Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Dienhart returns to flame Gene and other links

Tom Dienhart has always been one of TOB's biggest boosters. The inexplicable relationship and support allegedly stemmed from a shared agent. Who knows? Of course since in the process of making TOB sound great he also became of critic of Jags and the Jags hire. Now that BC bounced Jags, Dienhart popped back up only this time to lambaste Gene. Although I have been critical of Gene in this process, I don't think Dienhart is offering anything insightful. He is just piling on one of his favorite targets. Plus he floats Mitch Browning as a replacement but Browning is supposedly joining Tennessee's staff.


BC seems a little concerned with Bryan Davis's grades.


Here is a Q&A with Ron Brace.

Labels: ,

4 Comments:

At 1:14 PM, Blogger About Five said...

Dienert is stating the obvious but not really piling on. Bic was a good coach to lose. It follows other good coaches that Gene pushed out the door or dared to leave.

Lahey should be required to have that press conference picture in his office facing him all day long till Gene goes away.

That sour puss is firing offense all by itself. Gene must really be some two faced character around Lahey to keep his job.

 
At 2:44 PM, Blogger John said...

I find it pretty ironic that Dienhart now regards Jags as one of football's "rising stars" after blasting his hiring two years ago.

If I remember correctly, Dienhart said Jags was the worst of the 12 coaches hired that off-season and ranked him 64th out of 65 major conference coaches. Now that he's no longer at BC, he's a hero.

This guy has a well-documented anti-BC agenda and shouldn't be taken seriously. What a joke.

 
At 5:01 PM, Blogger Big Jack Krack said...

I agree with John - who cares what Dienhart writes?

Those Big East people who continually bash BC - this gets very old - if Gavitt and Tranghese had done a better job (admit Penn State early on, etc.) the football part of the league may have been able to get stronger over the years and flourish.

Instead, the conference, which has existed since 1979, didn't begin playing football until 1991. Before that, member schools played in other leagues or as independents. Once it bagged Miami, the league had a chance to grow and get strong. It would have been positioned to expand to adapt to the new realities in college football.

What did it do? Nothing, except finally take measures to kick Temple out. Unfortunately, Temple and even Rutgers were not competing well for many years (although everyone knew Rutgers always had the potential - hell they beat us 4 straight under Bicknell)

But for a long time the league only really had 6 teams - what kind of a league was that? Tranghese never reacted to the problem in my opinion - he's the main cause of this situation.

Once Miami, Virginia Tech and BC moved to the Atlantic Coast Conference (hell, these teams were moving on to ensure stability in their own programs after the Big East proved itself incapable of managing itself into a sustainable conference) - This left the league with only UConn (brand new, replacing Temple), Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse and West Virginia.

Let me ask this? How did Conference USA like it when the Big East raided their league, and added Cincinnati, Louisville and South Florida?

If the Big East had done a good job in the beginning, and recognized the importance of football in regards to all other sports, basketball included - and nourished the league etc. - we wouldn't be having such a confersation.

I'm sick of these jerks who bash BC instead of bashing Tranghese, Gavitt and all the other lazy bozos who were asleep at the switch.

 
At 9:34 PM, Blogger eagleboston said...

3 A's and a B? What is the concern with Davis' grades?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home