The case for adding Temple to the Big East

[RickUSF]

I found this guy's blog online about Temple to the Big East.  In fact, he is actually a Rutgers fan, and he has an interesting conversation with a Temple fan/blogger and the conversation brings up some interesting points...

http://www.onthebanks.com/2010/5/21/1481472/the-case-for-adding-temple-to-the

On the Banks:  Was that decision fair for the Big East football conference to rescind Temple's membership fair, both on its own merits, and in comparison to Rutgers?

Temple Football Forever: No, because they mentioned "competitiveness" as a reason and it was only a few months after Temple beat Rutgers for the third straight time on the way to four straight wins. A lot of Temple fans thought that was disengenious.

OtB: Ultimately, did being forced out of the conference end up being a wake up call for Temple?

TFF: Absolutely, because it forced the university to hire a dynamic young coach, who like Bruce Arians 20 years prior, proved that winning football could be achieved at Temple University. Bobby Wallace, a part-time coach who lived several months of the year in Alabama, wasn't providing the kind of commitment and oversight the program needed.

OtB: Is Temple a better bet than Villanova to join the Big East in football, and if so, why? Do Temple fans particularly want to rejoin the Big East in some form? What kind of conference setup would they like to see?

TFF: I don't know where Villanova would play. Temple has an ironclad lease for exclusivity on Saturdays in the fall at Lincoln Financial Field. The wording is written in the contract, part of the state's deal with the Eagles to fund one-third of the stadium. Not even can the Eagles play on Saturdays at LFF until the end of the college season. That lease last another eight years. Temple would not allow Villanova to play at the Linc, period, end of story.  Temple would, of course, accept an all-sports invite to the Big East. The conference as currently constituted includes large schools, like Temple and Rutgers, who are traditional rivals. Like schools with like groups of fans.

OtB: One of the things Rutgers fans see in New Jersey/New York City is that there's only relatively limited interest in college athletics in a pro-centric Northeastern market. What could Temple sports realistically accomplish in the Philadelphia market and Eastern Pennsylvania?

TFF: Realistically, we saw what a Temple team could do, ratings-wise, in its bowl game - deliver the Philadelphia TV market in a big way. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Temple-UCLA drew the largest bowl ratings on ESPN in the Philadelphia market since the Penn State appearance in the Alamo Bowl in 2007. That's at 4:30 on a Tuesday afternoon. A winning Temple team in 1986 with a Heisman Trophy candidate named Paul Palmer consistently out-rated Penn State on Philadelphia-area TV sets.

By all accounts, Temple should be a winning team with a Heisman Trophy candidate (Bernard Pierce) this season. Should be interesting checking the Neilsens after each game. That indicates there is a latent interest in following football fortunes of the largest school in the market. It translates immediately to TV sets. How it translates in fannies in the seats (already on the upswing) will be determined over a 2-3 year period.

OtB: I think most Rutgers fans have empathy towards Temple as a program that has been through similar challenges. Is that sentiment mutual, or is there still some residual hostility? Should the two teams play each other regularly?

TFF: I think Rutgers was our biggest rival, geographically, since the Temple-Delaware series ended. It's not quite the same getting up for Kent State and Buffalo.

OtB: Temple has a great coach in Al Golden. Media speculation about his future is a compliment, but it has to be annoying with everyone presuming he'll leave, despite turning down other opportunities over the past few years. Isn't it possible the lesson Golden and Schiano learned from Joe Paterno was to build their own programs? Are we mutually fortunate to have two of the more decent coaches in the game?

TFF: Both are incredibly similar. Great recruiters, great program CEOs, who have both been questioned wtih game-day decisions. On game day, Greg Schiano may be no Frank Burns and Golden is certainly no Wayne Hardin. But both programs needed strong CEO/recruiters to get on their feet and both coaches delivered against long odds.  There was a lot more anxiety about losing Al two years ago. Since then, East Carolina, Tennessee and Cincy came after him strong and he declined interest, THEN signed a reported $1.2 million contract extension (with a huge buyout for Temple) and those two factors have lessened the anxiety level..

OtB: I'm trying to get a feel for the program's history as an outsider. What's the narrative of Temple Football? Any iconic coaches or signature players?

TFF: Arians is not an iconic figure, but most fans feel he was treated unfairly by the administration by being fired after going 6-5 in two of his last three seasons. His final 6-5 came against the 10th-toughest schedule in the country. He lost at Penn State (27-23), to defending national champion BYU (25-23). He had the team competitive. Hardin, on the other hand, is an iconic figure. Tremendous game coach with a 152 IQ who used his brain to outwit almost all other foes. Temple fans are still talking about some of the great plays and schemes Hardin had, trick and regular, to beat opponents.

An ideal coach would be Hardin on game day and a recruiter of Golden's prowess. Those seem to be employed only in the SEC these days. Since Arians, Temple hired a coach coming off an 0-11 season at Rice (Jerry Berndt) and a great defensive coordinator (Ron Dickerson) who didn't have a clue on game day and a guy, Bobby Wallace, who had no feel for the Northeast. This is Golden's turf. He gets the vibe.