NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:42 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 227 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 16  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2003 11:43 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:39 pm
Posts: 1215
Oy, I leave for two days and the heat goes up around here! Allow me to also say I hope everyone had a happy 4th of July. Happy birthday, America.

BlackGold, two interesting points. I find it somehwat funny to think that the BE, CUSA and A-10 could have some type of arrangement that does not take affect right away. Given the current climate, that seems like a smokescreen for someone to beat the others to a punch.

As for the WAC, I've always assumed they come to the mid-majors table with the weakest hand. At least, why would someone want to leave CUSA to join the WAC, save for Tulane to hook up with Rice for academic reasons. I'm not as familiar with those schools or regions, so it's unfair for me to profess knowing what the outcome will be. But, what it all hinges upon is which conference has the tightest union among its members. Face it, all three will be actively looking at each other for potential candidates, and barring an initial move by some school it seems certain that the conference that appears closer to it's penulitmate design will secure the most prized members. It appears that the MWC is fairly solid, so that leaves the WAC and CUSA to scrounge around. Pending the arrangement discussed above, CUSA stands to gain, or lose, the most. Curious to see how this plays out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2003 12:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540

Quote:
Friarfan,I have received both of your responses to mine.
First,I believe that your strong anti-ACC bias is showing.As I have previously posted, I believe that the ACC botched their original expansion.However I believe that Mr.Swofford gets credit for working with his schools in getting an alternative expansion plan which arguably puts the ACC in position to claim to be one of the stronger conferences in the country for both FB and bb.
As for the BE and Tranghese,he lost his temper and got "his pooch screwed" in the process.
I contend that if Mr.Tranghese had not "burned his bridges" with his personal attacks on Miami he could/should have been in a better position to attempt to make an effective counterproposal to Miami after the ACC dropped both Syracuse and BC. Instead he was apparently out hiding somewhere.
You asked me what he and of course the BE should have done to keep the FB schools.It does not surprise me that you disagree with my listed ideas since they deal with correcting the balance between the BE bb and FB schools.
It is just a matter of time before Providence and the rest of the bb-only schools that are trying to desparately hand onto D-1a FB conference are placed into their proper NCAA division.
Friarfan,I do not say this with any anger at all ,so I have no idea what "my" temper or lack thereof has to do with or discussion.Again,perhaps your pro-Tranghese/Providence bias is showing again?
Its too bad that in its time of crisis the BE has someone like Tranghese supposedly leading it.I am so sorry if the truth hurts you.Comments?


FriendofNCAA,

I apologize if I read anger into your remarks.

I took offense at your personal attacks on Tranghese with crude comments like "fire his butt." I found your condescending lecture to me about "how business is done in the real world" insulting. Your continued taunts about "truth hurts" don't belong on this board where discussions are normally conducted in a civil & friendly manner. I find this quite ironic from a guy who applauds Commissioner Swofford for his civility.

Regarding my ties with PC & your assumptions about my resulting defense of Commissioner Tranghese, let me just say that you don't know me well enough to attack my arguments based on personal bias. The fact of the matter is that I have ties with UConn, BC, Fordham University, & Manhattan College - yes, in addition to PC. I am not an alumnus of PC or a resident of the Providence area. I simply used that name to give a small school a little plug on this board. I tend to root for the underdog. Instead of attacking me personally, disagree with my argument or proposal. I have no problem with that.

Regarding my anti-ACC bias, again you are out in left field. I am long time fan of the ACC. I have great respect for the ACC both academically ant athletically. I believe, in contrast, that your comments bend over backwards to favor the way the ACC handled this mess. I find your comments lacking in objectivity with their one sided criticism of one player in an unfortunate situation.

If you think that there was ever a chance that Miami was going to stay with the Big East regardless of the Big East Commissioner's behavior, you are dreaming. To think that a major university would make a decision on the future of the institution, based on this premise, is demeaning to the integrity of its Board. They could simply have insisted on his dismissal as a condition of their continued membership - something which he offered to do.

For the record, I agree with you that the Big East basketball & football schools will eventuall split - & have posted this opinion a number of times. I have also said that I do not believe that this split will be easy or will necessarily come in the short run.

I also believe that Miami should have gone to the ACC - & have held this opinion from the beginning. I think that it was a golden opportunity for them & one that they would have been crazy to pass up.

Finally, I believe that Commissioner Tranghese has unfairly taken the heat for this debacle. He did not create the Big East. He has been asked to manage it. It is probably the toughest job of any conference commissioner in the country. He did not file the lawsuit that has sparked more animosity than any comments he has made. He has been asked to serve as spokesman for the conference & his employers have applauded him for his outspoken remarks - interestingly, including Virginia Tech when he made them. The indignation which he voiced was their indignation

In the end, the direction of this conference or any other will be determined by its members. The office of the conference commissioner does not have the power in any conference that you seem to believe it does. Roy Kramer would not have been able to accomplish what he did with SEC expansion had his members not wanted it & had the timing not been right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2003 9:39 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
BlackGold, I will accept your comment as input from the "objective third party" & acknowledge that I have completely failed to effectively make my point. To sum up that point, my initial objection was to the uneven characterization of the 2 commissioners - one as "gentlemanly & cordial" & the other as "in a consistently negative attack mode that made him part of the problem." I believe that this characterization is unfair & that there is plenty of blame to go around among all parties involved.

What galls me is that the ACC engaged in a "corporate raid" in which they made overtures to half the Big East Football schools & then after it's over, their fans & others try to justify it by blaming the Big East in one way or another. I find this attitude unconscionable.

Make no mistake about it - the Big East was the victim in this charade. And make no mistake about the fact that there is a great deal of anger up here in Big East country about the way that the "cordial & gentlemany" Mr. Swofford & Friends conducted themselves in this matter - & not among Providence College Friars but among football schools. If you think I'm bad . . . well, you're just seeing the tip of the iceburg.

The way that BC & Syracuse were disgraced was shameful by a group of people who failed to keep their word when they told these 2 fine universities that campus visits were just a formality. The significance of comments by Mr. Tranghese pales in contrast to this lack of integrity.

I, for one, have no resentment about Miami & Virginia Tech leaving. I have thought all along that they should have gone. I am glad that we kept BC & Syracuse. So, I think that the outcome was best for the Big East. But I don't like the way it was handled & I couldn't stand by & listen to Mr. Swofford being lionized.

At this point, I will heed your advice & make no further comments on this thread. Sorry if I've offended.


Last edited by friarfan on Sun Jul 06, 2003 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2003 12:09 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:39 pm
Posts: 1215
Some discussion on NYC radio has suggested that most BE schools, from both sides, are still interested in staying together. As such the league will likely see through the 2005 TV contracts with little action beyond the necessary addition of 2 schools with 1-A fb. Comments from several officials from the non-fb factions expressed anxiousness to see the results of studies that I presume are about possible expansion scenarios which will tell the camps whether or not the fb schools will be better off with 8, 10 or 12 members.

No word yet on whether the CUSA schools are doing similar studies, and, most importantly IMO, whether or not their scenarios include non-BE options for their bball schools. Or what to do about their western front. I've been speculating on the benefits of the BE to Marquette, St. Louis, Charlotte and DePaul. Regardless, I suspect that they'll be "delicately advised" of the benefits outside the CUSA, and as such it will be interesting if the BE bball schools see these schools as vital if the BE should ever split up, in which case they'll take them instead of Xavier and Dayton.

Thus the simple idea proposed by one caller whereby the BE "boots" ND, adds Louisville, Cincinatti, and the bball schools except Charlotte, which moves to the A-10. BE at 8 - 8, with overtures to add Army and Navy fb while joining a request by the ACC to have fb title games for 10-school leagues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2003 1:22 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:39 pm
Posts: 1215
Guys, given the BE's position they really don't need a detailed study to figure out the best first move is an invite for Louisville. Does that invite happen right after their pre-designated mourning period? And I'm including in this an open invitation to interested parties, which presumably the Cardinals would accept. Additional schools would be studied, I'm sure, especially if they approached the BE. Otherwise I assume the BE will act to land Louisville for next year if possible. And the non-fb schools won't trun it down because of Louisville's bball credits and the need to appease the minimum demands for 8 fb teams. Agreed?

And under the open invitation scenario, what other schools toss their hat into the ring if only to take a chance and see what happens? Marshall? ECU? UCF?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2003 1:20 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:39 pm
Posts: 1215
Don't know, BlackGold. I can understand the need for Mike Tranghese and company rounding up the wagons, but I'd also assume given the BE's position they'd want to retain as high a post as possible with that committee! Frankly, I can't see how much work is involved with being BCS coordinator!!

Face it, we're all suffering the same malady right now - an lull in the action with little to talk about. I assume/hope the BE will take some step within the next two months, or at least announce an outline/ timeline for what they'll do. I see no other dominos tipping until the BE makes its move, unless the A-10 or CUSA bball schools grow bold. Syracuse and UConn would be tough programs to abandon, but Xavier, Marquette and others may feel they could, if joined by the BE basketball schools, create a conference worthy of the BE pedigree without the football schools. In which case they're thinking it's now or never. The question is, who's going to pay for the study to evaluate said league's prospects and benefits and then be courageous enough to throw it out there.

Schools most interested in this right now - Xavier, UMass and the CUSA bball schools. The latter group has to thinking about the new CUSA motto: "As secure as the BE, only more spread out and with less TV market!!"

Linchpin to that strategy - Convince ND they can have their cake (fb independence) and eat it, too (conf. affiliation for other sports) courtesy of your league. IMO, the Catholic league could work as the old BE did before football, especially with ND's name attached.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2003 11:51 am 
BlackGold,just got back from vacation.My views on ACC/BE have not changed.
Good work in digging up additional info.
Yes,the BCS Commissioners have come up with a contingency plan in case Mr. Tranghese for whatever reason cannot continue to function as BCS coordinator.Mr.Weiberg is very capable and will do a fine job.
I anticipate that this BE/CUSA expansion lull will subside in the near term.Good luck with your digging.Comments?


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 227 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group