More ACC issues...now Virginia

[Yawkey Way]

Yeah, I was wondering about the use of 'parochial' as that typically refers to religion (Christian) and UConn is a secular, state university. Even in the '90's when I w.'

BC has never been a national power in football. I hope you don't think that I said this above. The only comment that I made regarding the term " national" was in reference to BC no longer being a school that gets most of its students locally from Massachusetts, and such. BC gets a lot of students now from outside New England. They attend for 4 years, then many leave the region. As such, they have no " hate " for Uconn ( thats reserved for the older BC Alums.. and the locals ). They could not tell you where Uconn plays its home football games.They don't care. ( they barely care about BC football ). So this notion that Uconn will ever become BC's football rival does not square with how the current BC student body ( the future Alums ) look at this. If you are a student at BC from Illinois, a Uconn football game does nothing for you, as presumably Uconn football is not in the ACC. I suppose that if Uconn becomes a member of the ACC, that BC student from Illinois might take some interest as its a league game and played annually as such. But a football with Uconn might just as well be a game with UMaine, as far as the majority current student body at BC is concerned. Such a Uconn- BC football game gets the Uconn football fans heart rate going fast, but it really doesn't do much at all over at BC. Its just the way it is. BC students get excited when its ND, but thats becase many of them could not get into ND on their Application there. Syracuse however might become a future interesting football rival for BC, and vive versa. Both are not Publics, and recruit the same regions.

 

[upstater]

Why is this not open to speculation ? Why is there a certainty about this ? That it was a slam dunk that if BC did not express their resistance to Uconn, Uconn was going to get the votes for admittance to the ACC ? There is no evidence that I'm aware of that schools made it known that Uconn to the ACC was a slamdunk, absent the wishes of BC. It MIGHT be the case. But it certainly falls into the realm of some uncertainty and speculation at the very least, that absent BC's wishes, UConn was a slam dunk to the ACC.

Is BC's position on this STILL the reason TODAY that the other ACC schools have not decided to invite UCONN to the ACC ?.... as another Uconn poster said on here, " because there is still a statue of limitations in effect " ? as he said to " blackball Uconn from getting to the ACC , as a " promised agreement by the ACC to BC ? Is this what most Uconn posters here believe ? Just asking here, thats all...and trying to make sense of what I've been reading on here regarding this.

I have all the evidence I need.

A month before the whole Pitt/BC invitation came about, there was a Villanova insider on Rutgers' board who laid out what was going on in the ACC, and he said that Syracuse and UConn were the selections for expansion but that UConn was getting pushback from BC. He went on to describe how the ACC was considering Pitt as the replacement.

I paid this no mind even after Pitt and Cuse was selected, until the Boston Globe article in which BC's AD said he had blackballed UConn.

We heard numerous quotes in the press afterward about how appalled the Duke and UNC were at BC's blackball.

Subsequent to that, the former AD of ND and the AD of Virginia made noise that the ACC was not done and that it was looking at moving to 16. Articles appeared that Notre Dame and UConn would be added in weeks.

When the BG article appeared, BC's AD referred to ESPN engineering the whole thing. Multiple posters in ACC country close to the ACC said that several schools were livid, as was Swofford. The next day, BC's AD apologized to ESPN and the ACC schools and said he took everything back. On ACC boards, multiple posters reported that because the ACC was in damage control, and because of the mention of ESPN's involvement, further expansion was temporarily scuppered.

By the time the next expansion rolled around, there were other circumstances involved, like FSU needing more football heft, which explains Louisville. But even then BC opposed UConn on the basis of encroachment into its home region, according to newspaper articles from North Carolina. The AD Bates opposed UConn. This is an institutional imperative at BC.

So, although message boards are always filled with innuendo and lies, the newspaper articles printed in the Globe and the Carolina papers clearly show how BC's opposition was key to UConn's exclusion.

Heck, even 2 years ago, the Louisville AD said UConn's invitation had already been penned prior to the press he put on.

 

[BC1978]

I can't say I blame Florida State or Clemson for not wanting to risk another Boston College.

Really??

FWIW, BC football has been very competitive in the ACC, bottoming out in 2011 and 2012 at the tail end of the Spaz years, and recovering quickly under Addazio.

Based, on conference records (and only using the total record to sort out identical conference records), the results are as follows:

2005: 4th of 12 schools
2006: 4th of 12 schools
2007: 2nd of 12 schools (Atlantic Division winner)
2008: 2nd of 12 schools (Atlantic Division winner)
2009: 5th of 12 schools
2010: 7th of 12 schools
2011: 10th of 12 schools
2012: 12th of 12 schools
2013: 7th of 14 schools
2014: 6th of 14 schools

Not for nothing, IMHO, but if you asked Florida State or Clemson about BC, two schools that BC plays tough and has beaten on a number of occasions, I think you might be surprised at their answers.

 

[uconndogs]

Do we really need to put up with a BC contingent here. Personally, I'm in no mood and I suspect I'm not alone.

 

[SubbaBub]

Really??

FWIW, BC football has been very competitive in the ACC, bottoming out in 2011 and 2012 at the tail end of the Spaz years, and recovering quickly under Addazio.

Based, on conference records (and only using the total record to sort out identical conference records), the results are as follows:

2005: 4th of 12 schools
2006: 4th of 12 schools
2007: 2nd of 12 schools (Atlantic Division winner)
2008: 2nd of 12 schools (Atlantic Division winner)
2009: 5th of 12 schools
2010: 7th of 12 schools
2011: 10th of 12 schools
2012: 12th of 12 schools
2013: 7th of 14 schools
2014: 6th of 14 schools

Not for nothing, IMHO, but if you asked Florida State or Clemson about BC, two schools that BC plays tough and has beaten on a number of occasions, I think you might be surprised at their answers.

Looks to me like BC recruited a lot better in the BE. Wonder why that is? {I know, so I don't need to wonder}

 

[BC1978]

Looks to me like BC recruited a lot better in the BE. Wonder why that is? {I know, so I don't need to wonder}

Well, whether that is true or not is kind of irrelevant, isn't it? Since it is now clear that pretty much every BE FB program was eyeing an exit, the BE was never going to remain as it was for the long-term, IMO. (Unless you really believe that if BC had decided to stay in the BE, after Miami and VT left, that no other BE school would have jumped up to take BC's place when the ACC again came calling.)

 

[SubbaBub]

Well, whether that is true or not is kind of irrelevant, isn't it? Since it is now clear that pretty much every BE FB program was eyeing an exit, the BE was never going to remain as it was for the long-term, IMO. (Unless you really believe that if BC had decided to stay in the BE, after Miami and VT left, that no other BE school would have jumped up to take BC's place when the ACC again came calling.)

The manner in which BC left spooked the remaining schools. The BB/FB factions also drove these teams to see safer ground. So BC can share credit on that one. If BC stayed and the FB schools split, then yes the BE would be alive today.

 

[BC1978]

The manner in which BC left spooked the remaining schools. The BB/FB factions also drove these teams to see safer ground. So BC can share credit on that one. If BC stayed and the FB schools split, then yes the BE would be alive today.

I think the inherent instability created by the FB and BB factions was mostly responsible. Unless you really believe that BC's departure from the BE in 2003 "spooked" Syracuse, Pitt, and WVU in 2011 and 2012 and Rutgers in 2013 into leaving the Conference.

Do you really think that had BC elected to stay in the BE in 2003 no other BE FB school would have taken their place (thus "spooking" all of the remaining schools)? Do you think a BC decision to stay would have prevented any of these other schools from leaving in 2011, 2012, and 2013?

My limited point here is that I believe the BE FB Conference was never going to remain as it once was, regardless of whether BC left or not.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I have all the evidence I need.



We heard numerous quotes in the press afterward about how appalled the Duke and UNC were at BC's blackball.
.

There was never any public comments from Duke and UNC that BC took the position of not supporting Uconn's quest to the ACC. It was public knowledge as a matter of fact. What some ACC schools commented on what the fact that the BC AD decided to go public in an unguarded moment to reveal information about ACC proceedings that these schools were unhappy with. The AD was a jerk, overstepped his bounds, was called out of it, and apologized to the other ACC schools.. who accepted his apologies. But this notion that Duke and UNC were ssomehow suprised that BC did not support Uconn as a school to the ACC, was no news to Duke, nor UNC... and there is no evidence to support the narrative we often hear that the ACC schools promised BC not to invite Uconn. These ACC schools ( similar to the other P5 Conference schools ) evaluate Uconn for potential consideration for membership wholly apart from the wishes of the former BC AD... (who is no longer employed at the school.) If the ACC wanted Uconn in the ACC, Swofford would bring all the school Presidents together, have a discussion on the pros and cons, then put it to a vote. BC has a new AD. Whatever the ACC decides it won't look over to the BC AD around the table to form their decision on how to vote. The Schools would have met with their individual School Accountants. THEY will tell these schools if such an invite of a potential school will make them money or not... and THATS how it is principally decided, ... always...Same as it ever was.

 

[CL82]

There was never any public comments from Duke and UNC that BC took the position of not supporting Uconn's quest to the ACC. It was public knowledge as a matter of fact. What some ACC schools commented on what the fact that the BC AD decided to go public in an unguarded moment to reveal information about ACC proceedings that these schools were unhappy with. The AD was a jerk, overstepped his bounds, was called out of it, and apologized to the other ACC schools.. who accepted his apologies. But this notion that Duke and UNC were ssomehow suprised that BC did not support Uconn as a school to the ACC, was no news to Duke, nor UNC... and there is no evidence to support the narrative we often hear that the ACC schools promised BC not to invite Uconn. These ACC schools ( similar to the other P5 Conference schools ) evaluate Uconn for potential consideration for membership wholly apart from the wishes of the former BC AD... (who is no longer employed at the school.) If the ACC wanted Uconn in the ACC, Swofford would bring all the school Presidents together, have a discussion on the pros and cons, then put it to a vote. BC has a new AD. Whatever the ACC decides it won't look over to the BC AD around the table to form their decision on how to vote. The Schools would have met with their individual School Accountants. THEY will tell these schools if such an invite of a potential school will make them money or not... and THATS how it is principally decided, ... always...Same as it ever was.

You could not be more right. You imagined sequence of events is far more likely to be accurate than the statements of the people who were actually involved. You could not have any more "truthiness" and we all agree that we are the better for your insight.

Thank you for your interest in Connecticut athletics.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Looks to me like BC recruited a lot better in the BE. Wonder why that is? {I know, so I don't need to wonder}

BC probably did recruit better in the BE under Skinner for Basketball. But for Football ? On the whole, BC has probably recruited bit better in the ACC than in the BE. BC suffered a bit for 2-3 years with the Jags, Spaz but appears back on track now for solid, if unspectacular, football recruiting. BC is about 30-35 nationally right now with their football recruiting. The fact that their recruited players tend to qualify, can probably add 6-10 places to that current recuiting ranking too. So I don't see much evidence to support the claim that BC overall recruited better in football when they were in the BE.

 

[Yawkey Way]

[QUOTE="SubbaBub, post: 1152511, member: 523" If BC stayed and the FB schools split, then yes the BE would be alive today.[/QUOTE]

No chance, imo. The handwriting was on the wall once Miami decided to bolt the BE for the ACC. That started the football dominos in the BE to fall. The BE was a basketball league run by basketball people that were clueless regarding a vision for football. The BE football league was finished. If people disagree with this assessment then that is of course their perogative.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

I really think they need to let female students arm themselves. If a few of these frat boys start getting shot, we might see this change. It's not just the ACC or UVA, this is a general problem in colleges. Disgusting.

In the left margin, not too far down from the article's start, is a link to another Rolling Stone article on fraternities at Dartmouth; a school to which I have family ties going back to the "Animal House" (Screen Writers were Dartmouth grads) days. Events in the movie were tame to the extreme when compared to events cited in the article. It's hammers Dartmouth's "rape culture" and the unbelievable attitudes of the fraternities. I've sent the link to appropriate family members. Am awaiting a response.

In any event, recent exposure leads me to believe that these horrible acts are not confined to any Conference or region of the country. They won't stop until School Administrations stop reacting to a perceived PR problem and start serving/protecting victims.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

I think one issue within UVA is that the school has a long history with Greek Life and many of its biggest donors and names partcapted in it. Woodrow Wilson was in the same frat, Phi Kappa Psi, involved in the Rolling Stone instigation. Like any other university (or corporation in general), it is driven by money and I am sure that UVA administration is worried that any curtailment or bad press on it's Greek Life will reduce donations from these folks. Thus, the issue was brushed under the rug until now.

When pressed, the UVA President admitted as much, i.e. "people won't send their daughters to a rape school." or something very close to that.

 

[upstater]

There was never any public comments from Duke and UNC that BC took the position of not supporting Uconn's quest to the ACC. It was public knowledge as a matter of fact. What some ACC schools commented on what the fact that the BC AD decided to go public in an unguarded moment to reveal information about ACC proceedings that these schools were unhappy with. The AD was a jerk, overstepped his bounds, was called out of it, and apologized to the other ACC schools.. who accepted his apologies. But this notion that Duke and UNC were ssomehow suprised that BC did not support Uconn as a school to the ACC, was no news to Duke, nor UNC... and there is no evidence to support the narrative we often hear that the ACC schools promised BC not to invite Uconn. These ACC schools ( similar to the other P5 Conference schools ) evaluate Uconn for potential consideration for membership wholly apart from the wishes of the former BC AD... (who is no longer employed at the school.) If the ACC wanted Uconn in the ACC, Swofford would bring all the school Presidents together, have a discussion on the pros and cons, then put it to a vote. BC has a new AD. Whatever the ACC decides it won't look over to the BC AD around the table to form their decision on how to vote. The Schools would have met with their individual School Accountants. THEY will tell these schools if such an invite of a potential school will make them money or not... and THATS how it is principally decided, ... always...Same as it ever was.

There were reporters at major Charlotte newspapers who quoted the Duke and UNC presidents as expressing both frustration and bewilderment that BC would make the regional argument, given the fact that there are 4 ACC schools within less than an hour of one another. If that's noit about BCs small-minded attitude, then what is it about?

Those quotes have nothing to do with BC revealing the inner secrets, especially since BC's blackball happened BEFORE the story. These were quotes from the actual meetings.

The problem with your entire post is that you were posting there was no evidence when we've had dozens of threads and links to those articles over the years.

As for BC's new AD, the UNC and Duke pres's ridiculed him.

 

[buddy]

There was never any public comments from Duke and UNC that BC took the position of not supporting Uconn's quest to the ACC. It was public knowledge as a matter of fact. What some ACC schools commented on what the fact that the BC AD decided to go public in an unguarded moment to reveal information about ACC proceedings that these schools were unhappy with. The AD was a jerk, overstepped his bounds, was called out of it, and apologized to the other ACC schools.. who accepted his apologies. But this notion that Duke and UNC were ssomehow suprised that BC did not support Uconn as a school to the ACC, was no news to Duke, nor UNC... and there is no evidence to support the narrative we often hear that the ACC schools promised BC not to invite Uconn. These ACC schools ( similar to the other P5 Conference schools ) evaluate Uconn for potential consideration for membership wholly apart from the wishes of the former BC AD... (who is no longer employed at the school.) If the ACC wanted Uconn in the ACC, Swofford would bring all the school Presidents together, have a discussion on the pros and cons, then put it to a vote. BC has a new AD. Whatever the ACC decides it won't look over to the BC AD around the table to form their decision on how to vote. The Schools would have met with their individual School Accountants. THEY will tell these schools if such an invite of a potential school will make them money or not... and THATS how it is principally decided, ... always...Same as it ever was.

You keep repeating the same things over and over and over again. BC's objection to UConn's admission was strong enough to get others to come on board and acquiesce to their request. There is absolutely no question to this. BC won. UConn lost. You feel better now?

 

[Yawkey Way]

The narrative that BC prevailed upon the other ACC schools to not act in their own self interests, but instead to acquiesce to the demands of BC to keep Uconn out of the ACC is both illogical, as well as silly. Schools want to make money. If they thought that adding Uconn to the ACC would make them money, then requests from BC would have ceded quickly and completely to that Financial self interest overriding motive.

Also, BC has a new AD ( from the midwest )... a new basketball Coach ( from the midwest.... a new football Coach ( from Florida, by way of Connecticut ). All new to the ACC. Is BC still today this alleged powerful political power broker in the ACC (with their new AD) that can still " blackball " Uconn's invite to the ACC ?

If not, when did BC lose this apparent power in the ACC to get their demands met to apparently singlehandedly thwart a school from an invite to the ACC ? 5 years ago ? 3 years ago ? Or does BC still wield this alleged enormous political muscle within the ACC even today to keep Uconn out of the ACC ? Does BC wield this level of political power with other P5 Conferences to prevail upon these Conferences as well to acquiecse to BC's demands to keep Uconn out of these Conferences too? Or is BC's apparently enormous political muscle confined to just the ACC ? Just asking, as I'm trying to make sense of what I've been reading of late here.

 

[whaler11]

The narrative that BC prevailed upon the other ACC schools to not act in their own self interests, but instead to acquiesce to the demands of BC to keep Uconn out of the ACC is both illogical, as well as silly. Schools want to make money. If they thought that adding Uconn to the ACC would make them money, then requests from BC would have ceded quickly and completely to that Financial self interest overriding motive.

Also, BC has a new AD ( from the midwest )... a new basketball Coach ( from the midwest.... a new football Coach ( from Florida, by way of Connecticut ). All new to the ACC. Is BC still today this alleged powerful political power broker in the ACC (with their new AD) that can still " blackball " Uconn's invite to the ACC ?

If not, when did BC lose this apparent power in the ACC to singlehandedly thwart a school from an invite to the ACC ? 5 years ago ? 3 years ago ? Or does BC still wield this alleged enormous political muscle in the ACC even today to keep Uconn out of the ACC ? Does BC wield this level of political power with other P5 Conferences to prevail upon these Conferences as well to acquiecse to BC's demands to keep Uconn out of these Conferences too? Or is BC's political muscle confined to just the ACC ? Just asking, as I'm trying to make sense of what I've neen reading of late here.

How do you not have something better to do.

 

[buddy]

There has been no more CR since the last go around. The former AD, former president priest of BC were the one's at the helm at that time. If CR comes up again, then perhaps it may be a different story. But for past CR involving UConn to the ACC, BC was the villain. No doubt. No question. Please stop. You pleas are falling on deaf ears. BC is lower than pond scum and my opinion at least is not going to change until BC comes out and lobbies publicly for UConn's inclusion.

 

[HoopsFan21]

When pressed, the UVA President admitted as much, i.e. "people won't send their daughters to a rape school." or something very close to that.

Forget rape U, how about a town where young women have been disappearing at an alarming rate never to be seen again? Maybe the guy they've accused for the Hannah Graham murder is responsible, maybe not. If I had a daughter, there would be no way in hell I would let her go to Charlottesville VA.

 

[upstater]

You keep repeating the same things over and over and over again. BC's objection to UConn's admission was strong enough to get others to come on board and acquiesce to their request. There is absolutely no question to this. BC won. UConn lost. You feel better now?

The new AD Bates was into his job already at the time of the last expansion and there were articles stating that he opposed Uconns addition. While other schools had Uconn second to Louisville, Bates outright opposed it.

 

[Yawkey Way]

[QUOTE="buddy, post: 1153042, member: 3489"



It was reported by a Villanova fan 5 years ago, posted on the Rutgers Board, that when Brad Bates was the AD at Miami of Ohio, he contacted the BIG to prevail upon the BIG to blackball Uconn to the BIG. Now that Bates is at BC, newspaper reports in Charlotte are saying that Bates has a guaranteed promise with all the other schools in the ACC to keep Uconn out of the ACC until the Statue of Limitations are up. Its unclear how long BC has this promise, but the Maryland Board has an insider that works in Swofford's office and says he heard Swofford say over the water cooler one day that the Statue of Limitations timeline runs about long as people's imagination does.[/QUOTE]

 

[upstater]

[QUOTE="buddy, post: 1153042, member: 3489"



It was reported by a Villanova fan 5 years ago, posted on the Rutgers Board, that when Brad Bates was the AD at Miami of Ohio, he contacted the BIG to prevail upon the BIG to blackball Uconn to the BIG. Now that Bates is at BC, newspaper reports in Charlotte are saying that Bates has a guaranteed promise with all the other schools in the ACC to keep Uconn out of the ACC until the Statue of Limitations are up. Its unclear how long BC has this promise, but the Maryland Board has an insider that works in Swofford's office and says he heard Swofford say over the water cooler one day that the Statue of Limitations timeline runs about long as people's imagination does.

[/QUOTE]

What a troll

 

[Yawkey Way]

What a troll[/QUOTE]
Nah.. you're just into personal insulting, and not into discussing the topic with me. Thats your thing, thats all.

 

[upstater]

What a troll

Nah.. you're just into personal insulting, and not into discussing the topic with me. Thats your thing, thats all.[/QUOTE]

I don't know you personally, so how could that be a personal insult? Are you 2 foot tall or something?

I only know you by your troll posts that disregard everything that's said in order to twist things, the definition of an internet troll.