Here's an interesting look at DeFillippo's comments & their implications by the feature columnist in the Hartford Courant's sports department:

http://www.courant.com/sports/hc-jacobs,....columnist

(10-13-2011 07:21 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Here's an interesting look at DeFillippo's comments & their implications by the feature columnist in the Hartford Courant's sports department:

http://www.courant.com/sports/hc-jacobs,....columnist

that link didn't work - is this the one you're after?
http://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc...779.column

EDIT: sorry link did work, but it went to the columnist's page not the article.

I don't think his statements matter one way or the other. BC opposing Uconn, is no different than Nova being against temple, or USF against UCF, or WV being against Marshall. They all are fighting for what they think is best for their programs. Him speaking of ESPN influence is a bit different. That may well help BE to keep its auto bid.

(10-13-2011 07:27 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I don't think his statements matter one way or the other. BC opposing Uconn, is no different than Nova being against temple, or USF against UCF, or WV being against Marshall. They all are fighting for what they think is best for their programs. Him speaking of ESPN influence is a bit different. That may well help BE to keep its auto bid.

Read the article regarding ESPN influence.

IMO, the ESPN claims by DeFilippo are bogus & were simply self-aggrandizing to make him seem more important.

The idea that ESPN would promote Pitt over UConn never made any sense & I posted a variety of reasons why at the time. But Jacobs adds important reasons in his column. Specifically the fact that CT's governor was promoting a tax abatement/jobs creation package for ESPN in CT during this very period when ESPN was supposedly ruining the state university's flagship's future athletic prospects makes absolutely no sense. The interest in Pitt has ACC fingerprints all over it, not ESPN.

(10-13-2011 07:35 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-13-2011 07:27 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I don't think his statements matter one way or the other. BC opposing Uconn, is no different than Nova being against temple, or USF against UCF, or WV being against Marshall. They all are fighting for what they think is best for their programs. Him speaking of ESPN influence is a bit different. That may well help BE to keep its auto bid.

Read the article regarding ESPN influence.

IMO, the ESPN claims by DeFilippo are bogus & were simply self-aggrandizing to make him seem more important.

The idea that ESPN would promote Pitt over UConn never made any sense & I posted a variety of reasons why at the time. But Jacobs adds important reasons in his column. Specifically the fact that CT's governor was promoting a tax abatement/jobs creation package for ESPN in CT during this very period when ESPN was supposedly ruining the state university's flagship's future athletic prospects makes absolutely no sense. The interest in Pitt has ACC fingerprints all over it, not ESPN.

I agree. The ACC did it. And they didn't need someone holding their hand. They wanted UConn. They still want UConn. I think DeFilippo didn't have as much to do with it, just as you're suggesting. I think it had much more to do with geography, the television market of Pittsburgh, but even more to do with the fact that Pittsburgh was becoming a target of the Big 12 and we had to prevent that from happening. The truth, I think, is that the ACC knew no one else was going to snatch up UConn right now and could hold off there whereas Pittsburgh they had to get now.

This is very simple. The ACC took Pitt over UConn because if they didn't scoop them up, the B12 was going to.

The ACC has long looked at the Big East as its developmental system and I'm sure that it's plan all along was to take the best programs in the BE to control the Eastern seaboard if/when the era of superconferences came to fruition.

When the B12 was restabilizing three names immediately came out as its targets - ND, ARK and Pitt. ND and ARK quickly rebuffed the B12 but Pitt (wisely) did not. Instead the Panthers openly courted the B12 and welcomed their advances. In fact I'm told that Pitt, West Virginia and Louisville were basically selling themselves as a package deal. I KNOW for a fact that Pitt and WVU were tied at the hip.

As a disclaimer though, the person who told me that - who was on the money throughout the entire process - also told me that there was almost no chance Pitt was going to get into the ACC or B1G (my preferences over the B12) and that the B12 would "never take TCU." So he didn't exactly bat .1000. Still, he was very accurate about the mechanics of these decisions and I think it also shows just how fluid this entire process has been and continues to be.

I'm sure that the ACC worried that with Penn State already in the B1G, if Pitt landed in the B12, the ACC would never have any hope of controlling the Eastern seaboard as it would have no teams in Pennsylvania - the second largest state in the entire Northeast. To achieve a presence in PA that likely would have forced the ACC to add either Temple or Villanova as its 16th team when it next expands - and frankly, neither option compares to some of the other viable candidates still out there.

That's why this went down like it did - quickly. The ACC knew that if they passed on Pitt now they would be forever frozen out of PA. Whereas if they grabbed Pitt now, UConn and/or Rutgers will still likely be there in five years or whenever the ACC next decides to expand.

Also, if their ultimate aim is to attract ND, Pitt becomes more valuable than UConn in that pursuit as well. Over the years, only Michigan State, Navy, USC and Purdue have played the Irish more often than have the Panthers. And when you factor in all sports Pitt probably moves to the head of the class by virtue of our long shared BE affiliation.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is obvious that DeFillippo lobbied hard against the Huskies and that likely did have some impact on the decision. However I think it was way down the list.

(10-13-2011 08:40 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  This is very simple. The ACC took Pitt over UConn because if they didn't scoop them up, the B12 was going to.

The ACC has long looked at the Big East as its developmental system and I'm sure that it's plan all along was to take the best programs in the BE to control the Eastern seaboard if/when the era of superconferences came to fruition.

When the B12 was restabilizing three names immediately came out as its targets - ND, ARK and Pitt. ND and ARK quickly rebuffed the B12 but Pitt (wisely) did not. Instead the Panthers openly courted the B12 and welcomed their advances. In fact I'm told that Pitt, West Virginia and Louisville were basically selling themselves as a package deal. I KNOW for a fact that Pitt and WVU were tied at the hip.

As a disclaimer though, the person who told me that - who was on the money throughout the entire process - also told me that there was almost no chance Pitt was going to get into the ACC or B1G (my preferences over the B12) and that the B12 would "never take TCU." So he didn't exactly bat .1000. Still, he was very accurate about the mechanics of these decisions and I think it also shows just how fluid this entire process has been and continues to be.

I'm sure that the ACC worried that with Penn State already in the B1G, if Pitt landed in the B12, the ACC would never have any hope of controlling the Eastern seaboard as it would have no teams in Pennsylvania - the second largest state in the entire Northeast. To achieve a presence in PA that likely would have forced the ACC to add either Temple or Villanova as its 16th team when it next expands - and frankly, neither option compares to some of the other viable candidates still out there.

That's why this went down like it did - quickly. The ACC knew that if they passed on Pitt now they would be forever frozen out of PA. Whereas if they grabbed Pitt now, UConn and/or Rutgers will still likely be there in five years or whenever the ACC next decides to expand.

Also, if their ultimate aim is to attract ND, Pitt becomes more valuable than UConn in that pursuit as well. Over the years, only Michigan State, Navy, USC and Purdue have played the Irish more often than have the Panthers. And when you factor in all sports Pitt probably moves to the head of the class by virtue of our long shared BE affiliation.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is obvious that DeFillippo lobbied hard against the Huskies and that likely did have some impact on the decision. However I think it was way down the list.

I am fascinated by this piece. I could, theoretically, understand why the B10 isn't interested in Pitt, but why in your friend's opinion wasn't the ACC interested?

I completely agree with everything you posted, Isaly. The ACC did what it did because it was in the best interests of the ACC. This however belies DeFilippo's statement that they did because "ESPN told us to." That childish statement ("The devil made me do it.") is what I disagree with. This was an ACC move, not an ESPN move.

I wondered that myself and basically he said that he didn't think that the ACC was going to expand. Then he said that if they ever did expand we would likely be behind UConn, Syracuse and Rutgers because of their access to NYC - the golden goose of media markets.

Honestly, even though I didn't like what I was hearing, it's not like what he said was outrageous so I never pushed it any further. And you have to understand that he was basically right on just about every prediction up to that point so I had no reason to doubt him there - even though I wanted to. However I'm sure that you can guess who my first phone call was to that Saturday morning as the news was breaking.

In my mind, I had always just kind of assumed that Syracuse and Pitt were the next in line and that we made the most sense as team's No. 13 and 14 in the ACC - which was always my preference over the B1G. I don't mean that in an arrogant way, that was just my belief.

I just looked at our complete profiles versus everyone else's and I thought that we were clearly in the driver's seat.

We are each highly regarded schools that have each enjoyed sustained periods of nationally significant football success. We're obviously each currently nationally significant basketball programs and we each have good TV numbers in both sports when our teams are strong.

Comparatively, UConn too is a national basketball power (more so than either Pitt or SU). And West Virginia draws good TV numbers nationally for football. For its part Rutgers is a very good school. However none of the others had all of the qualities in one package that I felt we had.

Fortunately for us, it turns out that the B12 and more importantly the ACC agrees with my rationale. And man oh day that was one sweet phone call to make!

If Mizzou goes to the SEC I would be very worried if I were a fan of Rutgers, USF and Cincy as I think they are most likely to be left out of the party once the music stops.

Of those three I would feel most badly for Rutgers, which is just now FINALLY getting its schitt together. Cincinnati also has done a tremendous job of building up their program and they probably have the best chance of sneaking into the B12 - provided A.) Mizzou leaves; B.) the league decides to expand to 12 teams; and C.) BYU again snubs that league. All of those things remain distinct possibilities so UC is still in play here, IMHO. Their percentage chances aren't great but they are better than USF's - which appears to have nowhere to go.

As for the Bulls, I honestly don't feel too badly for them. They have continued to play petty politics even as the ship has clearly begun to sink. Villanova too for that matter. Hell, if the BE football ship does sink and the Bulls are forced to re-apply to C-USA, if I'm UCF I would freeze them out of that league using Genshaft's own rationale. Then again I am petty and spiteful and I'm sure that UCF will be more magnanimous than that.

(10-13-2011 08:46 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I completely agree with everything you posted, Isaly. The ACC did what it did because it was in the best interests of the ACC. This however belies DeFilippo's statement that they did because "ESPN told us to." That childish statement ("The devil made me do it.") is what I disagree with. This was an ACC move, not an ESPN move.

I agree that the comments were ill advised and not accurate. What I note here is the complete lack of perspective as to WHY he felt the way he did.

Very easy to label him petty and vindictive by people who have never been sued. The fact is he was sued PERSONALLY (talk about vindictive!). Yes, the Pitt admins and the other plaintiffs did make comments - but most of the vitriol back then came from Connecticut state officials. Many of their public comments for all intents and purposes branded him as essentially a criminal, liar, and theif. One can only speculate what he went through when he was deposed. All for actions that EXACTLY mirror the actions other schools have taken since without any of this stuff happening in the aftermath.

While I agree that his comments were dumb, the animosity that he feels is underdstandable and is also felt by many in the BC community. If the shoes were reversed, Uconn fans would feel EXACTLY the same way.

(10-13-2011 09:01 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I wondered that myself and basically he said that he didn't think that the ACC was going to expand. Then he said that if they ever did expand we would likely be behind UConn, Syracuse and Rutgers because of their access to NYC - the golden goose of media markets.

Honestly, even though I didn't like what I was hearing, it's not like what he said was outrageous so I never pushed it any further. And you have to understand that he was basically right on just about every prediction up to that point so I had no reason to doubt him there - even though I wanted to. However I'm sure that you can guess who my first phone call was to that Saturday morning as the news was breaking.

In my mind, I had always just kind of assumed that Syracuse and Pitt were the next in line and that we made the most sense as team's No. 13 and 14 in the ACC - which was always my preference over the B1G. I don't mean that in an arrogant way, that was just my belief.

I just looked at our complete profiles versus everyone else's and I thought that we were clearly in the driver's seat.

We are each highly regarded schools that have each enjoyed sustained periods of nationally significant football success. We're obviously each currently nationally significant basketball programs and we each have good TV numbers in both sports when our teams are strong.

Comparatively, UConn too is a national basketball power (more so than either Pitt or SU). And West Virginia draws good TV numbers nationally for football. For its part Rutgers is a very good school. However none of the others had all of the qualities in one package that I felt we had.

Fortunately for us, it turns out that the B12 and more importantly the ACC agrees with my rationale. And man oh day that was one sweet phone call to make!

Isaly, in the spirit of friendly rivalry, I propose a comparison of UConn & Pitt.

Since UConn has joined the Big East, they have won 50 games while Pitt has won 51. Each has gone to a BCS bowl while UConn has tied for a 2nd championship in which the tie breaker did not favor them. UConn has gone to 5 bowl games & won 3, Pitt has gone to 3 bowl games & won 1.
Pitt clearly has the great tradition, but equally as clear is that they have shown no particular superiority in recent years. While tradition is great, I think a new conference wants to look at what the prospects are going forward. UConn has great facilities & excellent financial support, so I don't see what particular edge Pitt brings for football. It's not like Tony dorsett or Dan Marino is suddenly going to show up on the field playing for them.

As far as a market is concerned, UConn totally dominates a state with a population of 3.6 million & with no other major college or pro teams in the market. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Pitt's market is about 2.2 million & it has to compete within that market with the Steelers & with Penn State. As one of the premium state universities, Pitt certainly has alums elsewhere int he state & draws interest elsewher, so I give additional credit there. But it seems to me the market comparison is either a wash or slightly favors UConn.

Basketball is hands down UConn, the most dominant program in the country over the past 13 years. This isn't just a plus in the 2nd revenue sport, this is a plus in the sport that is most important in a basketball-first ACC. Seems like a big plus to me.

UConn then throws in the bonus of women's basketball. In addition, they compete for championships in every sport under the sun.

I think that the ACC interest came down to 2 factors, both of which you have mentioned. The ACC could build a wall on its western flank with Pitt & Syracuse - toward the goal of East Coast dominance. Second, Pitt & syracuse could both heighten their appeal to Notre Dame. In light of the Big XII interest in Pitt, I think that these are the factors that were decisive. I have to think that the ACC figured that they could always add Rutgers &/or UConn later to fill in the holes in their map. I actually have always thought that if ND comes, it would be Rutgers who would be #16 regardless of any advantages in the UConn athletic profile. Rutgers fills in the map better, half way between Boston & Washington/Baltimore. Rutgers also brings the bigger market even if you only compare the populations of NJ & CT. Finally, if ND is in the mix, they'd rather play a game in either New Brunswick or the Meadowlands than in East Hartford.

I think you all make some good points here. It makes sense that the ACC would take Pitt now for all the reasons you have mentioned. They add a Pennsylvania presence and maybe could help lure Notre Dame to the ACC (although I do not think ND will ever play in a D1 football conference).

With respect to DeFilippo; the man has always been an arrogant blowhard with a tendency toward diarrhea of the mouth. His latest comments are just another example of the man being unable to shut his mouth.

I am a Boston College fan. Here is my take on DeFilippo. He is responsible for BC leaving the Big East and joining the ACC. That move has been hugely popular among BC supporters and it bought him a lot of good will with Eagles fans. I think the move to the ACC maybe the best thing that ever happened to BC athletics. For that, DeFilippo deserves a great deal of credit.

He has also been able to coast along on a reasonably good size wave of BC athletic success. The BC football team has had something like 12 or 13 winning seasons in a row. (Obviously that streak is about to end this year but I will get to that later). BC has been to the ACC Championship Game in 2 of their first 6 years in the league and they have never had a losing record in conference since joining the ACC. (Again, all that ends this year).

BC has never been a basketball powerhouse but Al Skinner did have the Eagles in the NCAA tournament for something like 7 out of 10 years. The BC Hockey team has obviously been very successful.

All of this moderate athletic success along with the ACC move bought DeFilippo a lot of good will. He is getting very close to using up that good will. The Frank Spaziani hire has been an unmitigated disaster and this years BC football team is the worst they have had in over a decade. DeFilippo bungled the Jagozinski situation before that and had an awkward parting of ways with Al Skinner. Skinner never had national championship contending teams but he always had competitive teams and Al Skinner himself is a classy and well liked guy who never embarrassed himself or Boston College. Maybe the problem was that Skinner and DeFilippo are just too different. Skinner, understated and dignified and DeFilippo reckless, precocious and loud.

Long story short, DeFilippo's time is short at BC. The alumni and supporters are tired of his act and his constant running of the mouth. The failures of his recent coaching hires and the ineptness of this years football team will be icing on the cake.

That said, he holds a major grudge and a lot of resentment toward the University of Connecticut. The lawsuit still lingers in the minds of many BC fans and the UConn mens basketball coach is universally despised by the BC community for his constant demeaning and belittling of Boston College. Jim Calhoun suffers from the same affliction as DeFilippo in that he thinks his **** smells like roses and he can not shut his mouth.

As long as DeFilippo is around (which is not much longer in my opinion) he will always oppose UConn's entry to the ACC. It probably does not matter because the ACC is not run by Boston College. Far from it. The ACC belongs to Duke and UNC. If Swofford and Coach K want UConn in the ACC, then they will be in the ACC and there is nothing BC can do about it.

My two cents: I think the University of Connecticut would make a fine addition to the ACC. I think the rivalry with Boston College would be very intense almost immediately and would add a lot to the ACC as a whole. UConn and BC would also cement the ACC in the New England region. I am willing to put the lawsuit in the past but I just can not tolerate Jim Calhoun. I think his arrogance is offensive and his program skirts the very edges of the NCAA rulebook. I hope UConn gets in the ACC and I look forward to a strong New England rivalry with BC. I just hope Jim Calhoun is long gone by the time the Huskies join the conference.

Sorry for the long post

I don't think anyone would argue that Pitt & 'Cuse were good adds for the ACC (just as UConn would be). They are certainly deserving of their invitations, and I think both schools will do well against ACC competition.

My point throughout this discussion is not that UConn should have been picked over either of those schools, it's that GDF has been disingenuous in his comments.

1) He states he's upset about the lawsuit and UConn's public comments. If this was the case, he'd be working to block Pitt. Pitt was pushing just as hard (if not harder) for the lawsuit, and made just as many (if not more) public comments blasting BC as UConn did.

2) He is now stating that he's protecting BC's "turf". This is closer to the truth. There's much less interest in college FB in the NE than in other areas of the country. If UConn fades to "also ran" status, BC has the area to itself. Plus, BC's athletic programs aren't doing very well. If UConn gets relegated to a non BCS conference, not only will football suffer, but BBall will likely face difficulties as well.

It's kind of like the whole Yankees-Red Sox thing: what's better than a Yankee victory? A Red Sox loss.

I blame BC and GDF for #1, but not necessarily #2.

In the long run, I do think it would benefit BC to have another program in New England, as the rivalry would keep more fans interested in both FB programs. Since joining the ACC, BC has seen its average attendance decline in both FB and BB.

I do think that GDF and Shalala were significant influences in lobbying against UConn at the committee level. Did they "block" UConn? We'll probably never know, and it's kind of irrelevant. The bottom line is that UConn is not in the ACC (for now).

Is there any evidence to suggest Shalala was lobbying against Uconn?

(10-13-2011 09:25 AM)TommyC Wrote:  My two cents: I think the University of Connecticut would make a fine addition to the ACC. I think the rivalry with Boston College would be very intense almost immediately and would add a lot to the ACC as a whole. UConn and BC would also cement the ACC in the New England region. I am willing to put the lawsuit in the past but I just can not tolerate Jim Calhoun. I think his arrogance is offensive and his program skirts the very edges of the NCAA rulebook. I hope UConn gets in the ACC and I look forward to a strong New England rivalry with BC. I just hope Jim Calhoun is long gone by the time the Huskies join the conference.

Sorry for the long post

Tommy, thanks for your post. Completely agree with you on all points.

I hold Calhoun - despite his success - in the same contempt in which you
hold DeFilippo. Sometimes we have to tolerate a guy for who we have little or no use if we're to stay loyal.

I would love to see a rivalry between UConn & BC rekindled as would many of the BC fans whom I need. For all the pluses in the ACC, many of the BC fans I know miss the old rivalries in the Northeast & are happy to be reunited with Syracuse.

I have nothing against BC & in fact am somewhat partial to them since I paid 4 years for tuition there - for my daughter. The governor of CT is also partial to them since he paid 7 years of tuition there for himself - 4 as an undergrad & 3 more for law school. There are certainly ties between the 2 schools & their respective fan bases that are not reflected by the attitudes of guys like De Filippo & Calhoun.

I must add that I hated to see Al Skinner leave BC. The guy was completely a class act all the way & produced teams that were fun to watch & that were successful in good basketball conferences. The guy was a magician at finding top talent that other schools had overlooked. He was one of the good guys in college sports. It's always laughable to see blowhards like DeFilippo come in & fire guys like Skinner, then only to muck up the hires that they subsequently make on their own. Skinner has forgotten more about coaching & how to build a good a team than DeFilippo ever knew.

I think it is safe to say that JC is to BC fans what GDF is to UCONN fans. I don't think either will be leaving their respective jobs anytime soon. Given JC's success (forgetting the flip side of that success with his program), he will leave on his own terms at some point in time. While I am sure the BC admins. were not happy with GDF's comments, he has nevertheless enjoyed a solid relationship with his bosses and won't be going anywhere unless his recent comments somehow snowball.

(10-13-2011 10:02 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-13-2011 09:25 AM)TommyC Wrote:  My two cents: I think the University of Connecticut would make a fine addition to the ACC. I think the rivalry with Boston College would be very intense almost immediately and would add a lot to the ACC as a whole. UConn and BC would also cement the ACC in the New England region. I am willing to put the lawsuit in the past but I just can not tolerate Jim Calhoun. I think his arrogance is offensive and his program skirts the very edges of the NCAA rulebook. I hope UConn gets in the ACC and I look forward to a strong New England rivalry with BC. I just hope Jim Calhoun is long gone by the time the Huskies join the conference.

Sorry for the long post

Tommy, thanks for your post. Completely agree with you on all points.

I hold Calhoun - despite his success - in the same contempt in which you
hold DeFilippo. Sometimes we have to tolerate a guy for who we have little or no use if we're to stay loyal.

I would love to see a rivalry between UConn & BC rekindled as would many of the BC fans whom I need. For all the pluses in the ACC, many of the BC fans I know miss the old rivalries in the Northeast & are happy to be reunited with Syracuse.

I have nothing against BC & in fact am somewhat partial to them since I paid 4 years for tuition there - for my daughter. The governor of CT is also partial to them since he paid 7 years of tuition there for himself - 4 as an undergrad & 3 more for law school. There are certainly ties between the 2 schools & their respective fan bases that are not reflected by the attitudes of guys like De Filippo & Calhoun.

I must add that I hated to see Al Skinner leave BC. The guy was completely a class act all the way & produced teams that were fun to watch & that were successful in good basketball conferences. The guy was a magician at finding top talent that other schools had overlooked. He was one of the good guys in college sports. It's always laughable to see blowhards like DeFilippo come in & fire guys like Skinner, then only to muck up the hires that they subsequently make on their own. Skinner has forgotten more about coaching & how to build a good a team than DeFilippo ever knew.

Melky, while I agree with your comments about AS, it became obvious to not only BC fans but the local press that he was not recruiting as hard in his later years (one can speculate that this was due in part to key losses among his AC's who left for HC jobs). The program lacked energy and that more than anything else resulted in the diminished crowds.

Most fans felt that AS did a great job at BC but it was time for a change. So far, the fan base has been thrilled with SD and the energy he has brought to the program. Will he move BC BB forward? Only time will tell. This year looms to be a struggle as he will have a freshman dominated team. However, most of us feel really good about BC's longer term BB future.

BTW, most of the BC community supported GDF's handling of the BB coaching change.

(10-13-2011 09:15 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(10-13-2011 08:46 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I completely agree with everything you posted, Isaly. The ACC did what it did because it was in the best interests of the ACC. This however belies DeFilippo's statement that they did because "ESPN told us to." That childish statement ("The devil made me do it.") is what I disagree with. This was an ACC move, not an ESPN move.

I agree that the comments were ill advised and not accurate. What I note here is the complete lack of perspective as to WHY he felt the way he did.

Very easy to label him petty and vindictive by people who have never been sued. The fact is he was sued PERSONALLY (talk about vindictive!). Yes, the Pitt admins and the other plaintiffs did make comments - but most of the vitriol back then came from Connecticut state officials. Many of their public comments for all intents and purposes branded him as essentially a criminal, liar, and theif. One can only speculate what he went through when he was deposed. All for actions that EXACTLY mirror the actions other schools have taken since without any of this stuff happening in the aftermath.

While I agree that his comments were dumb, the animosity that he feels is underdstandable and is also felt by many in the BC community. If the shoes were reversed, Uconn fans would feel EXACTLY the same way.

No problem with anything you saa, Eagle. We all have jerks who work for our schools, starting with Jim Calhoun.

But I have to say in response to your post that a guy in DeFilippo's position has to understand that he's playing in the big leagues. If he can't stand the heat, then he'd better get out of the kitchen. He must develop a thicker skin. As soon as he lets his personal feelings intrude, then he can't do his job & can't serve the interests of his employer. It's not about him; it's about what's best for BC. If it's in BC's best interests to bring UConn into the ACC, then to oppose them is childish & serves only his personal agenda - which is not hwat he's being paid to do. This is as true for Jim Calhoun as it is for Gene DeFilippo.

If I were to take your approach, I could say that Calhoun's feelings & those of other CT officials as well as the fans are understandable. After all the State of CT spend tens of millions to upgrade facilities in expectation of joining a Big East that included Miami, VT, BC, & SU only to learn that 3 of these 4 were conspiring behind their backs to leave while lying to their faces about their commitment to the conference.

But again none of this matters. It's a big boy & big girl world. They have to deal with the realities with which they are confronted. Regardless of all the claims of fairness & unfairness, cooler heads are needed to achieve desired objectives & to work in the best interests of the institutions they're paid to represent.

(10-13-2011 10:39 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-13-2011 09:15 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(10-13-2011 08:46 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  I completely agree with everything you posted, Isaly. The ACC did what it did because it was in the best interests of the ACC. This however belies DeFilippo's statement that they did because "ESPN told us to." That childish statement ("The devil made me do it.") is what I disagree with. This was an ACC move, not an ESPN move.

I agree that the comments were ill advised and not accurate. What I note here is the complete lack of perspective as to WHY he felt the way he did.

Very easy to label him petty and vindictive by people who have never been sued. The fact is he was sued PERSONALLY (talk about vindictive!). Yes, the Pitt admins and the other plaintiffs did make comments - but most of the vitriol back then came from Connecticut state officials. Many of their public comments for all intents and purposes branded him as essentially a criminal, liar, and theif. One can only speculate what he went through when he was deposed. All for actions that EXACTLY mirror the actions other schools have taken since without any of this stuff happening in the aftermath.

While I agree that his comments were dumb, the animosity that he feels is underdstandable and is also felt by many in the BC community. If the shoes were reversed, Uconn fans would feel EXACTLY the same way.

No problem with anything you saa, Eagle. We all have jerks who work for our schools, starting with Jim Calhoun.

But I have to say in response to your post that a guy in DeFilippo's position has to understand that he's playing in the big leagues. If he can't stand the heat, then he'd better get out of the kitchen. He must develop a thicker skin. As soon as he lets his personal feelings intrude, then he can't do his job & can't serve the interests of his employer. It's not about him; it's about what's best for BC. If it's in BC's best interests to bring UConn into the ACC, then to oppose them is childish & serves only his personal agenda - which is not hwat he's being paid to do. This is as true for Jim Calhoun as it is for Gene DeFilippo.

If I were to take your approach, I could say that Calhoun's feelings & those of other CT officials as well as the fans are understandable. After all the State of CT spend tens of millions to upgrade facilities in expectation of joining a Big East that included Miami, VT, BC, & SU only to learn that 3 of these 4 were conspiring behind their backs to leave while lying to their faces about their commitment to the conference.

But again none of this matters. It's a big boy & big girl world. They have to deal with the realities with which they are confronted. Regardless of all the claims of fairness & unfairness, cooler heads are needed to achieve desired objectives & to work in the best interests of the institutions they're paid to represent.

You and I basically agree, Melky. I would only add, however, that it's one thing to harbor I'll feelings toward another institution. I can certainly understand JC's and UCONN fan feelings about how things went down. It's another to brand people as, in essence, a criminal, liar, and thief and drag them through a baseless legal nightmare.

As I said before, I am not defending his comments. I am only trying to provide some perspective. Like all of us, he is human. I am not sure any other AD or college official has ever gone through what he went through.