Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
Author Message
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,287
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 162
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #41
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-13-2019 01:14 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(02-13-2019 12:20 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(02-12-2019 11:35 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  BTW, there was never any talk of an eastern seaboard conference...

There was talk in April/May of 1985 and January of 1989. Although it was just that, talk.

In 1985 from the Philly Inquirer:

"There have been ongoing discussions (about an all-sports conference) for five or six years," the Temple president said. "But there is nothing imminent. I know the president of West Virginia is very interested."

There has been talk in the past of a possible Seaboard Conference that would include Florida State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Rutgers, Temple and West Virginia. However, Liacouras said a more feasible arrangement would include Temple, Penn State, Rutgers and West Virginia as a starting base.
"Each of us has a comprehensive program which includes graduate and professional schools, and all are in the Northeast," Liacouras said.


So there was talk, and the President of Temple was aware of it. Yes, it was radical at the time, but it was floated out there. By whom? I have no idea.

On a related note, West Virginia's athletic council voted to leave the A10 and join the Metro in the mid-80's (WVU President, Golden Gee, initially supported this).

In 1989 the "Eastern Seaboard Conference" was talked about amongst AD's of West Virginia, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, FSU and Penn State. It was blown up by newspapers, but quickly downplayed by those involved as a "30 second conversation over breakfast".

* Later in May of 1989, AD's actually met and discussed the financial matters regarding a football conference. So this was more serious. Mentioned attending Army, Boston College, Florida State, Miami, Navy, Pitt, Rutgers, South Carolina, Syracuse, Temple and West Virginia. Penn State was a no-show.

Interesting, I was unaware of this. By 1989, the schools have direct control of their TV rights. The landscape is shifting, and it would make sense for a group of independents to chat about ideas for how to position themselves together in the market. However, there would not have been any urgency, since the CFA was still functioning and still included the SEC and Notre Dame.

The urgency came when the Big Ten invited Penn State in December 1989, sending Syracuse, Pitt and BC into panic mode. Things became even urgent when Notre Dame abandoned the CFA in February 1990 by signing its own TV deal with NBC. This was followed by the SEC's decision to expand, which would have at a minimum introduced a threat that they were considering leaving the CFA.

Right, and I believe Penn State was in talks behind closed doors with the Big Ten in early 1989, which is why they were blowing off invites and such. I know they wanted an all or nothing conference and it looked as if that wasn’t happening with their chief rivals Pitt and Syracuse.
02-13-2019 03:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,261
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 219
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #42
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-13-2019 03:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(02-13-2019 01:14 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(02-13-2019 12:20 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(02-12-2019 11:35 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  BTW, there was never any talk of an eastern seaboard conference...

There was talk in April/May of 1985 and January of 1989. Although it was just that, talk.

In 1985 from the Philly Inquirer:

"There have been ongoing discussions (about an all-sports conference) for five or six years," the Temple president said. "But there is nothing imminent. I know the president of West Virginia is very interested."

There has been talk in the past of a possible Seaboard Conference that would include Florida State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Rutgers, Temple and West Virginia. However, Liacouras said a more feasible arrangement would include Temple, Penn State, Rutgers and West Virginia as a starting base.
"Each of us has a comprehensive program which includes graduate and professional schools, and all are in the Northeast," Liacouras said.


So there was talk, and the President of Temple was aware of it. Yes, it was radical at the time, but it was floated out there. By whom? I have no idea.

On a related note, West Virginia's athletic council voted to leave the A10 and join the Metro in the mid-80's (WVU President, Golden Gee, initially supported this).

In 1989 the "Eastern Seaboard Conference" was talked about amongst AD's of West Virginia, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, FSU and Penn State. It was blown up by newspapers, but quickly downplayed by those involved as a "30 second conversation over breakfast".

* Later in May of 1989, AD's actually met and discussed the financial matters regarding a football conference. So this was more serious. Mentioned attending Army, Boston College, Florida State, Miami, Navy, Pitt, Rutgers, South Carolina, Syracuse, Temple and West Virginia. Penn State was a no-show.

Interesting, I was unaware of this. By 1989, the schools have direct control of their TV rights. The landscape is shifting, and it would make sense for a group of independents to chat about ideas for how to position themselves together in the market. However, there would not have been any urgency, since the CFA was still functioning and still included the SEC and Notre Dame.

The urgency came when the Big Ten invited Penn State in December 1989, sending Syracuse, Pitt and BC into panic mode. Things became even urgent when Notre Dame abandoned the CFA in February 1990 by signing its own TV deal with NBC. This was followed by the SEC's decision to expand, which would have at a minimum introduced a threat that they were considering leaving the CFA.

Right, and I believe Penn State was in talks behind closed doors with the Big Ten in early 1989, which is why they were blowing off invites and such. I know they wanted an all or nothing conference and it looked as if that wasn’t happening with their chief rivals Pitt and Syracuse.
As I think about it, it is pretty obvious that Penn State's biggest mistake was delay. Syracuse began meeting with Providence, Georgetown and St. John's to discuss forming what would become the Big East in 1978. https://cuse.com/sports/2001/8/8/history.aspx Syracuse had no particular rivalry with Providence or Georgetown, only St. John's. BC was not invited until later, once the initial four had decided to move forward.

Paterno didn't make his move until 1981 (or possibly 1980, at the earliest). By then, the Big East was a huge success and Syracuse and BC would have something significant to lose if they left. In 1978 neither had nothing to lose.

For the 10 seasons from 1968 though 1978, Syracuse played the football schools and the early Big East members the following number of times:

Penn State: 20 (home and home every season)
Pittsburgh: 10
West Virginia: 10
Temple: 10
Rutgers: 8 (8 consecutive seasons from 1970-78)
BC: 5 (5 consecutive seasons from 1973-1978)

St. John's: 10
UConn: 7 (6 consecutive seasons from 1968-1974)
Providence: 1
Georgetown: 0
Seton Hall: 0
Villanova: 0

In other words, Syracuse had significant ongoing basketball rivalries with its fellow football schools, not with this group of basketball schools (aside from St. John's).

These schools had made the following number of NCAA and NIT appearances during the same 10 years:

Syracuse: NCAA 6(Final Four 1975), NIT 2

Rutgers: NCAA 2 (Final Four 1976), NIT 5
Temple: NCAA 2, NIT 2
BC: NCAA 1, NIT 2
Pittsburgh: NCAA 1 (Regional Finals 1974), NIT 1
Penn State: 0
West Virginia: 0

St. John's: NCAA 5, NIT 5
Providence: NCAA 5 (Final Four 1973), NIT 3
Villanova: NCAA 5 (Final Four 1971), NIT 1 (1971 results vacated by NCAA)
Georgetown: NCAA 2, NIT 3
UConn: NCAA 2, NIT 2
Seton Hall: NCAA 0, NIT 2

The non-FBS basketball schools that were early members of the Big East collectively had quite a bit stronger history than the FBS football schools, aside from Syracuse. Undoubtedly, this is why the founding group was talking.

It is worth noting that the football schools generally had better basketball facilities.

Syracuse: Manley Field House, capacity 9,536

West Virginia: WVU Coliseum, capacity 14,000
Penn State: Rec Hall, capacity 8,600 (record crowd 1973)
Rutgers: Louis Brown Athletic Center, capacity 8,000
Pittsburgh: Fitzgerald Field House, capacity 5,308 (1978), expanded to 6,360 in 1980.

Providence: Providence Civic Center, capacity 13,000
UConn: Hartford Civic Center, capacity 11,000 (expanded to 15,000 in 1979)
St. John's: Alumni Hall, capacity 6,000

All other schools played in smaller campus gyms with capacities in the 3,000-4,000 range, although all had access to larger NBA or NHL arenas.

The groups were present in the following large TV markets (the market ranking is my recollection of the rankings at the time):
New York (1): Rutgers, St. John's, Seton Hall
Philadelphia (4): Temple, Villanova
Boston (6): BC
Washington DC (8): Georgetown
Pittsburgh (11): Pittsburgh
Hartford (22): UConn

My point is that in 1978, Syracuse and BC would have had significant interest in an all sports conference as an alternative to the Big East. By the time the option was presented to them, the Big East was an overwhelming success, and they would have made a significant sacrifice by leaving.

Because the Eastern Independents stuck together for football after the decision to decline Penn State's invitation and the Big East's decision to bypass Penn State, they lost nothing on the football side. Even when Penn State did leave, SU, BC and Pittsburgh were extremely fortunate to "replace" Penn State with Miami, maintaining a solid football arrangement until around 2000, when the Big East's second TV contract for football turned out to be a disappointment.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2019 09:41 AM by orangefan.)
02-14-2019 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
megadrone Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,137
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 38
I Root For: Rutgers
Location: NJ
Post: #43
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-14-2019 03:42 PM)orangefan Wrote:  As I think about it, it is pretty obvious that Penn State's biggest mistake was delay. Syracuse began meeting with Providence, Georgetown and St. John's to discuss forming what would become the Big East in 1978. https://cuse.com/sports/2001/8/8/history.aspx Syracuse had no particular rivalry with Providence or Georgetown, only St. John's. BC was not invited until later, once the initial four had decided to move forward.

Paterno didn't make his move until 1981 (or possibly 1980, at the earliest). By then, the Big East was a huge success and Syracuse and BC would have something significant to lose if they left. In 1978 neither had nothing to lose.

For the 10 seasons from 1968 though 1978, Syracuse played the football schools and the early Big East members the following number of times:

Penn State: 20 (home and home every season)
Pittsburgh: 10
West Virginia: 10
Temple: 10
Rutgers: 8 (8 consecutive seasons from 1970-78)
BC: 5 (5 consecutive seasons from 1973-1978)

St. John's: 10
UConn: 7 (6 consecutive seasons from 1968-1974)
Providence: 1
Georgetown: 0
Seton Hall: 0
Villanova: 0

In other words, Syracuse had significant ongoing basketball rivalries with its fellow football schools, not with this group of basketball schools (aside from St. John's).

These schools had made the following number of NCAA and NIT appearances during the same 10 years:

Syracuse: NCAA 6(Final Four 1975), NIT 2

Rutgers: NCAA 2 (Final Four 1976), NIT 5
Temple: NCAA 2, NIT 2
BC: NCAA 1, NIT 2
Pittsburgh: NCAA 1 (Regional Finals 1974), NIT 1
Penn State: 0
West Virginia: 0

St. John's: NCAA 5, NIT 5
Providence: NCAA 5 (Final Four 1973), NIT 3
Villanova: NCAA 5 (Final Four 1971), NIT 1 (1971 results vacated by NCAA)
Georgetown: NCAA 2, NIT 3
UConn: NCAA 2, NIT 2
Seton Hall: NCAA 0, NIT 2

The non-FBS basketball schools that were early members of the Big East collectively had quite a bit stronger history than the FBS football schools, aside from Syracuse. Undoubtedly, this is why the founding group was talking.

It is worth noting that the football schools generally had better basketball facilities.

Syracuse: Manley Field House, capacity 9,536

West Virginia: WVU Coliseum, capacity 14,000
Penn State: Rec Hall, capacity 8,600 (record crowd 1973)
Rutgers: Louis Brown Athletic Center, capacity 8,000
Pittsburgh: Fitzgerald Field House, capacity 5,308 (1978), expanded to 6,360 in 1980.

Providence: Providence Civic Center, capacity 13,000
UConn: Hartford Civic Center, capacity 11,000 (expanded to 15,000 in 1979)
St. John's: Alumni Hall, capacity 6,000

All other schools played in smaller campus gyms with capacities in the 3,000-4,000 range, although all had access to larger NBA or NHL arenas.

The groups were present in the following large TV markets (the market ranking is my recollection of the rankings at the time):
New York (1): Rutgers, St. John's, Seton Hall
Philadelphia (4): Temple, Villanova
Boston (6): BC
Washington DC (8): Georgetown
Pittsburgh (11): Pittsburgh
Hartford (22): UConn

My point is that in 1978, Syracuse and BC would have had significant interest in an all sports conference as an alternative to the Big East. By the time the option was presented to them, the Big East was an overwhelming success, and they would have made a significant sacrifice by leaving.

Because the Eastern Independents stuck together for football after the decision to decline Penn State's invitation and the Big East's decision to bypass Penn State, they lost nothing on the football side. Even when Penn State did leave, SU, BC and Pittsburgh were extremely fortunate to "replace" Penn State with Miami, maintaining a solid football arrangement until at least 2000, when the Big East's second TV contract for football turned out to be a disappointment.

Given who Syracuse was playing on a regular basis, you wonder why they weren't in the Eastern 8. PSU, Rutgers, Pitt, WVU and Villanova were all members there (although PSU left for a while). If BC and Syracuse had joined, that would have been the all sports conference (espeically if Temple joins in 1982 after Villanova drops football).
02-14-2019 06:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gosports1 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,412
Joined: Sep 2008
Reputation: 122
I Root For: providence
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
still find it curious why an eastern league wasn't formed 50 plus years ago. P10 SEC, Big 8 ACC B10 have/had all been around for a long time.



side note about he founding 4 of the BE I think Gavitt and Crouthamel had a personal connection. College roommates maybe?
02-14-2019 10:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MissouriStateBears Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,539
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Missouri State
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
Got to remember the Ivy League was the east's powerhouse league for a long time.
02-14-2019 11:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,261
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 219
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #46
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-14-2019 10:55 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  still find it curious why an eastern league wasn't formed 50 plus years ago. P10 SEC, Big 8 ACC B10 have/had all been around for a long time.



side note about he founding 4 of the BE I think Gavitt and Crouthamel had a personal connection. College roommates maybe?

Good catch, both were Dartmouth, Class of '60. I never knew that before.

With respect to forming an Eastern conference 50 or 60 years ago, you have to keep in mind that the Eastern schools were never as homogeneous as the members of the Big Ten or SEC.

In 1950, there were 24 football independents playing in the East. However, the early '50's were a tumultuous time for college sports. There were the point shaving scandals in basketball, a couple of academic cheating scandals in football, and major debates over the structure and amounts of athletic scholarships, and whether to allow televising of college football games and, if so, who should control those rights.

Disagreements over how to deal with these challenges led to different decisions by different schools. By 1955, the Ivy League (which banned athletic scholarships) had formed, NYU, Fordham, Georgetown and Duquesne had all dropped football, and Temple had dropped down to college division for football. This left 11 football independents in the East: Army, Navy, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Colgate, Rutgers, BC, Holy Cross, Boston University, and Villanova. Of these, Army, Navy, Penn State, Pittsburgh and Syracuse were all clearly committed to competing at a national level. Others had a range of commitment levels, varying from essentially matching the non scholarship approach of the Ivy League (e.g., Rutgers) to a level close to but not quite as great as those committed to playing at a national level (e.g., BC).

Of course, on the basketball side, there still were more than 20 independents, making it relatively easy for schools to build a schedule that met their individual needs with respect to geography and competitive level.

It was really the NCAA decision to split Division 1 football into 1-A and 1-AA that created a group of schools that was potentially homogeneous enough to form a conference for football. Division 1-AA started play in 1978, but Division 1 schools weren't required to meeting 1-A standards until 1982. Some schools chose to increase their commitment, e.g., Rutgers and Temple, while others dropped to 1-AA. This left 9 Eastern Independents in Division 1-A: Army, Navy, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia, BC, Rutgers and Temple.

At the same time, the NCAA was modifying the rules for participation in the NCAA Tournament, expanding the field to 32 and allowing two schools per conference to participate beginning in 1975, and expanding the field to 48 and allowing unlimited schools per conference to participate beginning in 1980. This eliminated the primary benefit to remaining independent in basketball. Finally, this same period saw the birth of cable sports, with ESPN launched in 1979, SportsChannel launched in 1979, and USA launched in 1977 at the original Madison Square Garden Network.

These factors collectively created an extremely positive environment in which to form a conference. As a result, college basketball went from 19 conferences and 81 independents in 1973-74 to 28 conferences to 21 independents in 1979-80. Again, 1977-78 was the time to strike. 1980-81 was too late.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2019 09:46 AM by orangefan.)
02-15-2019 08:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,287
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 162
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #47
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
There is one homogenous northeastern conference that existed back in the 40's, the Yankee Conference, made-up of northeastern land grant schools (although Boston Univ. joined in the 70's). Funny enough, a few of the northeastern sportswriters mentioning these schools in the 80's mocked them and their agriculture-centric mission in general. A lot of belittling the fanbases as bumpkins almost.

[Image: YC%2Bhelmets%2B85.JPG]

It seems the "YanCon" became pretty much just a football-only conference in the mid-70's for whatever reason. In the 80's they added Richmond, Delaware, and Villanova. Some more schools were added in the 90's and then it became the A10 football conference and now the CAA football conference.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2019 11:34 AM by esayem.)
02-15-2019 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,261
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 219
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #48
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-15-2019 11:33 AM)esayem Wrote:  There is one homogenous northeastern conference that existed back in the 40's, the Yankee Conference, made-up of northeastern land grant schools (although Boston Univ. joined in the 70's). Funny enough, a few of the northeastern sportswriters mentioning these schools in the 80's mocked them and their agriculture-centric mission in general. A lot of belittling the fanbases as bumpkins almost.

It seems the "YanCon" became pretty much just a football-only conference in the mid-70's for whatever reason. In the 80's they added Richmond, Delaware, and Villanova. Some more schools were added in the 90's and then it became the A10 football conference and now the CAA football conference.

No doubt that the Yankee Conference was a pretty homogeneous group of schools, as was the Ivy League. However, the Yankee was never a D-1 conference until Division 1-AA was created. The Ivy League was a D-1 conference, but was formed on the basis that nobody would offer athletic scholarships. Because of this, unlike the performance of its members prior to its official formation, the level of play of its members after its formation was rarely at a national level.

My point is that there was not a sufficient number of Eastern schools legitimately trying to compete at a national level to form a conference of homogeneous schools until the 1-A/1-AA split.
02-15-2019 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,287
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 162
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #49
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-15-2019 01:12 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(02-15-2019 11:33 AM)esayem Wrote:  There is one homogenous northeastern conference that existed back in the 40's, the Yankee Conference, made-up of northeastern land grant schools (although Boston Univ. joined in the 70's). Funny enough, a few of the northeastern sportswriters mentioning these schools in the 80's mocked them and their agriculture-centric mission in general. A lot of belittling the fanbases as bumpkins almost.

It seems the "YanCon" became pretty much just a football-only conference in the mid-70's for whatever reason. In the 80's they added Richmond, Delaware, and Villanova. Some more schools were added in the 90's and then it became the A10 football conference and now the CAA football conference.

No doubt that the Yankee Conference was a pretty homogeneous group of schools, as was the Ivy League. However, the Yankee was never a D-1 conference until Division 1-AA was created. The Ivy League was a D-1 conference, but was formed on the basis that nobody would offer athletic scholarships. Because of this, unlike the performance of its members prior to its official formation, the level of play of its members after its formation was rarely at a national level.

My point is that there was not a sufficient number of Eastern schools legitimately trying to compete at a national level to form a conference of homogeneous schools until the 1-A/1-AA split.

Correct, although the Yankee was D1 for other sports including basketball until they stopped sponsoring the sport after the 1975-76 season. Football was rated at the “college division” until 1-AA, if I’m not mistaken? I know they had some Tangerine Bowl appearances.

There were so many eastern independents back then, it appears scheduling wasn’t complicated.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2019 03:01 PM by esayem.)
02-15-2019 03:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MissouriStateBears Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,539
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 88
I Root For: Missouri State
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-14-2019 03:42 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(02-13-2019 03:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(02-13-2019 01:14 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(02-13-2019 12:20 PM)esayem Wrote:  [quote='Dr. Isaly von Yinzer' pid='15902543' dateline='1550032520']
BTW, there was never any talk of an eastern seaboard conference...

There was talk in April/May of 1985 and January of 1989. Although it was just that, talk.

In 1985 from the Philly Inquirer:

"There have been ongoing discussions (about an all-sports conference) for five or six years," the Temple president said. "But there is nothing imminent. I know the president of West Virginia is very interested."

There has been talk in the past of a possible Seaboard Conference that would include Florida State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Rutgers, Temple and West Virginia. However, Liacouras said a more feasible arrangement would include Temple, Penn State, Rutgers and West Virginia as a starting base.
"Each of us has a comprehensive program which includes graduate and professional schools, and all are in the Northeast," Liacouras said.


So there was talk, and the President of Temple was aware of it. Yes, it was radical at the time, but it was floated out there. By whom? I have no idea.

On a related note, West Virginia's athletic council voted to leave the A10 and join the Metro in the mid-80's (WVU President, Golden Gee, initially supported this).

In 1989 the "Eastern Seaboard Conference" was talked about amongst AD's of West Virginia, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, FSU and Penn State. It was blown up by newspapers, but quickly downplayed by those involved as a "30 second conversation over breakfast".

* Later in May of 1989, AD's actually met and discussed the financial matters regarding a football conference. So this was more serious. Mentioned attending Army, Boston College, Florida State, Miami, Navy, Pitt, Rutgers, South Carolina, Syracuse, Temple and West Virginia. Penn State was a no-show.

Interesting, I was unaware of this. By 1989, the schools have direct control of their TV rights. The landscape is shifting, and it would make sense for a group of independents to chat about ideas for how to position themselves together in the market. However, there would not have been any urgency, since the CFA was still functioning and still included the SEC and Notre Dame.

The urgency came when the Big Ten invited Penn State in December 1989, sending Syracuse, Pitt and BC into panic mode. Things became even urgent when Notre Dame abandoned the CFA in February 1990 by signing its own TV deal with NBC. This was followed by the SEC's decision to expand, which would have at a minimum introduced a threat that they were considering leaving the CFA.

Even when Penn State did leave, SU, BC and Pittsburgh were extremely fortunate to "replace" Penn State with Miami, maintaining a solid football arrangement until around 2000, when the Big East's second TV contract for football turned out to be a disappointment.

Which ironically that second tv contract was a disappointment mainly because Miami was in their down period.
02-15-2019 06:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,282
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 83
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
Anyone with some old Big East knowledge know why Penn St was unacceptable to the Big East (by one vote) but Pitt was okay?
02-19-2019 10:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,287
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 162
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #52
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-19-2019 10:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Anyone with some old Big East knowledge know why Penn St was unacceptable to the Big East (by one vote) but Pitt was okay?

Metro location comes to mind. I think it was also a counter move to ensure Syracuse and BC remained because they both played 1-A football. So it sort of killed JoePa’s all-sports idea.
02-20-2019 05:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,823
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 537
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #53
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
Pitt did not have Joe Paterno and had a good basketball program in an urban area.
02-20-2019 07:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,261
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 219
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #54
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-20-2019 05:18 AM)esayem Wrote:  
(02-19-2019 10:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Anyone with some old Big East knowledge know why Penn St was unacceptable to the Big East (by one vote) but Pitt was okay?

Metro location comes to mind. I think it was also a counter move to ensure Syracuse and BC remained because they both played 1-A football. So it sort of killed JoePa’s all-sports idea.

There's no question that Pittsburgh fit the Big East vision of schools in major television markets and that Penn State did not. In addition, inviting only Pittsburgh was a sufficient move to ensure that Syracuse and BC stayed in the Big East.

I know that some people bemoan the Big East's failure to invite Penn State and/or the failure to form an all sports conference. However, in my view, Penn State was always going to end up in the Big Ten, so it doesn't really matter.

The following is Jake Crouthamel's description of the Penn State saga of 1981 from https://cuse.com/sports/2001/8/8/history.aspx
Quote:After only two years of existence as a conference formed specifically for men's basketball, football became an issue. Joe Paterno, head football coach and then Director of Athletics at Penn State, had been trying to put together an all-sports conference of the eastern Division IA independent schools. They included Syracuse, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, West Virginia and Temple. While our football fortunes would be well served through such an alignment, it would have been a step backward for men's basketball. To enter into such an alignment Syracuse and Boston College would have had to leave the BIG EAST. With the reluctance of B.C. and Syracuse to do so, Penn State then asked for membership in the BIG EAST. This was a turning point in the Conferences history. If Penn State was accepted, our football would be protected. If Penn State was rejected, B.C. and Syracuse might have no other option but to leave the BIG EAST, and join together with the other Eastern independents. To expand membership in The BIG EAST Conference six affirmative votes were necessary. The vote was 5-3. Instead of taking Penn State, we invited Pittsburgh as the ninth member. At that time Pittsburgh and Penn State were bitter rivals, and Pittsburgh was less than enamored with aligning itself with Penn State. Pitt's membership in the BIG EAST, along with B.C. and Syracuse, checkmated Penn State's eastern all-sports conference, and gave the Conference one more Division IA school. This football issue nearly caused the premature demise of the BIG EAST. Clearly, three schools in the BIG EAST had no concept of the importance of football, but the others realized that this decision not to invite Penn State would come back to haunt us. In fact, football would dictate every future consideration of membership expansion of our "basketball" conference.
02-20-2019 08:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panite Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,632
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 106
I Root For: Owls-SC-RU-Navy
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(01-30-2019 09:36 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The Eastern Athletic Association (nicknamed the Eastern 8, originally the Eastern Collegiate Basketball League, and later the Atlantic 10) started out as a non-football circuit in the late '70s with Duquesne, George Washington, Massachusetts, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Villanova, and West Virginia. Would it have been plausible to add I-A football around that time? Half the teams were already I-A independents, and they could have added BC and Syracuse as FB-only affiliates. Presumably, when the Big East formed shortly afterward, Villanova would still have left, and perhaps Temple is tapped as a replacement. Pittsburgh is less inclined to leave for the BE due to the FB commitment in the EAA. Penn State doesn't even apply for the BE, as their needs are met with the EAA. Tack on another FB affiliate (VT, Miami, FSU...), and you've got 8 football schools and 8 basketball schools.

Within 10-15 years, maybe you get something like this on the east coast:

EAA (10 FB, 12 BB)
Full: Florida State, Miami-FL, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Temple, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
NFB: Duquesne, George Washington, Massachusetts, Notre Dame
FBO: Boston College, Syracuse

Big East (0 FB, 8 BB)
NFB: Boston College, Connecticut, Georgetown, Providence, Seton Hall, St. John's, Syracuse, Villanova

ACC (8 FB, 8 BB)
Full: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, NC State, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Eventually, perhaps it's the ACC that gets eaten rather than doing the eating.

What do you think?

Answer - NO.

First ND would have joined the Catholic schools in the BE for BB and Olympic Spots.

Second Penn St would have bolted for the B-10 anyway, with Rutgers riding their coattails.

Third Florida St and Miami would bolt for the ACC - a southern based league with the first offer they received. Syracuse and BC would follow giving the ACC a true Atlantic COAST Conference.

VT ends up in the ACC with Virginia. Pitt ends up in the B-10 with Penn State if Maryland doesn't bite on the B-10 offer or they end up in the B-12 with West Virginia.

Temple ends up in the MAC with UMASS as a travel partner or in CUSA.
04-jawdrop 02-13-banana 02-13-banana 02-13-banana COGS COGS COGS 04-cheers
02-22-2019 10:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,818
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #56
RE: Could the Eastern 8 have become a power football conference?
(02-22-2019 10:02 AM)panite Wrote:  
(01-30-2019 09:36 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The Eastern Athletic Association (nicknamed the Eastern 8, originally the Eastern Collegiate Basketball League, and later the Atlantic 10) started out as a non-football circuit in the late '70s with Duquesne, George Washington, Massachusetts, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Villanova, and West Virginia. Would it have been plausible to add I-A football around that time? Half the teams were already I-A independents, and they could have added BC and Syracuse as FB-only affiliates. Presumably, when the Big East formed shortly afterward, Villanova would still have left, and perhaps Temple is tapped as a replacement. Pittsburgh is less inclined to leave for the BE due to the FB commitment in the EAA. Penn State doesn't even apply for the BE, as their needs are met with the EAA. Tack on another FB affiliate (VT, Miami, FSU...), and you've got 8 football schools and 8 basketball schools.

Within 10-15 years, maybe you get something like this on the east coast:

EAA (10 FB, 12 BB)
Full: Florida State, Miami-FL, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Temple, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
NFB: Duquesne, George Washington, Massachusetts, Notre Dame
FBO: Boston College, Syracuse

Big East (0 FB, 8 BB)
NFB: Boston College, Connecticut, Georgetown, Providence, Seton Hall, St. John's, Syracuse, Villanova

ACC (8 FB, 8 BB)
Full: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, NC State, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Eventually, perhaps it's the ACC that gets eaten rather than doing the eating.

What do you think?

Answer - NO.

First ND would have joined the Catholic schools in the BE for BB and Olympic Spots.

Second Penn St would have bolted for the B-10 anyway, with Rutgers riding their coattails.

Third Florida St and Miami would bolt for the ACC - a southern based league with the first offer they received. Syracuse and BC would follow giving the ACC a true Atlantic COAST Conference.

VT ends up in the ACC with Virginia. Pitt ends up in the B-10 with Penn State if Maryland doesn't bite on the B-10 offer or they end up in the B-12 with West Virginia.

Temple ends up in the MAC with UMASS as a travel partner or in CUSA.

I can see ND just as easily spurning this alternate EAA for the Big East as joining the EAA.

Penn State has most of what they always wanted in this scenario, so I don't believe they would bolt for the Big Ten.

A strong EAA that's not really divided between FB and BB interests (as the Big East was) is in a much stronger position relative to the ACC. I think the EAA eats the ACC, but at the very least it's a tossup as to which survives as a power conference.
(This post was last modified: 02-22-2019 04:27 PM by Nerdlinger.)
02-22-2019 04:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.