Kyle Flood is the only coach that we have that has won (tied for actually) a conference title in football. He’s also the only coach to beat Michigan. He definitely helped screw the program over, however…so there’s that. 
(semi-OT) Kevin Warren
- Thread starter RU_PAYBACK
- Start date
Wasn't there a rumor that Julie was trying to find boosters to buy Kyle out
and couldn't do it so he stayed until he made an off field move tat got him gone , taking his Groucho glasses with him
Maybe you missed the point. Was Warren perfect? No, few people are. Should he get zero credit for the UCLA/USC additions and the latest media deal? Of course not. Some never got over how "he" "handled" covid, when he was brand new and serving at the pleasure of the B1G Presidents. So, no cake for Mr. Warren even when he did something right. Flood did more wrong than right, but he deserves some kudos for the 2014 season in hiring Friedgen, letting him run the offense, beating Michigan, finishing 8-5, winning a nice bowl game. But some will only remember the bad and attribute anything good that happened to "Greg's players." That is the point of comparison. We can quibble about it, but he did a few things well that worked out. His entire body of work, however, was like a Counting Crowds concert on acid.
That was 2013 .
He should have been canned and we should have hired Mullen or tressel
I don’t know enough about everything Warren was responsible for to have an informed opinion of his tenure.
What I do know is the the big TV contracts the B1G just signed were set up by decisions Delaney made years ago, and if you think Warren deserves a lot of credit for not slamming the door in USC and UCLA’s face when they asked to join the B1G, I don’t.
Those of us who have been incessantly talking about conference realignment scenarios on this board for years discussed and argued for a preemptive move west by the B1G long before it happened.
Yes, 2013, corrected that. IIRC, Barchi and the BOG were in a penny pinching mode, and they were all too happy to save the money on a cheap fiddle while Rome burned.
Sad and look it’s taken 10 years to get back to having a realistic shot at qualifying for a bowl game
As the old saying goes, you have to spend money to make money. Rutgers does it differently. They like to pinch pennies, lose money and then spend money to make money.
I know during Covid the B1G leadership in its infinite wisdom decided it would not start and possibly postpone the season.
Lo and behold the SEC was carrying on business as usual, with games on national TV, crowds in sunny stadiums, no masks, for all football loving Americans to see.
Made the B1G and Pac 12 dopes look pretty stupid, and pissed a lot of players, fans, and families off. Then the genius(es) quickly reversed course.
But carry on about the great B1G leadership when Warren was running the show…
Lo and behold the SEC was carrying on business as usual, with games on national TV, crowds in sunny stadiums, no masks, for all football loving Americans to see.
Made the B1G and Pac 12 dopes look pretty stupid, and pissed a lot of players, fans, and families off. Then the genius(es) quickly reversed course.
But carry on about the great B1G leadership when Warren was running the show…
Two thoughts on his time. The good- he brought the idea from the NFL to package out the TV inventory to multiple partners. That was an extremely well executed plan. Exceeds expectations. Far Exceeds, LOL. The bad- letting USC and UCLA in as full share members on day one. I don't think we had to do that. It ruffled a lot of feathers, and I think there was a more fair deal to be made.
You don't understand how things work. That is clear. This was already addressed.
Anyone upset by USC and UCLA getting full shares just doesn’t understand the details of how these additions have worked.
USC and UCLA were the only additions brought in at a time TV contracts were ending and new ones were being negotiated, so the new TV partners could consider those two schools in their bid and include the full payments to them (so they wouldn’t dilute the payments to current members).
Meanwhile, all of the other additions, including RU, were added in the middle of existing TV deals. The only choices were to 1-delay the full share to those schools, 2-reopen the TV deals to get full shares for the additions which would force you to extend the deals, or 3-give the additions full shares which would lower the payments to the current schools and probably get the additions rejected,
Given the evidence we have from the conferences choosing option 2, giving less than full shares was absolutely the right move.
Lol no one really cared about that . They backpedaled and had a season anyway . Awkward times
Of all the things that happened in 2020 in this country , the BIG conference was near the least of the embarrassments
you are not seeing the big picture . Most college sports were canceled in fall 2020. I don’t think even Rutgers had students on campus. I get that it’s professional sports and priorities are wrong , but it’s still kinda crazy that schools won’t allow students to go to classes, but they are gonna play football games.
The IVY league is pretty smart people and it cancelled its football season .
Uconn claimed a national title by cancelling its season.
Warren backtracked and listened to his stakeholders and the BIG played a season . All good leaders do sometimes make wrong decisions . Being stubborn and not fixing the wrong decision is the problem. Warren got the season played
I agree that the Big Ten was right to give UCLA and USC full shares. But I'm not convinced by your reason. It depends on what the TV contract says. If the contract (like the ACC contract) says that new members are treated pro rata, then there's no problem giving full shares in the middle of the contract. (The reason this wasn't done for Cal and Stanford is that the ACC wanted to use a lot of the new money to make Florida State and Clemson feel better about being in the conference.) Note also that the new Big Ten contract was agreed on before UCLA and USC became members. I think the key rather is that USC and UCLA have built tremendous franchises for themselves over time. Everyone recognizes them; they have lots of fans in their immediate area -- much more than, say, we do in the New York area. Even when they're down, people notice them. So they are very valuable. In addition, USC and UCLA had the option of staying put in a prestigious conference, and so they had negotiating leverage; we didn't have that.
Some contracts may NOW have a pro rata clause, but they didn’t at the time, so when the ACC added Pitt, Syracuse, and Louisville the ACC had to agree to extensions to get full shares for the new members. They extended the deal again around the whole ACC network thing.
That is why the ACC ended up in trouble because there contract runs all of the way until 2036, and why the B1G played it perfectly because they will have had their contract out to market twice before the ACC ever could test the market once.