Irish fan on why UConn belongs in the ACC

[BlueMAB]

I don't believe UConn was set to get the ACC offer until BC began piping up. Pitt is an old and important football rival for us, and the ACC clearly has been working to get us into the ACC fold for at least a decade. Taking Pitt would help the ACC woo us.

It's no shot at UConn from either the ACC or ND. It is just what is based on how things developed over decades while UConn did not play major college football.

What you "believe" is not only irrelevant, but also contradicts reality.

 

[btstimpy]

They signed the GOR after getting rebuffed. But he was angry at Tobacco Road, that much can't be denied. And, in case you didn't know, tier 3 for football is anything outside the conference regular season.

Tier 3 is anything during the entire season that ESPN won't pick up and Raycom won't pick up to show. In Florida State's case, that would be an occasional game against a FCS opponent like they had this season with Savannah State. And I think ESPN picked it up and put it on ESPN3 anyway. So FSU had zero Tier 3 inventory in football to worry about and probably never will.

 

[MSNDfan]

What you "believe" is not only irrelevant, but also contradicts reality.

Because reality is so obviously about BC having amazing powers over all and sundry and about the ACC being stupid enough to pursue ND without making certain it adds the only BE football team with which we had a rivalry: Pitt.

 

[BlueMAB]

Because ND's decision to join the ACC hinges not on what's best for ND, but whether or not they get to keep playing Pitt.

LMAO.

 

[btstimpy]

I guess he is implying the B1G is and will be academically superior to the ACC.

Maryland Presidents have a misperception of their stature in the Academic arena all of the time. Dr. C. Daniel Mote was certainly confused. He never could get that place into the Top 50 academically. It's no surprise that his successor, Dr. Wallace Loh, is also confused.

 

[Pat125]

Maryland Presidents have a misperception of their stature in the Academic arena all of the time. Dr. C. Daniel Mote was certainly confused. He never could get that place into the Top 50 academically. It's no surprise that his successor, Dr. Wallace Loh, is also confused.

I don't know stimpy. Maybe they are confused, but not about academic quality. I'm guessing they and most university presidents don't subscribe to your shortsighted and arbitrary view of academic quality. I'm fairly certain that Dr. Sullivan isn't that confused either.

Maryland and UConn do quite well even though they are not ranked in the top 50 by some rag. Your view of misperception is misplaced.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Your view of misperception is misplaced.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

 

[MSNDfan]

Because ND's decision to join the ACC hinges not on what's best for ND, but whether or not they get to keep playing Pitt.

LMAO.

More and more I think most of the UConn fans who live in bitterness choose not to see many things that are fairly obvious.

The move to being a half member of a conference in football was certain to cause us to lose football rivalries. The best for us in such a scenario was to keep a number of our football rivalries while continuing our hold over the northeast and extending our reach into the deep and lush recruiting grounds of the south, all while securing our basketball and non-revenues in the ideal situation.

The ACC was clearly far and away the best choice, and it became as close to perfect as we could expect with Pitt in the ACC. We have played Pitt 69 times. The only teams we have played more are Navy, SC, Purdue and Michigan State. As making the move to the ACC would mean the end, at least annually, of the Purdue and Michigan State rivalries, having Pitt as part of the ACC would go a long way toward easing the move.

It is no accident that DeLoss Dodds led the Big 12 in trying to land Pitt. They were going to use Pitt to try to get us to make the deal with them that we made with the ACC.

 

[upstater]

It is no accident that DeLoss Dodds led the Big 12 in trying to land Pitt. They were going to use Pitt to try to get us to make the deal with them that we made with the ACC.

2004: UConn over Pitt 29-17
2005: Pitt over UConn 24-0
2006: UConn over Pitt 46-45
2007: UConn over Pitt 34-14
2008: Pitt over UConn 34-10
2009: Pitt over UConn 24-21
2010: UConn over Pitt 30-28
2011: Pitt over UConn 35-20
2012: UConn over Pitt 24-17

Is this the Pitt team that Texas was dying to use as a lure for ND? A team that went 4-5 against a school that went full 85 scholarships for the first time a decade ago?

That only makes sense in the context of this:

2009: UConn over ND 33-30

 

[Yawkey Way]

.

Here is what is pertinent about all this: ND coming aboard the ACC ended all possibility of anybody leaving, .

ND's giving up football independence by joining the ACC ( well with one foot in anyway ) indirectly helped the ACC in its leverage in getting a TV revenue contract that FSU and Clemson coould live with. This much is true. But it is MUCH more the case of the ACC's adoption by all its member schools with its recently enacted GOR provisions, binding on its member schools, that lessons the possibility of any ACC team leaving the ACC in the future... not so much ND's entry into the ACC.. The GOR is the glue for that.

 

[MSNDfan]

2004: UConn over Pitt 29-17
2005: Pitt over UConn 24-0
2006: UConn over Pitt 46-45
2007: UConn over Pitt 34-14
2008: Pitt over UConn 34-10
2009: Pitt over UConn 24-21
2010: UConn over Pitt 30-28
2011: Pitt over UConn 35-20
2012: UConn over Pitt 24-17

Is this the Pitt team that Texas was dying to use as a lure for ND? A team that went 4-5 against a school that went full 85 scholarships for the first time a decade ago?

That only makes sense in the context of this:

2009: UConn over ND 33-30

It makes sense in terms of ND's football history.

Because UConn has no football history, you may find the matter to be of no importance. But it matters.

And I would say that football history matters more to football fans than basketball history does to basketball fans.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Because ND's decision to join the ACC hinges not on what's best for ND, but whether or not they get to keep playing Pitt.

LMAO.

I know, its silly. The reality is ND saw the dominos falling all around them. They concluded ( correctly ) that they needed to find a home for their teams before the train left the station and they determined that the ACC was their best landing spot so they wanted to be sure the make up of that league would at least be something they could live with. ND did not want more of a southern tinge to the ACC.. they preferred an eastern tinge to it, so they did use their influence to try and shape the league they would soon be joining to include those schools that they had previous relationships with. ND had no previous relationships with the southern wing of the ACC. But they did with BC, Pitt, Miami, Syracuse from their BE days, going back several decades, as this ND fan correctly states in that respect, anyway.. So the negotiations for the shaping of the ACC from a predominently southern league to a much broader and more larger " Atlantic Coast " type league began to take shape.

 

[upstater]

It makes sense in terms of ND's football history.

Because UConn has no football history, you may find the matter to be of no importance. But it matters.

And I would say that football history matters more to football fans than basketball history does to basketball fans.

We've got football history. I just gave you some. UConn actually won the BE when Pitt was in it. Pitt? Wallowing.

 

[TerryD]

2004: UConn over Pitt 29-17
2005: Pitt over UConn 24-0
2006: UConn over Pitt 46-45
2007: UConn over Pitt 34-14
2008: Pitt over UConn 34-10
2009: Pitt over UConn 24-21
2010: UConn over Pitt 30-28
2011: Pitt over UConn 35-20
2012: UConn over Pitt 24-17

Is this the Pitt team that Texas was dying to use as a lure for ND? A team that went 4-5 against a school that went full 85 scholarships for the first time a decade ago?

That only makes sense in the context of this:

2009: UConn over ND 33-30

No, it had more to do with ND playing Pitt 69 times and UConn once.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

Yes, .. It was an unbridled and justifiable fear that the P5 train was leaving the station, and ND could not take the chance to be left behind doing the antiquated football independence gig any longer with the rapidly changing football landscape taking place all around them. So it made perfect sense for ND to find a league home, and the ACC in return got what it needed which was the ND brand to cut a good deal with the networks that later developed into a GOR deal.. all of which kept FSU and Clemson in the ACC, and prevented any poaching attempts as well as actual defections. ND in return kept their tv contracts, and some flexbility to keep about half their football schedule in their own domain, while the rest of their school teams came into the ACC as full members.

Here's a dime, go call your mother and tell her there are serious doubts about you being a college football fan.

ND's giving up football independence by joining the ACC ( well with one foot in anyway ) indirectly helped the ACC in its leverage in getting a TV revenue contract that FSU and Clemson coould live with. This much is true. But it is MUCH more the case of the ACC's adoption by all its member schools with its recently enacted GOR provisions, binding on its member schools, that lessons the possibility of any ACC team leaving the ACC in the future... not so much ND's entry into the ACC.. The GOR is the glue for that.

Sit back down Yawkey, that's the most intelligent thing you've said today.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

How could Michigan not be #1? Yost gave you your nickname.

We're the fighting Upstart Papists?

 

[upstater]

No, it had more to do with ND playing Pitt 69 times and UConn once.

You missed the point.

Texas wanted Pitt to lure ND. Uh-huh.

 

[MSNDfan]

We've got football history. I just gave you some. UConn actually won the BE when Pitt was in it. Pitt? Wallowing.

Now that's funny. For your sake, I hope you are joking. For UConn's sake, I hope no one in your administration or athletics department thinks that way, or at least has the good sense to pretend not to.

 

[Adios]

Now that's funny. For your sake, I hope you are joking. For UConn's sake, I hope no one in your administration or athletics department thinks that way, or at least has the good sense to pretend not to.

He's not joking. We have two conference titles at the FBS level.

 

[BlueMAB]

More and more I think most of the UConn fans who live in bitterness choose not to see many things that are fairly obvious.

The move to being a half member of a conference in football was certain to cause us to lose football rivalries. The best for us in such a scenario was to keep a number of our football rivalries while continuing our hold over the northeast and extending our reach into the deep and lush recruiting grounds of the south, all while securing our basketball and non-revenues in the ideal situation.

The ACC was clearly far and away the best choice, and it became as close to perfect as we could expect with Pitt in the ACC. We have played Pitt 69 times. The only teams we have played more are Navy, SC, Purdue and Michigan State. As making the move to the ACC would mean the end, at least annually, of the Purdue and Michigan State rivalries, having Pitt as part of the ACC would go a long way toward easing the move.

It is no accident that DeLoss Dodds led the Big 12 in trying to land Pitt. They were going to use Pitt to try to get us to make the deal with them that we made with the ACC.

No bitterness here. You're just a blowhard who thinks we're stupid.

On what planet would ND be a member of any conference where they are unable, or Pitt is unwilling to schedule an OOC game with ND?

Rivalries are so important to ND that they gave up three of them (Purdue, Michigan St., Michigan) so they could join the ACC to play Pitt. Right.

And you aren't even guaranteed to play Pitt every year anyway, right?

 

[BlueMAB]

Won won two Big East Championships in half the time it took Rutgers to win one.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

No bitterness here. You're just a blowhard who thinks we're stupid.

On what planet would ND be a member of any conference where they are unable, or Pitt is unwilling to schedule an OOC game with ND?

Rivalries are so important to ND that they gave up three of them (Purdue, Michigan St., Michigan) so they could join the ACC to play Pitt. Right.

And you aren't even guaranteed to play Pitt every year anyway, right?

SAP but memories are short in this thread.

- Well, Penn State 'had to' drop both ND and Pitt when they joined the BUG.

- Only the Michigan rivalry was given up and it had already been scheduled to go on hiatus. Sparty and Purd are staying but they won't be annual.

-We're still quasi-independent as long as we retain our two Californian annual opponents while preserving the Oct/Nov dates.

-Pitt/BC/Syr were not the reason we moved Olympic sports to the ACC [Duke and FSU are greater] but they make the 5 game commitment palatable. I can imagine that's it's only a 3 or 4 game obligation since we would have been playing those three anyway.

 

[upstater]

Now that's funny. For your sake, I hope you are joking. For UConn's sake, I hope no one in your administration or athletics department thinks that way, or at least has the good sense to pretend not to.

For all Pitt and Syracuse's history of playing football, you would think that both schools would not lose repeatedly for a decade to a school that had its full compliment of scholarships for the first time in 2004. This must mean that their football history is not quite as weighty as you think it is. Yale U. also has quite a football history.

 

[upstater]

SAP but memories are short in this thread.

- Well, Penn State 'had to' drop both ND and Pitt when they joined the BUG.

ND and PSU had a 10 year rivalry during the 1980s, and hardly played each other at all before then. I would hardly call it deep and abiding. And PSU would have played Pitt regularly if Pitt didn't demand a decade's worth of home-and-homes. PSU offered them a 2-2 that was rejected. I'm not sure why any of this is relevant anyway.

- Only the Michigan rivalry was given up and it had already been scheduled to go on hiatus. Sparty and Purd are staying but they won't be annual.

The only reason that we're even discussing this is the idea that ND preferred to play ACC teams over B1G teams. It is really hard to make this argument when the B1G isn't offering ND partial membership while the ACC is. Assuming independence is a priority for ND, that fact alone explains ND's current scheduling.

-We're still quasi-independent as long as we retain our two Californian annual opponents while preserving the Oct/Nov dates.

-Pitt/BC/Syr were not the reason we moved Olympic sports to the ACC [Duke and FSU are greater] but they make the 5 game commitment palatable. I can imagine that's it's only a 3 or 4 game obligation since we would have been playing those three anyway.

The deal is great for ND. No one has said otherwise.

 

[BlueMAB]

No they didn't.

If PSU wanted to keep playing ND out of conference they would have. NOTHING prevented them from doing so.

Don't give a if you're quasi-independent or not.
The idea that Pitt factored into the ND decision is a duck___ing joke.