http://villanova.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1159&tid=147572007&mid=147572007&sid=1000&style=2 (http://villanova.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1159&tid=147572007&mid=147572007&sid=1000&style=2)
Vucat05's recap of Tranghese on radio:
Basically calling out the Presidents for having no loyalty and no integrity. Said he was basically shocked and had more faith in the people in charge than he should have. He's being pretty frank. Also said the ACC did this cause we have been 'kicking their butts' in Basketball for 10 years and this is the only way they can beat us.
This is why Trangese is such a moron. He actually thinks this was a basketball related move?? The BE's adherence to basketball is what got them in this mess to begin with.
I liked this quote from the nova board...
"Think about this our children will have to watch Duke vs UNC in MSG on Saturday night for the ACC Championship. Is there anything more disgusting then watching baby blue and Duke nerds? Its just absolutely awful idea."
Yeah the guy defending the basketball programs, and speaking out against Pitt and Cuse is the idiot here. The backstabbing President at Pitt seems like a really loyal guy.
I am saying nothing about Pitt's President. However Tranghese, and his lack of foresight, is exactly why the BE is in the situation it is in now. He was not a good commissioner. Every decision the BE made under his leadership was reactionary.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 03:43:59 PM
I am saying nothing about Pitt's President. However Tranghese, and his lack of foresight, is exactly why the BE is in the situation it is in now. He was not a good commissioner. Every decision the BE made under his leadership was reactionary.
A little harsh on the guy who oversaw one of the most powerful conferences for 19 years. He tried to do something with football, but this was a basketball first conference and the football schools were not the prime football schools. Not saying he was perfect, but I also don't see him as a moron either.
And if the BE didn't make reactionary decisions, we would not have been invited to the BE. Getting into the BE, good or bad, will be determined over the course of the next month or so.... I suspect it will still be a good thing, especially if some of the B12 joins the BE schools.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 03:43:59 PM
I am saying nothing about Pitt's President. However Tranghese, and his lack of foresight, is exactly why the BE is in the situation it is in now. He was not a good commissioner. Every decision the BE made under his leadership was reactionary.
What would you have done differently?
Quote from: Abode4life on September 19, 2011, 03:40:43 PM
I liked this quote from the nova board...
"Think about this our children will have to watch Duke vs UNC in MSG on Saturday night for the ACC Championship. Is there anything more disgusting then watching baby blue and Duke nerds? Its just absolutely awful idea."
My fiancee and friends of ours were planning on a vacation to NYC for the Big East tourney in two years. Five glorious days of the best basketball on the planet. Now this happens...
Also in that interview Tranghese apparently ripped on Rutgers saying that people think they draw the NYC market, but they don't.
Quote from: Pakuni on September 19, 2011, 03:50:44 PM
What would you have done differently?
Not let Penn State get away. Penn State wanted to be a BE member and create a football conference. The BE turned them down because they didn't want them involved in basketball. Penn State went to the Big Ten and the east's historically most dominant football power was now in a midwest conference.
I love this Tranghese quote:
"Because [Rutgers] had 1 game televised on ESPN a few years ago that got good ratings, they think they matter"
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 03:27:45 PM
This is why Trangese is such a moron. He actually thinks this was a basketball related move?? The BE's adherence to basketball is what got them in this mess to begin with.
No, but he knows that if he says it publicly it will get the general public stirred up.
Which it has.
Tranghese did a great job making this conference into what it is today. His succesor was the one blind sided by this. It is a sad coincidence that Dave Gavitt died this week as well, he was a great man, and did a great deal for the Big East.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 03:55:32 PM
Not let Penn State get away. Penn State wanted to be a BE member and create a football conference. The BE turned them down because they didn't want them involved in basketball. Penn State went to the Big Ten and the east's historically most dominant football power was now in a midwest conference.
How did Tranghese "let Penn State get away". He wasn't even commissioner when the conference denied PSU membership and rejected Paterno's plan for a football league (that would involve bringing in even more schools).
So I'm not sure how you pin that all on him.
And Penn State didn't join the Big 10 until more than a decade later, after the Big East landed programs like Miami and Virginia Tech.
In hindsight three decades later it's easy to criticize and say you would have done it differently, but at the time the mandate from school presidents was for the Big East to remain a basketball conference and it's hard to argue that Penn State would have imporved their standing as such. And it would be inaccurate and unfair to call Tranghese a moron over that.
Penn State announced they were going to join the Big Ten in 1988, and they joined in 1990. Maimi and Virginia Tech joined in 1991. Penn State was the first domino to fall in that restructuring.
And Tranghese was #2 back then.
And I was specifically asked what I would have done differently. I answered the question.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 04:23:40 PM
Penn State announced they were going to join the Big Ten in 1988, and they joined in 1990. Maimi and Virginia Tech joined in 1991. Penn State was the first domino to fall in that restructuring.
And Tranghese was #2 back then.
And I was specifically asked what I would have done differently. I answered the question.
My bad on '95, but the announcement actually came in December 1989 ....
Reagrdless, if the only thing you can point to over the guy's nearly 30 years with the conference is letting Penn State "get away" - when he wasn't even the guy in charge and the membership wanted nothing to do with a football conference - then I'd say he had a pretty good tenure.
Really the ultimate example of hindsight being 20/20.
Only a Monday morning QB would call Tranghese an idiot. Give me a break.
Wasn't it Pitt's president that spearheaded suing BC when they went to the ACC?
Quote from: buckchuckler on September 19, 2011, 05:56:26 PM
Wasn't it Pitt's president that spearheaded suing BC when they went to the ACC?
Yep.
Mark Nordenberg this weekend:
"We did make it clear within the Big East, we were willing to improve the conference in any way we were asked. At the same time, we made it very clear that if other opportunities did arise, we would feel obligated to seriously assess them and look at the long-term future of the University of Pittsburgh."
Mark Nordenberg in 2003 when BC, VaTech, Miami left:
"This is a case that involves broken commitments, secret dealings, breaches of fiduciary responsibility, the misappropriations of conference opportunities and predatory attempts to eliminate competition."
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/35551/video-tranghese-embarrassed-by-raid
video of his comments...
Quote from: TallTitan34 on September 19, 2011, 04:01:28 PM
I love this Tranghese quote:
"Because [Rutgers] had 1 game televised on ESPN a few years ago that got good ratings, they think they matter"
I can't speak for every sports fans in Jersey, but I'd guess 90% of us think this way as it relates to Rutgers. They are an afterthought in their own state.
Quote from: Boone on September 19, 2011, 05:10:10 PM
Only a Monday morning QB would call Tranghese an idiot. Give me a break.
Ask fans of the football schools what they think of him.....the answer will be "not much."
Quote from: Pakuni on September 19, 2011, 04:19:09 PM
How did Tranghese "let Penn State get away". He wasn't even commissioner when the conference denied PSU membership and rejected Paterno's plan for a football league (that would involve bringing in even more schools).
So I'm not sure how you pin that all on him.
And Penn State didn't join the Big 10 until more than a decade later, after the Big East landed programs like Miami and Virginia Tech.
In hindsight three decades later it's easy to criticize and say you would have done it differently, but at the time the mandate from school presidents was for the Big East to remain a basketball conference and it's hard to argue that Penn State would have imporved their standing as such. And it would be inaccurate and unfair to call Tranghese a moron over that.
It was 1985 when PSU applied for the BE. They added no value to the league at the time, as it was a BB only league and the football schools were independents. In 1985, football was no where near the money maker or driver that it is now. Basketball drove the league and the schools.
Was it a mistake not to add PSU? I am not so sure considering the time and reasons.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 04:23:40 PM
Penn State announced they were going to join the Big Ten in 1988, and they joined in 1990. Maimi and Virginia Tech joined in 1991. Penn State was the first domino to fall in that restructuring.
And Tranghese was #2 back then.
And I was specifically asked what I would have done differently. I answered the question.
Pitt had a ton to do with how Penn State fell out and ended up in the Big 10 to the point that Pitt and Penn State will not play a game let alone be in the same conference. To hang Penn State on Tranghese would be ridiculous.
Quote from: mu03eng on September 19, 2011, 07:32:13 PM
Pitt had a ton to do with how Penn State fell out and ended up in the Big 10 to the point that Pitt and Penn State will not play a game let alone be in the same conference. To hang Penn State on Tranghese would be ridiculous.
Good memory. Forgot about Pitt and how they played it against Penn St. They were the reason.
Quote from: MUMac on September 19, 2011, 07:30:15 PM
It was 1985 when PSU applied for the BE. They added no value to the league at the time, as it was a BB only league and the football schools were independents. In 1985, football was no where near the money maker or driver that it is now. Basketball drove the league and the schools.
Was it a mistake not to add PSU? I am not so sure considering the time and reasons.
Of course it was a mistake. Penn State not only wanted to join, they wanted to form a BE football conference, and rumors were that Maryland would have followed them to do so. But the BE concentrated on basketball and said no...yet just a few years later everyone knew that was a mistake when all the major independents were snatched up for football reasons.
They did a great job of getting Miami when they did. But then they added a bunch of football only members, such as Virginia Tech...which was done...again...to protect their basketball product.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 07:42:49 PM
Of course it was a mistake. Penn State not only wanted to join, they wanted to form a BE football conference, and rumors were that Maryland would have followed them to do so. But the BE concentrated on basketball and said no...yet just a few years later everyone knew that was a mistake when all the major independents were snatched up for football reasons.
They did a great job of getting Miami when they did. But then they added a bunch of football only members, such as Virginia Tech...which was done...again...to protect their basketball product.
But to call him a moron and point to this as your only defense. Weak. Very weak.
It wasn't my only defense. He entire leadership was one of reaction and not one of proactivity. He was the #2 guy when PSU was rejected.
His first move was spearheading the addition of football only members...such as Virginia Tech, who was pissed off for years about not being able to join for all sports.
He was caught blindsided when the ACC raided their membership. Never once taking the initiative to think about doing something similar.
He invited more basketball schools into the league, which ironically may have actually helped with its eventual decline.
Say what you want...his moved benefitted MU...but most people I know who are fans of football schools with in the conference believe that his leadership (or lackthereof) is what ultimately destroyed the conference.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2011, 07:21:15 PM
Ask fans of the football schools what they think of him.....the answer will be "not much."
That's because the football schools' fans prefer to blame everyone and everything but their own programs for BE football's failure on the field.
How come I've yet to read an article that comes close to placing the blame for the defections and the BE's demise at Tranghese's feet? The "moron" charge doesn't hold water.
Quote from: Boone on September 20, 2011, 09:35:07 AM
How come I've yet to read an article that comes close to placing the blame for the defections and the BE's demise at Tranghese's feet? The "moron" charge doesn't hold water.
Here ya go....
http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/sports/pitt-redshirt-diaries/29807-michael-tranghese-jack-swarbrick-john-marinatto-sound-off
"Michael Tranghese is one of the classiest and smartest guys in this business and I like him a lot. But he is a basketball guy and this is the first of many statements he has made which (a) show his disdain for college football and how much it overshadows basketball and (b) why the Big East football conference never fully realized its potential. When the commissioner and part architect of a conference - and the commissioner who follows him for that matter - treat football as if it is an annoyance that takes away from their favorite sport, it is doomed to fail."
Enjoy.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 20, 2011, 09:43:40 AM
Here ya go....
http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/sports/pitt-redshirt-diaries/29807-michael-tranghese-jack-swarbrick-john-marinatto-sound-off
"Michael Tranghese is one of the classiest and smartest guys in this business and I like him a lot. But he is a basketball guy and this is the first of many statements he has made which (a) show his disdain for college football and how much it overshadows basketball and (b) why the Big East football conference never fully realized its potential. When the commissioner and part architect of a conference - and the commissioner who follows him for that matter - treat football as if it is an annoyance that takes away from their favorite sport, it is doomed to fail."
Enjoy.
So your best defense for labeling Tranghese a "moron" is a blog post that describes him as one of the smartest guys in the business? OK.
Anyhow, I don't think anyone has ever disputed that the Big East is a basketball-centric conference, or that its leaders have run it that way. The conference was created, after all, for the sole purpose of basketball.
Moron is admittedly hyperbole. But c'mon....he clearly didn't have a full grasp on what was driving, and is driving, college sports.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 20, 2011, 10:09:29 AM
Moron is admittedly hyperbole. But c'mon....he clearly didn't have a full grasp on what was driving, and is driving, college sports.
Oh, I think he absolutely had a grasp on it. I just don't think he cared much, for better or worse. Again, the Big East was created - uniquely - to be a high major athletic conference for
basketball. Football was less than an afterthought. It's absolutely fair (and accurate) to say football never received the attention from BE leaders that it has in other conferences. It's also fair to say that Trangehse may have overrated the ability of basketball to be a cohesive force for conference members.
But it's not fair to label Trangehese (or Gavitt, for that matter) as incompetent for favoring basketball because that the whole purpose of the conference. It never was their goal or interest to make football king, so to rip them for it now seems a bit unfair.
That's an absurd argument. That's like saying the old typewriter company didn't care for computers because that's not why it was created. So it ignored what was going on around them and kept churning out typewriters until it went under.
You adapt...or you die. The Big East didn't adapt to a changing landscape, and now they are on life support. And he was in charge for most of those years. Sorry, but that's what happens when you put a "basketball guy" on top of your conference. The football members are eventually going to give up and leave - and the ones left are trying to find a way out.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 20, 2011, 10:47:58 AM
That's an absurd argument. That's like saying the old typewriter company didn't care for computers because that's not why it was created. So it ignored what was going on around them and kept churning out typewriters until it went under.
What an awful analogy.
College football existed at the time of the Big East's creation. It was, in fact, king then, as it is now. It wasn't something new, like the computer, tHAT came along after the typewriter company (your Big East) had established itself. The Big East's founders knew that football existed. They knew it was king. They weren't blind to these facts. They didn't "fail to adapt." College football wasn't some new invention that makes basketball an obsolete sport. Ugh.
The college landscape isn't what's changed. What's changed are the priorities of some Big East members ... and that's something well outside the control of conference leadership.
You are, for all intents, blaming Tranghese for not making the Big East a football-first conference when that's not the reason it was created nor was it ever something the majority of its members ever sought.
But again, besides somehow forcing conference members to accept Penn State basketball 30 years ago (which apparently would have prevented any of this from happening?) when he was an assistant to the commissioner, what specifically would you have done differently?
I am really struggling with your constant harping on this matter. They adapted - they added football schools such as Miami, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, USF ... They also saw other programs add football - UCONN, Nova (restarted), Georgetown. The latter two are not yet ready for BE football. Miami left due to regional reasons moreso than anything else. Virginia did the same.
The problem is that Pitt and Syracuse regressed as programs - due to their own administration and programs, while Louisville, Rutgers and Cincinnati never developed as they should have.
When does it fall on the member institutions and not the league? You cite as the primary evidence that they did not accept Penn State - who you believe would have brought Maryland. I lived in Maryland shortly after that. Maryland football was pretty god awful back then. Bobby Ross resigned right around that time, due to the lack of commitment to football by the administration. Penn State had nothing to offer besides football. You would have had to accept a terrible basketball program to accept Penn State. And these were the big mistakes? Blown decisions that apparently had not been thoroughly thought out by the higher ups when rejecting Penn State (and Maryland)?
This was, as Pakuni, I and others have stated, a basketball first league. They made attempts at football, but for various reasons, it stagnated. You believe that falls all on Tranghese - making him a moron. I believe that is a superficial analysis and cheap shot.
"Michael Tranghese is one of the classiest and smartest guys in this business..."
Yeah, that translates to "moron." ::)The charge doesn't stick. Give it up, Monday morning QB!
So Tranghese is to be ripped for not allowing an atrocious basketball program that played most of its games before 3,000 fans into the strongest league in the country? Please. This is all about money and college football. Pitt thinks it can make more money playing Clemson in front of 20,000 fans than it can playing Rutgers in front of 20,000 fans. The league should sue Nordenberg for every penny he has the same way he wanted to sue BC.
OK...have it your way. Tranghese was so smart despite the fact that the conference he was leading started to crumble on his watch...a process that continues to this day.
I'm telling you this, the basketball schools are really the only people who defend his leadership. This is the reason that schools are leaving the conference. A lack of understanding what drives revenue in the NCAA today.
Alright...more evidence....
In 1998, Tranghese had the brilliant idea of giving away Big East football. An article from 2003...
http://articles.courant.com/2003-06-12/features/0306120470_1_big-east-acc-acc-president-acc-expansion-plan
"Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese told USA Today last month he twice explored the possibility of having the Big East's major football programs -- Miami, Boston College, Syracuse and Pittsburgh -- play under the ACC banner. The conference would have remained intact in all other sports."
Look...he simply had no clue when it came to the changing landscape of college sports. And the BE is suffering because of it. He was going to essentially give away a conferences most valuable product....for the sake of keeping basketball together.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 20, 2011, 01:30:14 PM
Look...he simply had no clue when it came to the changing landscape of college sports. And the BE is suffering because of it. He was going to essentially give away a conferences most valuable product....for the sake of keeping basketball together.
Again, you're assuming, with no basis, that Tranghese's decision not to cater to football above basketball - or, in other words, following the mandate of the conference and its members - equated to him having "no clue."
How did the landscape change? Nationally speaking, was football ever less important than basketball at any point in Big East history?
Also, the facts take issue with your claim the conference's most valuable product is football. In fact, Big East football is barely profitable for most of its members. On average, Big East programs made a $982K profit off football in 2009, according to Forbes. Basketball, on average, earned members a $3.5 million profit.
Lastly ... still waiting for insight on how you would have handled things differently.
Quote from: Pakuni on September 20, 2011, 01:50:20 PM
Again, you're assuming, with no basis, that Tranghese's decision not to cater to football above basketball - or, in other words, following the mandate of the conference and its members - equated to him having "no clue."
I think his interview yesterday speaks volumes of what he feels versus the members feelings.
What I would have done differently...
1. Make sure Penn State didn't head to the B10 and begin a football conference immediately.
2. Assuming they were too late to do this, add Rutgers, WVU, Miami and Virginia Tech immediately as full members. (VPI was only a partial member who had to practically beg for full inclusion - one of the reasons they had no loyalty in the end.)
3. Drop the idea of adding Temple at all....they were a loser when they were added.
4. Agressively look at ways of getting to 12 members, through promotion of basketball programs (like UConn), or poaching other conferences. (Like the ACC.)
5. Tell the basketball schools that either they go along or the football schools would take their ball and simply leave the conference.
BTW, I worked with a guy who was a big Penn State alum in the early 90s who suggested all of these ideas above. This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking...the importance of football was pretty well known even back then.