Tranghese Rips All Over Pitt/Cuse & ACC

[MUMac]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[MUMac]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[Villacats]

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.

[Boone]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[Pakuni]

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. 

[GGGG]

Moron is admittedly hyperbole.  But c'mon....he clearly didn't have a full grasp on what was driving, and is driving, college sports. 

[Pakuni]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[Pakuni]

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?

[MUMac]

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.

[Boone]

"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!

[ecompt]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[Pakuni]

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.

[GGGG]

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.