Too bad - as noted, my biggest concern about the ACC is that it allowed BC to have any sway in the first place. BC has done nothing for the ACC yet they were still allowed to persuade the Tobacco Road decision makers that UConn should be kept out. Sure I am bitter, but, more importantly, the conference showed overall poor judgment when that was allowed to happen. I feel the same way about the Louisville add.
BC has no stroke within the ACC. None, nada, nil, nein, nunca, zero, zip, zilch, bubkes. Their powers that be were flat out being dishonest about how much influence they wielded, in regards to UConn joining.
They have done nothing inside the league since about 2007-2008.
They hold no sway over Tobacco Road. It was the TR schools, UVA, and, UMD who openly supported UConn. It was the southernmost ACC schools, and, your former BE Conference mates, who voted against you. Louisville was a compromise solution, plain and simple.
I know none of this changes yor opinion, but, it wasn't as if BC was telling the rest of the league what to do. They'll never have that kind of influence. Even if they're here for 100 years.
If nothing else, the ACC was known as pretty strong academic conference. That was thrown away when you decided to add Louisville.
Because the ACC added UL, all of a sudden a league with the likes of UNC, UVA, Duke, Wake, Tech, Miami, BC, etc, is no longer a strong academic conference? Thats just not true. None of their reputations took a hit because it took on UL, rather than UConn. It still IS a pretty strong academic conference. Easily either 1st or 2nd amongst the major conferences.
Did the B1G's academic rep take a hit for adding a mediocre institution like Nebraska?
These decisions concern me. No only because UConn was left out, but because the ACC seemed to do the expedient thing instead of the right thing. Thus, I would rather throw in with the B1G. You could argue that Rutgers was a poor choice by them, but without AAU, UConn wasn't even in the running.