Re: A Sound Deal
posted at 2/3/2011 8:35 PM EST
In Response to Re: A Sound Deal
[QUOTE]Old SanDog, 1. Dr. Tom DID leave The Institute (it was then BC) as a result of the scandal. He, who'd led a model life, was horrified at what his players did at the bidding of organized crime. Check your facs before you make another false claim. 2. So you are upset at the prospect of Bruce Pearl returning to his alma mater. Well, let's try this: Which is worse: a coach who violated NCAA rules about having recruits to his house for a barbecue, or a school President - and a priest at that - who misled a whole conference about the school's intent, while negotiating on the sly with another conference? Hmmmmm
Posted by Longputter[/QUOTE]
More blather from the putter
Not even sure what your point is about Davis, but the betting scandal went on for TWO YEARS under his watch.
Your other hero Bruce Pearl was suspended for recruiting violations and for LYING about it to investigators
Here are the facts about BC, Fr Leahy and the ACC
After the June 2003 vote where BC was not voted in to the ACC, nobody from BC ever said or did anything to suggest that BC had a fiirm commitment to staying in the ACC. Here are some direct quotes from the minutes of the July BE meeting"The group then visits the question of its commmitment to each other. Fr Leahy suggest that we defer this discussion"
"Bill Leahy indicates that he never felt the Big East had a committment to excellence and, further it had difficulty in balancing basketball/football issues. If people within the room at some point feel uncomfortablle about the direction of the league and, secondly, is presented with an attractive alternative, they would pay the $5M penalty and give the 27 month notice"
How could anyone conclude from this that BC was happy with the BE and was committed to staying a member? There is nothing in the meeting minutes to suggest that BC was planning to stay in the BE.
After the no vote on BC, the ACC focused on asking the NCAA to allow a conference title game with only 11 members. When the NCAA said no to this in September, Fr Leahy told the BE he intended to open discussions again with the ACC. Here is a qote from the October 1 meeting minutes"Fr Leahy then speaks to the potential of a possile marriage between Boston College and the ACC. He explains that because of recent media reports - and at his board's urging he must determine how genuine the ACC's reported interest in Boston College as a potential 12th member is before he is willing to commit BC to an exit penalty larger than already agreed to $5M"
How is any of that misleading? How could anyone not conclude that BC had every intention of leaving the BE at the first opportunity?
Please cite 1 source (not from a BC hater on an internet message board) that shows that BC lied or misled at any point in this process
I would love to see it