End of the Big East

And just like that, another Clinton lackey ruins something great:

Miami accepted an invitation to join the Atlantic Coast Conference on Monday, spurning a flurry of last-minute offers from Big East officials to remain in their league.

The decision was formally announced in a statement released by Miami moments before a news conference with university president Donna Shalala and athletic director Paul Dee got under way.

And, as usual for the Clinton crowd, it was all about money. I have no idea what will become of the Big East now.

5 replies
  1. 1

    Well, Miami actually is a tad closer to the other ACC schools than it is to the other Big East Schools (I believe ALL of them actually).

    Why blame this on Shalala? Please– feel free to bash Clinton himself! Why screw around with his ex-cronies? Her interest is in maximizing the benefit to the university; just think about a Miami-FSU game IN CONFERENCE, every year. That’s what SHE’S thinking of (or whoever decided this is).

    I realize that the Canes will now visit Morgantown less often– but if the Mountaineers were offered the nod to join the ACC (even though WV is technically not an Atlantic coastal state), I’m not sure the Big East would win out.

    Besides: the Big East is really a BASKETBALL CONFERENCE. Football powers like Villanova, UConn, Georgetwon and St. Johns (and ESPECIALLY Notre Dame in hoops but not football) always made for a strange conference.

  2. 2
    Kevin Drum says:

    My my, is there anything Clinton isn’t responsible for anymore?

  3. 3
    John Cole says:

    That was kinda my way of joking, although the main reason for the problem is Donna Shalala. Her duplicity was instrumental.

  4. 4
    Sean says:

    yeah, as a ‘Cuse fan it’s disappointing, but hey they can just join the Big 12, since they basically beat the whole pathetic conference in March

  5. 5
    David Perron says:

    My my, is there anything Clinton isn’t responsible for anymore?

    This, from a guy who in the last week or so attempted to make Bush responsible for all the income inequality in the last few decades? How delightfully inconsistent. Bush is responsible for everything that happened before his presidency; Clinton is responsible for nothing at all since he took office.

Comments are closed.