A history lesson: The real reason that Penn State ended the Pitt-PSU rivalry in 2000

... it's complicated

The reason that Penn State gave for ending its great football rivalry with Pitt in 2000 was that since the Nittany Lions were now in the Big Ten, they had only three out-of-conference games to play. For the school to continue its revenue stream, it had to have two homes games to Pitt's one for the series to continue.

Coach Joe Paterno knew that Pitt would never agree to that, but the truth is that Paterno was not being truthful about his reason for dumping Pitt.

He had some legitimate grievances against Pittsburgh.

The History Lesson

A little history lesson will help. The Big East Conference was initially discussed in 1978 as a basketball conference because of new NCAA in-season regulations that would affect independents. Four teams were initially involved: Syracuse, Providence, St. John's and Georgetown. The ADs analyzed a number of criteria that would allow teams to enter the league.

These included the quality of the men's programs, the regional representation, significant media markets, and other elements, according to a history and retrospective written by former Syracuse AD Jake Crouthamel, who was one of the four AD's who first envisioned the conference.

Additional teams

Boston College was added, as was Connecticut. Seton Hall was added after Rutgers decided to remain in what became the Atlantic 10 with Penn State to set the seven teams for 1979.

Villanova was added the following year to give it eight teams.

Notice something about that league: Only Syracuse and Boston College fielded Div. I football teams.

Immediate success of Big East

The Conference experienced tremendous success in the 1980s. In 1984, Georgetown under John Thompson won the NCAA title. In 1985, the Final Four included three Big East teams: Villanova, Georgetown, and St. Johns.

Villanova upset Georgetown, giving the fledgling conference early credibility. The Big East finally had issued a challenge to the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC).

Joe Paterno, the AD

Joe Paterno had demonstrated quickly in the 1960s that he wanted to take the Penn State football program further than did his predecessor, Rip Engle, who brought Paterno to Penn State after he played quarterback for him at Brown.

Paterno's early success

By 1968, the Lions had finished an 11-0 season and only a bad decision by the coach prevented his team from playing for a national title [played in Orange, instead of Cotton Bowl.]

The 1968 team with Mike Reid, Steve Smear, Jack Ham, and Denny Onkontz may have been the best defense ever in college football (I am biased here).

Paterno continued to do well in the 1970s and did play for a national championship against Alabama in 1978. Joe, however, never did well against the Bear.

Playing politics

By 1980, however, Paterno demonstrated that he knew how to play office politics. He convinced Dr. John Oswald, the president, to name him Athletic Director in 1980.

Up to that time, the A.D. had been a member of the Department of Health and Physical Education.

That really did not make sense, and Joe convinced Oswald that this would be great. He would be not just a great football coach, but also a great A.D.

Oswald, being an academic, was clueless, and gave him carte blanche to take on the administrative duties.

Reason for his move: Power

In reality, he wanted to make some major changes in his football program. So, he served from 1980 to 1982, when his buddy, Jim Tarman, was named A.D. to replace him.

Paterno's only concern was putting people in the A.D. position who supported him. Tarman would eventually be replaced by Tim Curley, again a recommendation of Paterno's, and of course, he is a major culprit in the Sandusky scandal.

Paterno and the Big East intersect

Paterno had been trying to talk to a number of the Div. I-A Eastern independents to see if they would be interested in a football conference. These included Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, West Virginia, and Temple, which would compete along with Penn State.

However, now Paterno saw an opening in which his idea of an Eastern all-sports conference would be ideal.

The Big East basketball conference was in its infancy, but still, Paterno decided to have Penn State apply to the Big East.

The Big East's conundrum

Syracuse's Crouthamel explains what the Penn State application meant to the Conference:

"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."

PSU blackballed

Joe Paterno and his school needed six votes, and he received five. There is still controversy about who the three no votes were, and former Big East Executive Director Mike Tranghese said that Syracuse voted for Penn State.

Who were the three?

Paterno always believed that Boston College and Syracuse blackballed him, with the help of the Pitt administration.

The person whom Paterno blamed for the Big East rejection was Ed Bozik, an ally of Chancellor Wesley Posvar who became A.D. in Sept. 1982.

Bozik's tenure was controversial, but in his obituary in 1994, this line appeared: "Bozik was given much of the credit for Pitt's move into the Big East Conference in 1982."

In short, he was the man whom Paterno accused of arranging the blackballing of Penn State in 1982.

That is the reason for ending the series

The galling part is that instead of Penn State gaining a spot in the Big East, that spot went to Pitt.

Paterno never forgot.

Paterno's plan of attack

First, Paterno had to have Penn State join a conference itself. He managed to finagle a spot in the Big Ten when many of the schools did not want Penn State to get a spot.

Once Paterno had the Nittany Lions entering Big Ten play starting in 1993, he could tell Pitt -- along with Boston College and Syracuse -- to hit the bricks.

Eventually, that all-sports conference that Paterno envisioned became reality in 1991.

Later, ironically, the Big East was hammered by Pitt, Syracuse, and Boston College fleeing to the ACC, along with later members Miami and Virginia Tech.

Conclusion

Joe Paterno had a long memory, and he was embarrassed by the Big East's action. He never forgot, and he has a vengeful part of him.

Perhaps it was justified. Perhaps he was overplaying his hand and tried to turn the basketball Big East into a football Big East.

It depends upon which side of the issue you are on.

My analysis

Paterno must have been shut down by two of the basketball schools. It could have been Dave Gavitt at Providence, though I doubt it. Could have been Villanova or Georgetown.

Note also that many of the original schools were Catholic colleges. They had little interest in football, except for B.C.

Was rejection because of Penn State's weak program?

Penn State's men's basketball program has been -- and still is -- woeful.

Penn State could have been rejected because of the poor quality of its men's basketball program. It is still mired in mediocrity, and may forever be there.

That could have been a factor, too, though the football angle was probably the crowning blow.

Formation of the Big East

http://cuse.com/sports/2001/8/8/history.aspx