+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: AAC Conference Talk (/forum-409.html)
+---- Thread: MIKE TRANSGHEESE SOLD US OUT (/thread-51679.html)
- JIM15068 - 07-28-2005 11:29 PM
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:03 am Post subject: MIKE TRANSGHEESE SOLD US DOWN THE RIVER,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
figuratively, if not literally. I just read the "1999 thread," and I was stunned. I had not read those news stories before, but surely Mike had. It makes me question Mike's motives now.
<a href='http://www.bigeastboards.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=1545' target='_blank'>http://www.bigeastboards.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=1545</a>
The articles assert, among other things, that Mike wanted to de-emphasize football severely in the Bigeast. It makes me question his wisdom concerning whether we now need a 9th team. It even makes me wonder if he really wants to help us remain a bcs conference in the long run.
It also makes me question his knowledge of the potential of a raid. Surely, the BIGEAST office reads every paper in the country that discusses the BE. If this was being published in 1999, how could the office miss it? There are a few possible answers here, and all of them are bad.
The articles seemed pretty credible to me. Even reading them 6 years after their publication, I can say that I would have paid attention to them then. That is not hindsight. Surely, he read them. Why then, wasn't he proactive?
Among the things that stood out in the articles to me were these:
1. Miami wanted better geographical rivalries and stronger competiton.
Numerous rumors in recent months claimed that Miami is getting itchy feet and wants to leave the Big East to get into the ACC or SEC , where it would have better geographical rivalries and stronger competition.
2. Virginia wanted to be in a 12-team conference with a play-off.
Virginia coach George Welsh is among coaches pushing to expand to 12 teams, which would permit the conference to play a championship game and to greatly increase television markets.
Welsh believes 12-team ``super conferences,'' such as the Southeastern and Big 12, eventually are going to rule college football. He doesn't want the ACC being left behind.
``We ought to just do it,'' Welsh said, ``and the sooner the better. We are all hurting for money, and playing a conference championship game would help.''
3. Some southern schools want Miami in the same conference as them.
Florida State, Georgia Tech and Clemson would be thrilled if Miami becomes the ACC's 10th member. While officials from those schools say little publicly because they don't want to appear to be ``tampering'' with a member of another conference, they are pushing expansion the hardest.
4. North Carolina and Duke are aginst expansion.
North Carolina's Bill Guthridge and Duke's Mike Krzyzewski have spoken against it,
5. Also, at this time, SYRACUSE, BOSTON COLLEGE, Miami, and VIRGINIA TECH all appear eager to get into the ACC.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Okay, Mr. proactive Mike, here's what I would do if I were a commissioner who wasn't worried about protecting a basketball conference.
Before I point out how to connect the dots, take a moment and look at the contentions already stated. What would you do?
Okay, here it is.
1. Invite VIRGINIA, FLA ST, GT, AND CLEMSON.
2. Have a southern and northern division with a playoff game. Southern would include the 4 previously listed plus VT and WVU, a formidable section.
I'm sorry Mike, but you missed the boat. Those four would have gone for it because they realize FB drives the bus, not basketball. Oh, my fault--I guess you did realize that they felt that way.
Jim
- Cat's_Claw - 07-29-2005 04:40 AM
This is old news, we talked about this about a year ago. That being said, I think he wants to hep the Big East remain a BCS conference. He seems to concerned with basketball though so he'll have to go if the football schools want a split most likely.
- templefootballfan - 07-29-2005 04:55 AM
On SI B-E message board in the 90's, Conversation was constantly about B-E protecting itself. There were some people in denail. Histroy is going to repeat itself. B-E has to start making long range plans now. Waiting for conf to grow & see were your at 2010 is death wish
- Jackson1011 - 07-29-2005 07:56 AM
Quote:That is not hindsight. Surely, he read them. Why then, wasn't he proactive?
-- Tranghese is an easy scapegoat in all of this. He is a bball guy and has a bball only background. However the real reason we weren't proactive was the nature of the league. For example why would Seton Hall or St Johns vote to allow Flordia St (if they were available) in the league? How would the Seminoles help them? Remember this is the same group of schools that voted "no" to Penn St. The cold truth is the bball onlys have been afraid of the fooball influence int he league always handcuffed football expansion whenver possible. In the mid 19990s, East Carolina was the perfect choice to be the 9th member of the football league. They were in the top 25 most yrs and the southern wing of the conference (Miami, Virginia Tech, WVU) played them reguarly...but we didn't have the votes to get them in.
-- The real people at fault are the football presidents who for whatever reason never didn't do what had to be done in forming an all sports league and choose to stay aligned with bball onlys who don't play football but would have a huge say on who his added has full members of the league
Quote:Histroy is going to repeat itself. B-E has to start making long range plans now. Waiting for conf to grow & see were your at 2010 is death wish
--waiting untill 2010 gives us a better chance to see who is available for expansion....UCF, ECU or Temple may be much more attractive then they are now....We have to very carefull about who we add
Jackson
- templefootballfan - 07-29-2005 03:22 PM
If B-E waits untill 2010, TV contracts & bowl contracts are starting to renegate. Conf are going to be looking on how to expand there rev. ACC gonna look at 25% incress in TV viewers, NYC Bowl, Liberty bowl, 2nd BB tourn in the meadowlands, reduce travell costs. sell more apparel, get in bed with ND. How do you think ACC can get all this. B-E has to start protecting itself now. Get rev up to 7 mill for Syc, Conn,WV & Rutg, They might say no thanks, If rev stay at 4 mill, They will be calling ACC. Just my opinon.
- brista21 - 07-29-2005 05:31 PM
templefootballfan Wrote:If B-E waits untill 2010, TV contracts & bowl contracts are starting to renegate. Conf are going to be looking on how to expand there rev. ACC gonna look at 25% incress in TV viewers, NYC Bowl, Liberty bowl, 2nd BB tourn in the meadowlands, reduce travell costs. sell more apparel, get in bed with ND. How do you think ACC can get all this. B-E has to start protecting itself now. Get rev up to 7 mill for Syc, Conn,WV & Rutg, They might say no thanks, If rev stay at 4 mill, They will be calling ACC. Just my opinon.Rutgers wouldn't go to the ACC although the alure of being buddy buddy with North Carolina might attract our admin. The Big Ten on the other hand I have a feeling they'd go to in a heartbeat which saddens me. As I feel we should be here where we are playing Cincy, Cuse, Conn, Pitt, WVU every year and should be playing Temple, PSU, BC every year.
- JIM15068 - 07-29-2005 06:55 PM
The schools will probably go until July, 2010, before the official split, but that doesn't mean it won't be announced earlier so that bowls can be worked out, and any new teams could give proper notice.
However, a July, 2007, emergency split is possible, if needed.
Another scenario is that something happens between BB and FB factions that just proves to be the last straw.
The first option is the smooth transition. The latter two would be messy.
Jim
p.s. Incidentally, I believe Mike is up for contract renewal. I wonder if any friction will result.
- Jackson1011 - 07-29-2005 07:38 PM
Quote:However, a July, 2007, emergency split is possible, if needed.
-- No offense intended Jim...but do you know this for a fact or are you speculating?
Quote:p.s. Incidentally, I believe Mike is up for contract renewal. I wonder if any friction will result.
-- I don't know how the football schools could be displeased with Tranghese....he kept the BCS for the leauge and if the LB deal goes down like we think it will the BE will have the best bowl lineup of its history
Jackson
- DFW HOYA - 07-29-2005 08:12 PM
Jackson1011 Wrote:The real people at fault are the football presidents who for whatever reason never didn't do what had to be done in forming an all sports league and choose to stay aligned with bball onlys who don't play football but would have a huge say on who his added has full members of the leagueFirst, there are NO "basketball only" schools--only schools which either do not play football in the Big East (Notre Dame, Georgetown, Villanova), or not at all (PC, Seton hall, St. John's, DePaul, Marquette), but they play in most if not all sponsored conference sports.
Next, until 2003, the expansion scoreboard was: I-A schools seven, non I-A zero. There was no effort by these schools to push UMass, Richmond, Xavier, etc. into the league; instead, the Big East never pushed expansion below I-A. With the exception of Penn State's hubris and Temple's weak stature, every otehr I-A candidate brought to a vote eventually got in, most times with the votes of these so-called "basketball schools" making the difference. (For example, the deciding vote to add Rutgers and WVU came from St. John's.)
If you think these schools are holding back ECU, ask first why the I-A Big East schools never brought ECU to a vote; or, in 2003, why didn't the I-A schools just say: "we want FIVE I-A football schools or we're out." Guess what? They didn't. Instead, they pushed for only three.
The reason why USF is in the Big East and not ECU is not Seton Hall or Providence's fault, it was a decision from the I-A members.
- USFPDiddy - 07-29-2005 09:58 PM
Aw cmon, give us some credit. We have beaten them several times in a row, you know. Actually, I'm pretty sure they never beat us once we got to 1-a (convenient, because back in the mid 90's they were a pretty good team...wonder what logan was doing towards the end?)
- Brick City Pirate - 07-30-2005 07:50 AM
I know it's fun to play the "what if" game. The bottom line is that ECU is not in the Big East. As an ECU fan, I don't blame anyone. It was just poor timing as far as I am concerned. As ECU's football program stands now, I don't blame any Big East fan for not wanting my Pirates in your conference. I have a good feeling, with our new coaching staff and with Terry Holland at the helm, that ECU will regain success. It will not happen overnight. I just hope that things work out in CUSA, or that when/if another BCS conference opportunity is available, ECU will be ready and wanted. Good luck to all Big East schools. I hate the ACC and hope you stick it to them when you have a chance.
- Jackson1011 - 07-30-2005 09:46 AM
Quote:First, there are NO "basketball only" schools--only schools which either do not play football in the Big East (Notre Dame, Georgetown, Villanova), or not at all (PC, Seton hall, St. John's, DePaul, Marquette), but they play in most if not all sponsored conference sports.
Next, until 2003, the expansion scoreboard was: I-A schools seven, non I-A zero. There was no effort by these schools to push UMass, Richmond, Xavier, etc. into the league; instead, the Big East never pushed expansion below I-A. With the exception of Penn State's hubris and Temple's weak stature, every otehr I-A candidate brought to a vote eventually got in, most times with the votes of these so-called "basketball schools" making the difference. (For example, the deciding vote to add Rutgers and WVU came from St. John's.)
If you think these schools are holding back ECU, ask first why the I-A Big East schools never brought ECU to a vote; or, in 2003, why didn't the I-A schools just say: "we want FIVE I-A football schools or we're out." Guess what? They didn't. Instead, they pushed for only three.
The reason why USF is in the Big East and not ECU is not Seton Hall or Providence's fault, it was a decision from the I-A members.
- First of you have some mighty thin skin of the "bball only" title makes you as angery as your post seems to imply
-- Secondly...the "Catholic Schools" have only allowed enough football expansion for the league to survive and thus stay together..nothing more....If Memphis had two straight Top 10 finishes in football do you really think there would be enough votes in the BE to make them a full member in 2007? I don't...and I call that holding back football
-- As for ECU...there football program collapsed between 1995-2005 which is why there weren't included in this round
Jackson
- ecu92 - 07-30-2005 10:21 AM
"As for ECU...there football program collapsed between 1995-2005 which is why there weren't included in this round."
Not quite accurate. The collapse started at the Mobil Bowl in 2001. ECU went to bowl games in '94, '95, '99, '00, and '01. We've gone 4 seasons with no bowl; let's not make it worse than it really is.
- Jackson1011 - 07-30-2005 10:24 AM
I know you guys were competitive post 95...I was just saying the decline occured in between those yrs :)
Jackson
- cuseroc - 07-30-2005 06:17 PM
Brick City Pirate Wrote:I know it's fun to play the "what if" game. The bottom line is that ECU is not in the Big East. As an ECU fan, I don't blame anyone. It was just poor timing as far as I am concerned. As ECU's football program stands now, I don't blame any Big East fan for not wanting my Pirates in your conference. I have a good feeling, with our new coaching staff and with Terry Holland at the helm, that ECU will regain success. It will not happen overnight. I just hope that things work out in CUSA, or that when/if another BCS conference opportunity is available, ECU will be ready and wanted. Good luck to all Big East schools. I hate the ACC and hope you stick it to them when you have a chance.BrickCity: I think that ECU would be a solid addition once they get back to their winning ways. I know that ECU has a lot of rabid fans that would help us bowl wise, especially with ECU being near a lot of bowls. Mickey T is right in not expanding now. There is none in the BE geographic boundaries who's ranking could immediatly help the BE. If ECU or Memphis were to go on a Louisville like tear, and end up ranked in at least the top 15, I think that one or both would be invited.
trangheese never said that the BE would not expand, but he always used terms such as there is noone who could help us now . You can believe that as soon as someone emerges who could help us (by having a good end of season ranking) they would be invited.
- Wilkie01 - 07-30-2005 08:03 PM
But we will have to expand to 17 or 18 teams in order to gain a 9th and/or 10th football teams. Anyone worth adding will want in for all-sports. Or, we cull two schools or we split !
- JIM15068 - 07-30-2005 08:46 PM
Jackson1011 Wrote:The July, 2007, emergency split scenario is speculation based upon BCS standards and ranking windows.Quote:However, a July, 2007, emergency split is possible, if needed.
-- No offense intended Jim...but do you know this for a fact or are you speculating?
Quote:p.s. Incidentally, I believe Mike is up for contract renewal. I wonder if any friction will result.
-- I don't know how the football schools could be displeased with Tranghese....he kept the BCS for the leauge and if the LB deal goes down like we think it will the BE will have the best bowl lineup of its history
Jackson
2004, -05, and -06 are the first 3 years of a bcs 4-year ranking window. For this ranking period, the average rank of all conference members is considered. If the ranking looks too low, one or 2 FB teams could be added (if they raised that rank) before the 2007 FB season. Therefore, they would be in the conference at the end of the 4-year period (after the 2007 FB season). Based on precedence, their 4-year rankings should count toward the overall conference ranking.
As I stated, I view this as an emergency situation and don't think it will be necessary. I am not privvy to any inside info on this.
Jim
- omniorange - 07-30-2005 09:11 PM
Quote:JIM15068 Posted on Jul 30 2005, 08:52 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE (Jackson1011 @ Jul 29 2005, 07:44 PM)
QUOTE
However, a July, 2007, emergency split is possible, if needed.
-- No offense intended Jim...but do you know this for a fact or are you speculating?
QUOTE
p.s. Incidentally, I believe Mike is up for contract renewal. I wonder if any friction will result.
-- I don't know how the football schools could be displeased with Tranghese....he kept the BCS for the leauge and if the LB deal goes down like we think it will the BE will have the best bowl lineup of its history
Jackson
The July, 2007, emergency split scenario is speculation based upon BCS standards and ranking windows.
2004, -05, and -06 are the first 3 years of a bcs 4-year ranking window. For this ranking period, the average rank of all conference members is considered. If the ranking looks too low, one or 2 FB teams could be added (if they raised that rank) before the 2007 FB season. Therefore, they would be in the conference at the end of the 4-year period (after the 2007 FB season). Based on precedence, their 4-year rankings should count toward the overall conference ranking.
As I stated, I view this as an emergency situation and don't think it will be necessary. I am not privvy to any inside info on this.
Jim
Makes sense for an emergency contingency plan. So I doubt our braintrust has thought of it :laugh:
Maybe we should pass it along
:bang: Cheers,
Neil