

You're right. It was March 2001, after the 2000 football season.

Cheers,
Neil

CardinalJim Wrote:I know there were stories in the Courier-Journal and Louisville Times about Louisville and Big East membership in the late 70's. Next week I'm going to send one of my co-ops to the Louisville Free Public Library to review the microfiche copies of the morning and evening papers from that era. I'll have them copy and scan in anything they find. Matter of fact I'll have them pull any Big East related story from that time. It will help put this to rest and it gives them something to do...LOL

Anyone have any idea when the first discussions of formation of the Big East began? It would help if we had starting point.
Jim

Spring of 1978 was when the four schools - Providence, St. John's, Georgetown, and Syracuse began meeting to discuss the formation of an eastern basketball league.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

CardinalJim Wrote:I know there were stories in the Courier-Journal and Louisville Times about Louisville and Big East membership in the late 70's. Next week I'm going to send one of my co-ops to the Louisville Free Public Library to review the microfiche copies of the morning and evening papers from that era. I'll have them copy and scan in anything they find. Matter of fact I'll have them pull any Big East related story from that time. It will help put this to rest and it gives them something to do...LOL

Anyone have any idea when the first discussions of formation of the Big East began? It would help if we had starting point.
Jim

Spring of 1978 was when the four schools - Providence, St. John's, Georgetown, and Syracuse began meeting to discuss the formation of an eastern basketball league.

Cheers,
Neil

Thanks Neil,
I'll have him start there.
Jim

So they gave Temple 5 yr plan & kicked them out after 4, while Temple was on track to make the criteria that BE asked.

1998: rank 101 Temple 15,127
1999: rank 87 Temple 20,771
2000: rank 93 Temple 18,612
2001: rank 94 Temple 18,440
2002: rank ? Temple 19,076
2003: 85 Temple 24,137 5,061

Home attendance figures from ncaa.org. I had to extrapolate 2002 as the site only showed the top 50 schools for 2002. 2003 represented an increase of 5,061 in attendance, so that's where the 02 figure comes from. They don't specify how many in attendance were using the freebies.

templefootballfan Wrote:So they gave Temple 5 yr plan & kicked them out after 4, while Temple was on track to make the criteria that BE asked.

No, just go back one year when the criteria was adopted to 1996 instead of 1997. See link below.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/f...igeast.htm

The plain truth of the matter is that in addition to the paltry attendance figures already given above (and those were exaggeration) - the actual on the field performance record was as follows:

1996 - 1-10 (0-7)
1997 - 3-9 (2-5)
1998 - 2-9 (2-5)
1999 - 2-9 (2-5)
2000 - 4-7 (1-7)

19 Total wins the first decade in the Big East, for a less than 2 wins a year average.

So please stop with the indignation. I highly doubt it is 'winning' anyone over on this board that somehow the Owls were victims. Most on this board already regard contributing Big East teams like Notre Dame, Georgetown, and Villanova as free-loaders.

I can just imagine what they actually think about Temple's Big East stay.


Cheers,
Neil

Never claimed Temple was victim, just not as bad as some of the exaggerations.
Also I never claimed anybody was freeloader from BB side. when you have a conf, not everybody
will or can be equal

templefootballfan Wrote:Never claimed Temple was victim, just not as bad as some of the exaggerations.

Actually, I feel just the opposite. They were worse than the characterization and sadly people are forgetting that now or were never truly aware of it in the first place.

Quote:Also I never claimed anybody was freeloader from BB side. When you have a conf, not everybody will or can be equal

Didn't claim that you said it. I just don't think it is the best strategy to try and say, "Temple really wasn't all that bad" on a board whose posters consider the contributions of Notre Dame, Georgetown, and Villanova as immaterial. It's a 'tough' crowd here for perceived 'free-loaders'.

As for your last sentence, that is true. But when you are in a conference for one sport, and one sport only, you had better be at least mediocre in that one sport.

It might have been different had the Owls been in for all-sports, where they could have contributed in basketball. But that wasn't the case. And the Owls management knew it. So for that management to fully address only one of the issues and concerns AFTER the vote to expel had taken place, threaten lawsuits, and cry foul because the gravy train was pulled out from underneath is at best extremely naive.

As I said earlier in this thread, the best part of the whole sordid incident is that it lit a fire under Rutgers' management, fearing they could be next, and the result has been the Rutgers we are seeing today.

Hopefully, the team I root for will right their own ship. Unlike the past three seasons, I actually enter this one calmer. I know either the team will show significant improvement or the coach is gone at the end of the year.

Cheers,
Neil