Scouting the Big East
July 18, 2007
The Sporting News

3 GOOD QUESTIONS WITH BIG EAST BIG BOSS MAN MIKE TRANGHESE

SN: Is there a Big East TV Network on the horizon?
Tranghese: No. We studied it long, hard and quietly. But it just didn't make sense for us. There are several big markets that we don't think we could get into easily: New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington. We have a good syndication package that will give us more exposure.


SN: How much longer will you be commish?
Tranghese: I have three years remaining on my deal, and I'll look at it each year. But I don't see myself working beyond the end of my current deal. And I would expect turnover at many of the BCS commissioner positions in the next five years as many of us are aging.

SN: Are there plans to expand?
Tranghese: Not now. If we add a team, it would help with scheduling. But we won't add a full-fledged member just for that. A team would have to bring a lot to the table from a TV, attendance and bowl standpoint. And I don't see that team out there right now.

ARMY AND NAVY?

While there are no plans to add a full member, talk continues about incorporating Army and Navy into the football league in a quasi-membership fashion. The plan: Each academy would play four Big East teams each year, which would alleviate many of the scheduling problems Big East teams experience in trying to fill five non-league dates. Games with Army and Navy would bring balance to teams' schedules, giving them four league home games and four league road games. For their part, Army and Navy would gain access to some of the Big East's lower-tier bowls.

IN FOR THE LONG HAUL

Louisville coach Steve Kragthorpe looked me square in the eye before things got started today and said: "This is it, I'm not going anywhere.This is my last job." And, ya know, I believe him. Kragthorpe isn't dominated by ego or money. Family matters to him. Now that he's at a big-time BCS school, he has access to everything that makes college football great.

SCHIANO SCUTTLEBUTT

Talking to Greg Schiano, I asked him how closely he considered the Miami job last year. "Not that hard, but I did listen to what (Miami A.D.) Paul Dee had to say out of respect to him. But I have a great deal at Rutgers, and my house is close to work. I have four kids, so it's important to spend as much time as I can with them."

JIM LEAVITT, ALABAMA HEAD COACH

It almost happened, believe me. Leavitt detailed his courtship from a few years ago by Tide A.D. Mal Moore. Leavitt was blown away by Bama's offer, and even was sent a contract to review. "I still have it," he says. But Leavitt never really wanted the job. Something just didn't "feel right." And, besides, he knows he has a good thing going in South Florida.

WEAK NON-CON SKEDS

The league knows it will be knocked for not having a great deal of boffo non-league games.

"But many schools were left scrambling when those other schools left for the ACC," says Tranghese. "It's difficult to fill holes in a short period of time. Louisville was calling everyone looking for games. But the future includes some good, marquee non-conference foes for our schools. We'll be fine."

THE LIST

Best dressed: Syracuse coach Greg Robinson. Loved the orange tie. The grayish hair and tan just give him the look of a corporate exec.

Best hair: South Florida coach Jim Leavitt. It's a little out of control -- in a good way. I have to say: It matches his intense personality.

Most intimidating: Pitt coach Dave Wannstedt. Maybe it's the 'stache. But Wanny creates quite a presence whenever he enters a room.

Most popular: West Virginia's Rich Rodriguez. He's the closest thing to The Beatles that the Big East has. Crowds followed him. But there wasn't much screaming.

Nicest wife: Rita Rodriguez. She's feisty and fun.

Most lonely: UConn players. Let's just say the media horde didn't descend upon the Huskies. I felt sorry for the lads. They all are good guys. I'm gonna guess they'll "do their talking on the field." Jeez, I've been hanging around these coaches too long.

THE POP IN

Syracuse coach Greg Robinson sauntered into the media room while us misshapen hacks pecked away.

"I'm just checking on you guys, seeing if you are working," he says. "You guys always check on us coaches. Well, I'm gonna check on you."

Of course, some sage scribe piped up: "Coach, you only can be in here for the first 15 minutes of the session. It's closed after that."

Ba-da BOOM!

OVERHEARD

I heard from a good source at the meetings that I should expect the Big Ten Network and Comcast to settle their differences soon. If true, that's huge. What finally will bring Comcast, a large cable provider in the Midwest that has balked at picking up the BTN, into the fold? Expect Comcast to be given an equity partnership in the BTN. The BTN originally approached Comcast to be its partner in the formation of the network, but Comcast balked and the Big Ten teamed with FOX.

I had heard it before, but hearing it again still amazes me: UConn's stadium was built entirely with state funds. The athletic department didn't have to raise a cent for the digs. What a sweet deal for the Husky program, when you consider the pains a place like Minnesota is going through trying to finish fund-raising for its new stadium.

New Cincinnati coach Brian Kelly was peeved that no paper from the Queen City sent a reporter to the Big East meetings. I concur with Kelly, a first-year coach who is poised to take the Bearcats to the next level.

Speaking of UC, here's some food for thought that was discussed over a pasta and bottled water lunch: Anyone else wonder why Temple was dumped from the Big East, while Cincinnati is kept? Think about it.

LET THE HEISMAN HYPE BEGIN
Got my first Heisman bauble: Rutgers left me pair of tiny binoculars at the front desk of my hotel in Rhode Island. On the carrying case, I'm instructed to "seeRAYrun.com," as in the Scarlet Knights star running back Ray Rice. Nice idea. A functional and informative piece of hype. My 6-year-old son will love to use these binoculars in his tree house, scanning the Chesterfield, Mo., horizon for the ice cream truck.

Interesting read except for the strange fashion commentary. UC is really getting hammered by the media for the no media rep thing. Questioning their membership in the league in national articles such as this one has to be uncomfortable for their athletic department. Perception can become reality if UC doesn't become more proactive on some of these issues, i.e. the local press and football attendance. I was being serious when I said the Cincy AD should hand deliver a check to the paper to get them out to media day. It's easily worth a thousand bucks to keep this kind of crap out of the national press.

interesting but MT said 'no interest from their side' with regard to army/navy before I thought...

Cincinnati is treated like the MAC schools inside the state of Ohio. Ohio State is the team the newspapers, radio and TV stations cover. MAC is on FoxsportsnetOhio while UC is not for football & basketball. MAC also has a new ESPN plus deal and put Temple on three times......if UC were in the MAC, the MAC would have UC on just about every week via foxsportsnet, espnplus, or comcastlocal.......BE put UC basketball on TV how many times last year? 1 time? come on.....perhaps Cincinnati media is sending BE the cold shoulder until they get more national TV games in hoops.

cuseroc Wrote:Speaking of UC, here's some food for thought that was discussed over a pasta and bottled water lunch: Anyone else wonder why Temple was dumped from the Big East, while Cincinnati is kept? Think about it.

What? Cincinnati is kept? Cincinnati just got in! Sheesh!

What is this supposed to mean? I'm thinking about it but I haven't come up with anything yet.

Cincinnati has already accomplished more in 2 years in the Big East than Temple did in 14.

L-yes Wrote:Interesting read except for the strange fashion commentary. UC is really getting hammered by the media for the no media rep thing. Questioning their membership in the league in national articles such as this one has to be uncomfortable for their athletic department. Perception can become reality if UC doesn't become more proactive on some of these issues, i.e. the local press and football attendance. I was being serious when I said the Cincy AD should hand deliver a check to the paper to get them out to media day. It's easily worth a thousand bucks to keep this kind of crap out of the national press.

I don't think you can hire media coverage. If UC succeeds on the field then the media coverage will follow. Kelly did the right thing in questioning the lack of coverage and it has generated a lot of conversation here in Cincinnati so maybe it will put some heat on the local rags but there is quite a bit here that competes for coverage.

Quote:SN: Is there a Big East TV Network on the horizon?
Tranghese: No. We studied it long, hard and quietly. But it just didn't make sense for us. There are several big markets that we don't think we could get into easily: New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington. We have a good syndication package that will give us more exposure.

--I never thought a BE network would have trouble getting Philly and NY. That's very suprising to me

Jackson

Jackson1011 Wrote:

Quote:SN: Is there a Big East TV Network on the horizon?
Tranghese: No. We studied it long, hard and quietly. But it just didn't make sense for us. There are several big markets that we don't think we could get into easily: New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington. We have a good syndication package that will give us more exposure.

--I never thought a BE network would have trouble getting Philly and NY. That's very suprising to me

Jackson

As I've stated many times before, there is a difference between 'reach' and 'pull'. In the Midwest there is more of a balance between pro and college sports. Also, the Big 10 has all of those huge state schools with lots of alum. This equates to both reach and pull.

The Big East has reach into NYC and Philly. But the major northeastern cities are way more pro cities than they are college sports cities (not having the balance of the midwest between the two). Also, the Big East institutions with reach into these markets are smaller than Big 10 schools because many of these institutions are private as well. This results in not having as many alum as Big 10 schools in the Midwest.

Those two factors presently keep the 'pull' factor down for the Big East in the northeastern corridor cities. As a result, the only way a Big East Network would fly is that it would have to be at a huge discount.

However, I do believe the pull can be increased by 'winners'. The northeastern sports fans, while having loyalties to pro teams (whether they win or not) also love winners - especially winners with tradition.

Which is why I would expect the Big East to overtake the ACC in terms of perception as well as reality as being the best basketball league within the next few years or so. The historical traditions of so many of the bb teams in the league coupled with the fact that so many of them are now winning should lead to this.

However, without PSU and Notre Dame, it will take longer with football - at least a decade of being perceived as 'winners', if not longer. Thanks to West Virginia and the adopted Louisville (and make no mistake about this, the northeast will adopt the Cards like they adopted Miami and FSU) that slow process has already begun.

As for the immediate future? Well, with the other power leagues likely following the B10 model, ESPNU is going to need some league to be its anchor conference.

Cheers,
Neil

Isnt that why we have Villanova and St John's for? Didnt some poster on this board tell us the BE would lose that market without them?

bearcat65 Wrote:

L-yes Wrote:Interesting read except for the strange fashion commentary. UC is really getting hammered by the media for the no media rep thing. Questioning their membership in the league in national articles such as this one has to be uncomfortable for their athletic department. Perception can become reality if UC doesn't become more proactive on some of these issues, i.e. the local press and football attendance. I was being serious when I said the Cincy AD should hand deliver a check to the paper to get them out to media day. It's easily worth a thousand bucks to keep this kind of crap out of the national press.

I don't think you can hire media coverage. If UC succeeds on the field then the media coverage will follow. Kelly did the right thing in questioning the lack of coverage and it has generated a lot of conversation here in Cincinnati so maybe it will put some heat on the local rags but there is quite a bit here that competes for coverage.

What is the standard for minimal media coverage in Cincy? UC is by most standards a success on the field going to bowl games regularly and competing with if not beating some of the elite in any given year. UC is not Vandy or Baylor and deserves better. Your notion only glosses over the problem which is far more complex and disturbing than simple success on the field.

UC is poised to have a very exciting year on the field and at the gate. UC will be tops in increased attendance and will finally put this discussion to rest. Look for a near sellout for Marshall. And full houses for Louisville and WVU. I think the Oregon St game could approach 30k on a Thurs night. I have never heard as much talk in the city for UC football. The media thing is blown out of proportion. There have been more articles and increased coverage in the last year. They should of sent a rep to media day but oh well.... 42 days until kickoff at beautiful Nippert Stadium on a beatiful construction free campus. I am way more excited about this team than the Bengals! The marketing area is much improved and the word is getting out! Go Bearcats!

Neil, you can only ‘pull’ what you can ‘reach’ and it can only be done by ‘winners’. I think I got it.

The heart and soul of our league is in the northeast.

Wouldn’t you agree our strength and identity is in the northeast?

Regardless of our members in the mid-west or the south, the success of our league should come from teams in the northeast. The success of Miami and VT doesn’t really help the league even if they were in the title games. Their successes seem to strengthen the perception that northeast programs can’t compete with programs from other region of the country. And our BCS was due to their membership and when they are left, people question the league worthiness. Back in ’05, when USF spank Uof L (our savoir) everybody were panic because it reinforce the league’s perception of our unworthiness of BCS, but thank to WVU, they kept our head above water. And last year, Rutgers successfully starting to ‘pull’ the fans base of the league. Now we are waiting for Syracuse and Pitt to wake up and start doing the same thing. I’m not expecting UConn to make any impact until ’08. Pitt has no excuse since they have great recruiting class the past few years.

As for the immediate future? How much impact does Big Ten Network and ACC’s new TV contract have on our future?

cuseroc Wrote:SN: How much longer will you be commish?
Tranghese: I have three years remaining on my deal, and I'll look at it each year. But I don't see myself working beyond the end of my current deal.

Could this really mean he thinks there will be a split coming up?

CardHouse Wrote:

cuseroc Wrote:SN: How much longer will you be commish?
Tranghese: I have three years remaining on my deal, and I'll look at it each year. But I don't see myself working beyond the end of my current deal.

Could this really mean he thinks there will be a split coming up?

Word is that he has already announced (at a private shindig this past Spring) his intention to retire at the end his current deal, which is the 09-10 year and will also coincide with his 20th anniversary year as commissioner.

Whether or not there will be a split, remains to be seen. Although I do think that there are many who would not want to see him retire under the cloud of a split.

Cheers,
Neil

To compare us to Temple is laughable. Even in our lousy 2005 season, it's not like we got blown out by 50 points every week (just vs. good teams ). Thomas and Kelly will do a fine job with UC's program with, or without, the media's help.

SO#1 Wrote:Neil, you can only ‘pull’ what you can ‘reach’ and it can only be done by ‘winners’. I think I got it.

The heart and soul of our league is in the northeast.

Wouldn’t you agree our strength and identity is in the northeast?

Perhaps that is what it should be, but when looking at the football side of the equation that isn't what one sees at the moment. Even the bb side, with the additions of Marquette and DePaul to Notre Dame has helped erode that perception somewhat.

Quote:Regardless of our members in the mid-west or the south, the success of our league should come from teams in the northeast.

Well, it would appear to me that the Big East is a success without teams technically from the northeast necessarily being successful. However, to maximize the potential of the Big East, yes, I see it as important that the northeastern teams do well in both major sports.

Quote:The success of Miami and VT doesn’t really help the league even if they were in the title games. Their successes seem to strengthen the perception that northeast programs can’t compete with programs from other region of the country.

That perception came from how poorly those northeastern teams fared against Miami, and Miami alone. Had Miami (along with BC) stayed around and gotten beat sometimes by Pitt, SU, BC, UConn, and RU (not saying they would have, but if this did happen) the perception of northeastern teams would be enhanced. However, since the NE teams didn't step up to the plate sooner, I admit there is still a perception problem that needs to be overcome.

As you mention, Rutgers took the first step to that process last year. They will need to solidify that step this year.

Still that was only a first step (from a program that has been historically bad). As you also mention, Pitt and Syracuse need to step up to the plate. I believe Pitt will take their first steps toward that this year and next. And, at the moment, I am optimistic that Syracuse can take that step in 2008 or 2009. I also believe UConn has everything in place to do so as well (coaching, facilities, winning traditions in other sports).

However, with no Miami-caliber (of the early 90s and early 00s) in the league perception-wise, the conference teams will need to step it up OOC as well. Which they are in terms of scheduling, but they will also need to do it on the field.

Quote:As for the immediate future? How much impact does Big Ten Network and ACC’s new TV contract have on our future?

Well the B10 Network means that more Big East games will be seen on ESPNU and ESPN Regional - since, as I understand it, the Big 10 games not on ABC, ESPN, and ESPN2 go on the BTN.

Which means the BTN will be competing directly with ESPNU. Hopefully, ESPN realizes this and starts to promote the Big East more as a result. The coverage BE Media Day received on ESPN News the other day was a great start.

The current ACC contract hurts the BE a bit in terms of football since they are taking some of the Thursday night ESPN slots away from the league. In terms of bb, since Raycom/Lincoln Financial Sports has the ACC contract it has little impact on the Big East in terms of bb. Our total ESPN coverage - all outlets - (and the vast amount of conference games the league will have) will dwarf any other league.

This should result in more exposure on ESPN News and perhaps even Sportscenter. Which means the TV contract served its purpose - getting the league more exposure. If the results (TV ratings) continue like they have, the money should follow in subsequent contracts.

While the current league configuration will likely never match the ACC, SEC, and Big10 in terms of dollars, I think the BE could challenge both the B12 and Pac-10 in terms of dollars, if the 'pull' increases - which, of course, remains to be seen.

Cheers,
Neil

L-yes Wrote:

bearcat65 Wrote:

L-yes Wrote:Interesting read except for the strange fashion commentary. UC is really getting hammered by the media for the no media rep thing. Questioning their membership in the league in national articles such as this one has to be uncomfortable for their athletic department. Perception can become reality if UC doesn't become more proactive on some of these issues, i.e. the local press and football attendance. I was being serious when I said the Cincy AD should hand deliver a check to the paper to get them out to media day. It's easily worth a thousand bucks to keep this kind of crap out of the national press.

I don't think you can hire media coverage. If UC succeeds on the field then the media coverage will follow. Kelly did the right thing in questioning the lack of coverage and it has generated a lot of conversation here in Cincinnati so maybe it will put some heat on the local rags but there is quite a bit here that competes for coverage.

What is the standard for minimal media coverage in Cincy? UC is by most standards a success on the field going to bowl games regularly and competing if not beating some of the elite in any given year. UC is not Vandy or Baylor and deserves better. Your notion only glosses over the problem which is far more complex and disturbing than simple success on the field.

Minimal media coverage will be determined by how much interest they perceive is out there. Now is it up to the media or the fans to generate that interest? If Nippert is full for every UC game, if talk shows are inundated with fans wanting to talk UC football, if the feedback the Enquirer receives for not covering the media day is overwhelmingly negative, then you will see increased coverage. If things go as they have then you will continue to see Reds, Bengals, college basketball, and high school football get the coverage. It's UC's job to generate interest in their progam not the local media.

BJUnklFkr Wrote:To compare us to Temple is laughable. Even in our lousy 2005 season, it's not like we got blown out by 50 points every week (just vs. good teams ). Thomas and Kelly will do a fine job with UC's program with, or without, the media's help.

I believe the original comment was directed toward the 'minima' attendance standards that got Temple the boot.

1998 - 15127
1999 - 20771
2000 - 18762

As a result of the above the football schools have a 25K minima average attendance standard that is supposed to be met by each school over a 5 year period or be subject for review:

2005 - 22423
2006 - 20373

The above would seem to suggest that over the next three years, Cincinnati would need to average about 27.5K in attendance, not to be 'subject to review' (whatever that truly means).

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

BJUnklFkr Wrote:To compare us to Temple is laughable. Even in our lousy 2005 season, it's not like we got blown out by 50 points every week (just vs. good teams ). Thomas and Kelly will do a fine job with UC's program with, or without, the media's help.

I believe the original comment was directed toward the 'minima' attendance standards that got Temple the boot.

1998 - 15127
1999 - 20771
2000 - 18762

As a result of the above the football schools have a 25K minima average attendance standard that is supposed to be met by each school over a 5 year period or be subject for review:

2005 - 22423
2006 - 20373

The above would seem to suggest that over the next three years, Cincinnati would need to average about 27.5K in attendance, not to be 'subject to review' (whatever that truly means).

Cheers,
Neil

Geography alone will save them this year with Louisville and WVU coming to town.

L-yes Wrote:Geography alone will save them this year with Louisville and WVU coming to town.

I hope more show up for UC-UofL than the last time. In 2005 the attendance was 21086. It was a Saturday game that started at noon.

I was surprised at the small attendance (by UofL standards) from UofL for that one.

By contrast WVU at UC drew 25893 that year.

P.S. - The responsibility for a good attendance lies with UC - not with UofL. I'm just saying I was surprised by the UofL turnout for the last game at UC.