If both the B1G and ACC wanted to add UCONN, which would you prefer and why?

[Calamitous]

When UConn starts trumping Louisville on the football field, they'll still be unhappy, and so will UNC and UVa.

Maybe so with FSU and Clemson, but UVa and UNC would be happier with UConn because of academics, good Olympic sports and good basketball. As for football, UNC and UVa don't care. Never have and never will (even with some of their good football years).

 

[UC990411]

RUTGERS than SYRACUSE

 

[Dooley]

I don't understand why you UConn fans seem to think Louisville's crappy in everything but football. The last time you beat us in football, it was because of a cheap shot that got flagged breaking Teddy's wrist! We won the 2013 National Men's Basketball title. Same year we were runners up in Women's Basketball and beat a Top10 Florida team in the Sugar Bowl. We also went to the College World Series. Quite frankly, if UConn was what you guys think you are, you'd be in. Instead of trying to be better overall, you're all too busy trying to talk smack about everyone else. It was that strategy that's left you guys on the outside looking in at the moment. I would rather have respectable conversations with you guys, honestly I would, but some of your fan base acts like you're Harvard in academics and Alabama in sports. You're not. You're just ....not.

There's a lot that I respect about UConn, but your behavior as a fan base is a detriment to your school and your image.

Thanks for that, first-time poster. The beef that UCONN fans have with Louisville (and it is completely justified) is that the ACC didn't want to invite WVU because of academics. Then, they invited Louisville over UCONN. Louisville's academics are horrendous so please don't try to defend them.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

Maybe so with FSU and Clemson, but UVa and UNC would be happier with UConn because of academics, good Olympic sports and good basketball. As for football, UNC and UVa don't care. Never have and never will (even with some of their good football years).

I would think that, of all schools, that Clemson would value its association with the ACC since it is a long-time member. However, as we've seen with Maryland, it doesn't really matter all that much.

 

[pj]

Maybe so with FSU and Clemson, but UVa and UNC would be happier with UConn because of academics, good Olympic sports and good basketball. As for football, UNC and UVa don't care. Never have and never will (even with some of their good football years).

What I meant was that Louisville will probably start reverting to the mean in college athletics, while UConn will continue to improve (especially in football) as it learns how to exploit a northeast that is under-exploited in college athletics. As UConn demonstrates better results than Louisville in all sports including football, the ACC will get a bad case of buyer's remorse.

 

[Dooley]

The problem is that they're NOT entirely horrendous, and that they're rapidly improving. This is something the ACC took note of. The improvements on campus just since I was there in '05 have been staggering and breath taking. I don't really expect anyone from the state of Connecticut to know that because, well, why would you? A person from Connecticut is as likely to consider Louisville as a person from Kentucky is to consider UConn. I get it. But that doesn't make it less so. WVU had other issues, namely the absolutely deplorable behavior of their fans and the fact that they're even more of a one trick pony than UConn that hurt their chances with the ACC. The academics were an excuse. It could even be argued that their bloggers spouting off nonsense pushed the ACC toward signing a GOR (though personally, I think that's giving WVU fans too much credit).

Louisville's budget dwarfs anyone else's in the AAC, and we top the charts of the public universities in the ACC as well. I know UConn fans will say it's because we "cook the books" or however you try and justify it, but as they say...numbers don't lie. On top of that, since we joined the Big East/American it's been Louisville and Notre Dame that have dominated in ALL sports, olympics included. The drop off after us is really quite staggering in terms of total titles won, so please stop with the act that Louisville's a one trick horse in football with nothing else to deliver. Louisville deserves to be in. We've worked hard in athletics and academics to improve the university's standings and reputation. It's NOT the commuter college it once was, but a research school that's quickly gaining national recognition and prominence. Being aligned with similar such schools in the ACC will only help boost our growth. Unlike some other schools to our east, we WANT to get better. The perception that you guys have that Louisville is the same as UCF is grossly outdated and laughable.

I genuinely feel that UConn brings a lot to the table and that they'd be a contributing addition to either the ACC or the B1G. However, I cannot help but be amused by certain members of your fan base. UConn has a lot of work to do still. Hell, so does Louisville. The difference is that in Louisville, we understand that. You guys seem more contented at trying to belittle what Louisville's done as oppose to trying to fix your own problems. You guys would rather pooh pooh the notion of Boston College holding you back as oppose to going out and legitimately trying to build a North Eastern power in football. As Louisville fans, we get it. Being in a state with SEC UK isn't easy. Their fans are insufferable, their administration tried like hell during our earlier years to squash our athletics (and even at one point attempt to take over UofL as a school), and even our own state capital often tries to give then preferential treatment because our lawmakers can't separate sports fandom from what's best from the state (being two premier universities). Nevertheless, we've succeeded ANYHOW. We've not sat back and pointed fingers like UConn fans sit around and do here. We went out and made it happen anyhow. We not only WENT to two BCS Bowl games...we WON them. We did something in one try that our instate rival hasn't done in my wife's lifetime: Beat Florida. But we never sat around and said "We're not where we want to be because of this school or that holding us back". We went out and got what was ours. THAT is what UConn needs to be doing. THAT is what YOUR FANS need to be doing. If you want attention, then DEMAND it. If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth and stop blaming everyone else for your problems. Stop belittling those that went out and made it happen for themselves because in the end you're only hurting yourselves worse to the very people that could be helping you. You run the risk of being just like West Virginia, only at least they found some way of getting into the P5 for now.

Ummm...no. Louisville's academics are horrendous.

Lousiville
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/university-of-louisville-1999

161st ranked school in USN&WR
Acceptance rate - 76.3%
4-year graduation rate - 26%
Students who live off campus - 72.8%

UCONN
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/university-of-connecticut-29013

57th ranked school USN&WR
Acceptance rate - 44.7%
4-year graduation rate - 67%
Students who live off campus - 28%

In other words, Louisville is still very much the commuter school with a community college-like acceptance rate and graduation rate. You would be wise to stop preaching about Louisville's academics. It is very evident that the ACC sacrificed academics in order to try to satisfy the "football schools" within the conference. Do you think the football schools give a hoot about academics?

You will get no argument from me about Louisville's athletic accomplishments. Louisville's timing could not have been better to have success in both football and basketball. UCONN's timing could not have been worse to hire Pasqualoni and have an APR ban. UCONN has done things to turn around both. Bob Diaco is the same type of exciting young coach that Charlie Strong brought to Louisville. And Kevin Ollie's early success as head coach has done wonders to restore UCONN as a Top 5 elite program post-Calhoun and post-APR. You are right about our fanbase...UCONN fans need to step up and sell out football games as they did before Pasqualoni. Hopefully that will happen. But we all saw Louisville's attendance drop under Steve Kragthorpe, so please don't come over here and preach about selling out games under bad coaching tenures. It happens all over the country. Fans don't go to games when teams lose...even at Louisville.

 

[FDNY99]

Ummm...no. Louisville's academics are horrendous.

Lousiville
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/university-of-louisville-1999

161st ranked school in USN&WR
Acceptance rate - 76.3%
4-year graduation rate - 26%
Students who live off campus - 72.8%

UCONN
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/university-of-connecticut-29013

57th ranked school USN&WR
Acceptance rate - 44.7%
4-year graduation rate - 67%
Students who live off campus - 28%

In other words, Louisville is still very much the commuter school with a community college-like acceptance rate and graduation rate. You would be wise to stop preaching about Louisville's academics. It is very evident that the ACC sacrificed academics in order to try to satisfy the "football schools" within the conference. Do you think the football schools give a hoot about academics?

You will get no argument from me about Louisville's athletic accomplishments. Louisville's timing could not have been better to have success in both football and basketball. UCONN's timing could not have been worse to hire Pasqualoni and have an APR ban. UCONN has done things to turn around both. Bob Diaco is the same type of exciting young coach that Charlie Strong brought to Louisville. And Kevin Ollie's early success as head coach has done wonders to restore UCONN as a Top 5 elite program post-Calhoun and post-APR. You are right about our fanbase...UCONN fans need to step up and sell out football games as they did before Pasqualoni. Hopefully that will happen. But we all saw Louisville's attendance drop under Steve Kragthorpe, so please don't come over here and preach about selling out games under bad coaching tenures. It happens all over the country. Fans don't go to games when teams lose...even at Louisville.

Dooley isn't it funny how UL fans tend to conveniently forget the years Kragthorpe was there...it's like their coaching went from Petrino to Strong back to Petrino

 

[FDNY99]

Imabeliever aside from Petrino the ONLY national significance your football program had was hiring Howard Schnellenberger in the 90's. Don't sit on your high horse and come to our board telling us about your GREAT historical athletics. Truth be told..if the ACC had a GOR in place (not allowing FSU and Clemson to threaten to go to the B-12) when they needed to replace UMD the tables would be reversed. You owe EVERYTHING you have right now to Charlie Strong and his rebuilding of the Kragthorpe disaster!!

 

[Dooley]

Dooley isn't it funny how UL fans tend to conveniently forget the years Kragthorpe was there...it's like their coaching went from Petrino to Strong back to Petrino

I know right? I'm sure Paul Pasqualoni's name will also be treated like "he who shall not be named" in a few years too, but Louisville fans are under some strange delusion that they continued to sell out Papa John's during Steve Kragthorpe's tenure. They had an announced crowd of 23,422 for their last game in the Kragthorpe era against Rutgers. And that is announced attendance, who knows how many fans actually went into the stadium.

I welcome fans from other teams coming over to our board. But it's fan bases like Louisville's who come over and preach to UCONN about the importance of selling out games that I find very ironic. Steve Kragthorpe and dwindling football attendance wasn't that long ago for Louisville.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I don't understand why you UConn fans seem to think Louisville's crappy in everything but football. The last time you beat us in football, it was because of a cheap shot that got flagged breaking Teddy's wrist! We won the 2013 National Men's Basketball title. Same year we were runners up in Women's Basketball and beat a Top10 Florida team in the Sugar Bowl. We also went to the College World Series. Quite frankly, if UConn was what you guys think you are, you'd be in. Instead of trying to be better overall, you're all too busy trying to talk smack about everyone else. It was that strategy that's left you guys on the outside looking in at the moment. I would rather have respectable conversations with you guys, honestly I would, but some of your fan base acts like you're Harvard in academics and Alabama in sports. You're not. You're just ....not.

There's a lot that I respect about UConn, but your behavior as a fan base is a detriment to your school and your image.

The reason you guys are in the ACC and not us is that the conference is an illogical, visionless mess. Is there anything about their expansion moves that hints at an overall set of goals? Not saying Louisville didn't make a solid case for themselves, just saying they were presenting to the village idiot and his 12 man posse that were either even bigger idiots or didn't care enough to stand up for professed principles. Congratulations, you've boarded a rudderless vessel.

 

[specialisthusky]

Its like 2012 all over in here. If by the grace of God we make it out of this hellhole the last thing I'll ever do is go on a Cincinnati or USF board to argue the merits. Good grief, grow up kid.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

How's it working out for you guys?

It's not, Dr. Phil, thanks for asking. I think you missed my larger point, though. I'm not anti-Louisville, far from it. I've enjoyed Cardinals basketball since Denny Crum's time. I enjoyed having you guys in the Big East. I wish you well in the future. My point was that there's not a lot of sense to be made from our not getting into the ACC because there was no logical sense to your selection. Rather than spend time trying to make sense out of nonsense, I think my efforts would be better spent with a tube of lipstick and a pig. (Again, the nonsense isn't on Louisville's part).

Try to answer this: What possible ACC strategic issue is answered with Louisville? They want to compete with Kentucky in KY? They want to push FSU and Miami past Florida in FL? GaTech + Louisville > Georgia in GA? What?

 

[buddy]

Apart from having states that touch, what purpose would there be in taking UConn by your metrics? Louisville was the winningest program left on the table AND we're close to Notre Dame, who was on our side. We have everything UConn has in basketball, better olympic sports, AND we're very competitive in football. I'm not sure you're seeing how those are all positives.

For the record too, our national championship game drew larger ratings than yours did this past year. I'll be courteous however, and blame that on UK. Nevertheless....people obviously tune in to watch The Cards.

I will say that you have one thing that really made all the difference that UConn doesn't have, that being Mr. Jurich. An AD that was aggressive and had foresight changed the game. Yes, you and Louisville have moved on to greater things. Congratulations. Winning does not make a difference in CR. We all learned that lesson with Rutgers. Academics make no difference for the ACC. We learned that from Louisville. You all were providing the southern culture that the ACC needed at the time. Nothing more. One more thing, when you say that you have everything UConn has in basketball, how many national championships do you have in men's basketball?, not talking women's basketball, men's soccer, or men's polo? But I digress. Now go away.

 

[NickyNewark]

I will say that you have one thing that really made all the difference that UConn doesn't have, that being Mr. Jurich. An AD that was aggressive and had foresight changed the game. Yes, you and Louisville have moved on to greater things. Congratulations. Winning does not make a difference in CR. We all learned that lesson with Rutgers. Academics make no difference for the ACC. We learned that from Louisville. You all were providing the southern culture that the ACC needed at the time. Nothing more. One more thing, when you say that you have everything UConn has in basketball, how many national championships do you have in men's basketball?, not talking women's basketball, men's soccer, or men's polo? But I digress. Now go away.

The 1st thing I teach my kids is winning isn't everything...but we all knew that however relationships and choices are important. ACC or B1G? We all know how scattershot and visionless Swoffys thinking is!! ImaBeliever seems like a decent sort with a fair point IMO that isnt pleasantly received here!!

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Apart from having states that touch, what purpose would there be in taking UConn by your metrics? Louisville was the winningest program left on the table AND we're close to Notre Dame, who was on our side. We have everything UConn has in basketball, better olympic sports, AND we're very competitive in football. I'm not sure you're seeing how those are all positives.

For the record too, our national championship game drew larger ratings than yours did this past year. I'll be courteous however, and blame that on UK. Nevertheless....people obviously tune in to watch The Cards.

I'm not denying those things you listed are positives. We have our share of positives as well. Arguing over who has more or whose are better simply isn't my point. And asking me to answer my own question without having taken a stab at an answer yourself is bad form. I could say things like we're on the Atlantic coast or we at least own our own state but I won't because, frankly, I don't know whether or not those would answer the question I raised. I flat out don't have a clue what strategy might explain the ACC's approach to conference expansion. What set of common goals were they pursuing? That's the question I asked (or meant to anyway).

Without a common set of goals, without a cogent strategy to achieve those goals, you're not swimming, you're just splashing in the pool. Discussing whether UConn or Louisville was the better fit for the ACC moot because we don't know the decision making criteria and I, at least, can't discern any logical set of criteria that explain Syracuse, Pitt, and Louisville. The Big Ten moves on Rutgers and Maryland and an inference can be deduced. What inference can you deduce from Syracuse, Pitt, and Louisville?

And come on man, the ACC makes a 30-50 year commitment to a new conference mate based on a 20 minute (I'm sure it went on longer but the management summary was probably 20 mins. or so) Powerpoint pitch given over the Thanksgiving weekend? Please. That just screams desperation. Face it dude, you're rudderless, a member of a conference futzing around the fringes trying to solve big problems with tactics. At the moment, the ACC is not configured for success.

 

[Calamitous]

Thanks for that, first-time poster. The beef that UCONN fans have with Louisville (and it is completely justified) is that the ACC didn't want to invite WVU because of academics. Then, they invited Louisville over UCONN. Louisville's academics are horrendous so please don't try to defend them.

I wouldn't say horrendous. UL is probably very similar to Virginia Commonwealth University, with the exception that they have a FBS football team. VCU has a very good medical school and art program. Other VCU disciplines are average for any university. I only know 2 UL grads and they don't seem uneducated. I do know a lot of VCU grads and some are very successful while others are in the fat part of the bell curve (like me). One plus is that UL does have a billion dollar endowment which my school doesn't have. But so does VCU. This is probably because they have their own medical schools.

But with that said, I would have never imagined a school of VCU's academic caliber joining the ACC because of the ACC's previous stringent standards. Not saying UL is a bad school, just shocked they slipped in before UConn.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

Face it. FSU and Clemson's threats worked. FSU I could understand because they were independent before joining. Clemson's positioning is the part that disappoints me the most. We need a new commissioner.

 

[freescooter]

Everything else being equal,from an athletic perspective, and from a university perspective too, I think, we fit best in the ACC. From location to "natural rivalries" we're a better fit. Despite Florida State it is a basketball first league and despite what some might wish, UConn is a basketball first school. The ACC is really the only P5 league where that's the case. And we have history with a number of the current ACC members. Some in football but a lot in basketball. We have the Hockey East option for both mens and womens hockey so we are part of one of the top leagues there anyway. I also think we're more comparable as a university to the ACC schools than we are to the Big 10 schools both from the perspective of size, the nature of the places, "approach to academics" which is more geared to a mid-sized university than massive place like Michigan or Ohio State, for example, and we are more campus oriented, which again is more like an ACC school. Then we're a better fit in terms of size. At 20,000 +- we'd be one of the smallest Big 10 schools, but in the upper half of the ACC for example. There are a few exceptions, mostly the privates, but most ACC publics are between about 15.000 and 25,000 give or take. All in all it is the better fit. there are clearly some benefits of going to the Big, prestige being the biggest non-monetary one. But all in all, if I had a choice, I'd go with the ACC.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

Everything else being equal,from an athletic perspective, and from a university perspective too, I think, we fit best in the ACC. From location to "natural rivalries" we're a better fit. Despite Florida State it is a basketball first league and despite what some might wish, UConn is a basketball first school. The ACC is really the only P5 league where that's the case. And we have history with a number of the current ACC members. Some in football but a lot in basketball. We have the Hockey East option for both mens and womens hockey so we are part of one of the top leagues there anyway. I also think we're more comparable as a university to the ACC schools than we are to the Big 10 schools both from the perspective of size, the nature of the places, "approach to academics" which is more geared to a mid-sized university than massive place like Michigan or Ohio State, for example, and we are more campus oriented, which again is more like an ACC school. Then we're a better fit in terms of size. At 20,000 +- we'd be one of the smallest Big 10 schools, but in the upper half of the ACC for example. There are a few exceptions, mostly the privates, but most ACC publics are between about 15.000 and 25,000 give or take. All in all it is the better fit. there are clearly some benefits of going to the Big, prestige being the biggest non-monetary one. But all in all, if I had a choice, I'd go with the ACC.

I would love to have you on board.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Dooley isn't it funny how UL fans tend to conveniently forget the years Kragthorpe was there...it's like their coaching went from Petrino to Strong back to Petrino

I always thought the Big East got duped adding Louisviville.
We brought them in to help football ,Petrino left,and they tanked.
They emerged only as the conference was falling apart.
No team got more out of their affiliation with the Big East than Louisville.

 

[omniorange]

Neil, hi you're one of the VERY few SU fan dot posters that before i was banned lol was fairly rational and friendly. You're observation is pretty much the way I see it except for the fact of payouts,CIC and a big research flagship their B1G looking mostly but could easily fit in the ACC too. I also don't see anymore moves that won't include UConn into the P5 unless the PAC12/SEC is the mover !?!

Size wise, at the moment, UConn is more like an ACC public institution. And while they are definitely making progress in terms of research, they are still very far away from the majority of research behemoths in the BiG. Which is why I still maintain they are betwixt and between. I think the vision of what the administration has for UConn is mostly BiG like, but over the next decade or so, I think they line up more with ACC public institutions.

I'd add the Big 12 to the Pac and SEC. When UConn gets an invite it will be either the BiG or the ACC.

The ACC says it is happy with the current divisional alignment for football, but the rumor is 6 out of 14 are not. And I suspect of the 8 who are, all 7 of the programs in the Coastal Division. Just as FSU and Clemson may have forced the ACC's hand in taking Louisville over UConn due to football reasons (which some of you know I supported Louisville from that sports angle perspective but didn't think the ACC would pull that trigger due to academics), I think the Noles and Tigers will likely want to scrap divisions altogether in a few years.

And, with the continuing problems at UNC and perhaps sanctions looming in the future (which might even lead to Roy Williams resignation or "retirement" in a few years), it wouldn't surprise me to see when the ACC asks ESPN for its review at the first 5-year "look in" of the new tv contract, they don't at least discuss the possibility of what adding UConn might bring to the value of the contract.

But a lot can happen between now and then.

Anyway, good luck to UConn. As I said in my earlier post I have a great deal of respect for UConn athletics. And Nicky, good luck to Rutgers in the BiG but honestly I think the Scarlet Knights are better off having a 2-3 win initial season so they can fire Flood and get a new coach.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[NickyNewark]

Size wise, at the moment, UConn is more like an ACC public institution. And while they are definitely making progress in terms of research, they are still very far away from the majority of research behemoths in the BiG. Which is why I still maintain they are betwixt and between. I think the vision of what the administration has for UConn is mostly BiG like, but over the next decade or so, I think they line up more with ACC public institutions.

I'd add the Big 12 to the Pac and SEC. When UConn gets an invite it will be either the BiG or the ACC.

The ACC says it is happy with the current divisional alignment for football, but the rumor is 6 out of 14 are not. And I suspect of the 8 who are, all 7 of the programs in the Coastal Division. Just as FSU and Clemson may have forced the ACC's hand in taking Louisville over UConn due to football reasons (which some of you know I supported Louisville from that sports angle perspective but didn't think the ACC would pull that trigger due to academics), I think the Noles and Tigers will likely want to scrap divisions altogether in a few years.

And, with the continuing problems at UNC and perhaps sanctions looming in the future (which might even lead to Roy Williams resignation or "retirement" in a few years), it wouldn't surprise me to see when the ACC asks ESPN for its review at the first 5-year "look in" of the new tv contract, they don't at least discuss the possibility of what adding UConn might bring to the value of the contract.

But a lot can happen between now and then.

Anyway, good luck to UConn. As I said in my earlier post I have a great deal of respect for UConn athletics. And Nicky, good luck to Rutgers in the BiG but honestly I think the Scarlet Knights are better off having a 2-3 win initial season so they can fire Flood and get a new coach.

Cheers,
Neil

You are indeed a pleasant and rational Cuse fan as are a few others upstate and in NJ and I agree with just about every word esp it would serve RU to not win more than 4 or 5 games so they can "s-can" nice guy bad recruiter KF and let JH make a signature hire!! I respect you're awareness of eastern college FB omniorange...Cheers,lol.....our party is manana...or 3 hrs.

 

[omniorange]

. I flat out don't have a clue what strategy might explain the ACC's approach to conference expansion. What set of common goals were they pursuing? That's the question I asked (or meant to anyway).

Without a common set of goals, without a cogent strategy to achieve those goals, you're not swimming, you're just splashing in the pool. Discussing whether UConn or Louisville was the better fit for the ACC moot because we don't know the decision making criteria and I, at least, can't discern any logical set of criteria that explain Syracuse, Pitt, and Louisville. The Big Ten moves on Rutgers and Maryland and an inference can be deduced. What inference can you deduce from Syracuse, Pitt, and Louisville?

And come on man, the ACC makes a 30-50 year commitment to a new conference mate based on a 20 minute (I'm sure it went on longer but the management summary was probably 20 mins. or so) Powerpoint pitch given over the Thanksgiving weekend? Please. That just screams desperation. Face it dude, you're rudderless, a member of a conference futzing around the fringes trying to solve big problems with tactics. At the moment, the ACC is not configured for success.

Though I am not the poster you were discussing this with, it's an intriguing question that you ask. I think the root of it goes back to the 2003 expansion which was planned out in 2001 and 2002.

That expansion was supposedly going to be about football and the vision of an ACC that stretched the entire east coast from Boston to Miami. But not everyone in the ACC was on board with the plan of Miami, BC, and SU because the football powers for the most part could care less about the northeast. They want to be in an SEC like football centric conference (not a conference known for basketball). I'm sure secretly they would have preferred Miami, VT, and WVU but Swofford and the consultants sold them on a vision of what the ACC might eventually look like as a 14 or 16 team conference in the future. And to possibly attract two bigger name football targets than VT and WVU, they needed to first become a conference that can be sold as an entire Atlantic Coast Conference. Neither Rutgers nor UConn was even on the radar at that time, nor in all honesty, should they have been.

Obviously the ACC needed Miami football (at least the Miami powerhouses of the early 00s and they still do since they really haven't shown up like those teams since they went to the ACC) but they the hoped for goal down the road was ND and/or PSU. And remember, back in 2003 there was no BTN which makes the latter target now virtually untouchable but then it was at least a slight possibility - snowball's chance but still a chance. So, with JoePa's likely adamant stance against Pitt on their minds, they were probably thinking add SU and BC with Miami and see if ND and PSU bite 5-7 years down the road. If they do, then not taking VT and WVU at that time pays off big. But the football centric schools wanted the football improved right there and then. And then in steps Virginia politics and the stubbornness of UNC and Duke that basically makes the ACC SEC-lite with a northeastern satellite in Boston.

In retrospect, the football centric schools were correct to want VT since it was the Hokies addition that helped make the Miami downturn not quite an abysmal failure.

Now fast forward to 2011. Whatever pipe dreams the ACC had in 2003 are long gone. They are in an extremely weak position and their best hope for surviving was ND, even on a partial basis, getting FSU, Clemson, VT, and GT games vs ND to help offset some of the lackluster conference opponents. Which is why they chose SU and Pitt. Sure Swarbrick lambasted SU and Pitt for leaving, but a year later ND is in the ACC with a guarantee of playing 5 games a year against ACC teams and that ND has to cycle through all of the teams every three years. That's not coincidence. Might it have happened with UConn and/or Rutgers possibly. But Pitt is a semi-regular opponent for ND and SU had already scheduled a 4 game series with two of the games being at MetLife.

So, in that regard, getting ND on board and securing a better overall tv contract that at least got them close to the others - the expansion was a success. The kicker was Maryland accepting a BiG invite. The football centric schools were probably not to please with taking Pitt and SU, probably preferring WVU and Pitt. So they were in a good bargaining position at that time and likely forced Louisville (a southern schools with recent football success) over UConn.

I guess this is just a long-winded response to say, as Ben Franklin once did, "half improvised and half compromise" only this time in regard to conference expansion rather than revolutions.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[woomba]

I don't disagree with most of what you wrote but there is one point that I do have an issue with.

If ND was the critical piece to stabilize the ACC as you say - then wouldn't the ACC been better off just holding off for a year and sitting tight? I don't buy that the deal was a year coming and the ACC added Pitt and Syracuse with ND in mind. If you ask any ND fan you see that they don't value those matchups at all - their primary interest is access to the south and easy scheduling. The old 12 member delivered on that better than the current 14-member configuration.

The additions of Syracuse and Pitt happened right around when the Big 12 was imploding with the potential creation of the Pac-16 and the Big Ten expanded to 12 with Nebraska...and seemingly open to additional expansion in the near future.

The general consensus was heading towards the idea that the era of super conferences was nigh and that a "stable" conference size was some number higher than 12. Based on that info, the ACC decided to strike first by identifying schools that they felt would be acceptable additions to the conference to try to reach that number first so that they can stabilize.

Ironically enough, it was those additions (and the collapse of the Big East) that triggered a new round of expansions for both the SEC and Big Ten and 2 years later...here we are, arguing the same points over and over on a message board despite the lack of any real realignment news in over a year

 

[NickyNewark]

Though I am not the poster you were discussing this with, it's an intriguing question that you ask. I think the root of it goes back to the 2003 expansion which was planned out in 2001 and 2002.

That expansion was supposedly going to be about football and the vision of an ACC that stretched the entire east coast from Boston to Miami. But not everyone in the ACC was on board with the plan of Miami, BC, and SU because the football powers for the most part could care less about the northeast. They want to be in an SEC like football centric conference (not a conference known for basketball). I'm sure secretly they would have preferred Miami, VT, and WVU but Swofford and the consultants sold them on a vision of what the ACC might eventually look like as a 14 or 16 team conference in the future. And to possibly attract two bigger name football targets than VT and WVU, they needed to first become a conference that can be sold as an entire Atlantic Coast Conference. Neither Rutgers nor UConn was even on the radar at that time, nor in all honesty, should they have been.

Obviously the ACC needed Miami football (at least the Miami powerhouses of the early 00s and they still do since they really haven't shown up like those teams since they went to the ACC) but they the hoped for goal down the road was ND and/or PSU. And remember, back in 2003 there was no BTN which makes the latter target now virtually untouchable but then it was at least a slight possibility - snowball's chance but still a chance. So, with JoePa's likely adamant stance against Pitt on their minds, they were probably thinking add SU and BC with Miami and see if ND and PSU bite 5-7 years down the road. If they do, then not taking VT and WVU at that time pays off big. But the football centric schools wanted the football improved right there and then. And then in steps Virginia politics and the stubbornness of UNC and Duke that basically makes the ACC SEC-lite with a northeastern satellite in Boston.

In retrospect, the football centric schools were correct to want VT since it was the Hokies addition that helped make the Miami downturn not quite an abysmal failure.

Now fast forward to 2011. Whatever pipe dreams the ACC had in 2003 are long gone. They are in an extremely weak position and their best hope for surviving was ND, even on a partial basis, getting FSU, Clemson, VT, and GT games vs ND to help offset some of the lackluster conference opponents. Which is why they chose SU and Pitt. Sure Swarbrick lambasted SU and Pitt for leaving, but a year later ND is in the ACC with a guarantee of playing 5 games a year against ACC teams and that ND has to cycle through all of the teams every three years. That's not coincidence. Might it have happened with UConn and/or Rutgers possibly. But Pitt is a semi-regular opponent for ND and SU had already scheduled a 4 game series with two of the games being at MetLife.

So, in that regard, getting ND on board and securing a better overall tv contract that at least got them close to the others - the expansion was a success. The kicker was Maryland accepting a BiG invite. The football centric schools were probably not to please with taking Pitt and SU, probably preferring WVU and Pitt. So they were in a good bargaining position at that time and likely forced Louisville (a southern schools with recent football success) over UConn.

I guess this is just a long-winded response to say, as Ben Franklin once did, "half improvised and half compromise" only this time in regard to conference expansion rather than revolutions.

Cheers,
Neil

Even as an RU fan I agree they wouldnt have been much of an add in any CR in "02" but remember this...in "91" when RU joined the OBE their were rumblings even then about the B1G which the then BE commish made sure RU was pushed through knowing how important to TV the NY/NJ Metro is to any TV relevance well before we heard much about any CR! Now looking back it was a quaint time when conferences were regional(which i miss). For reasons Im not quite sure of(PSU?) RU was always B1G oriented!?!