Please reconcile these two widely held beliefs:
BC is the unwanted red headed step child of the ACC. (No power)
BC is blocking Uconn's admission to the ACC (Total power)
A good friend of mine from Boston told me the Eagles didn't get a call from the refs for years after joining the ACC. So the fans clearly felt like the red headed step child but it sounds like a perception issue.Please reconcile these two widely held beliefs:
BC is the unwanted red headed step child of the ACC. (No power)
BC is blocking Uconn's admission to the ACC (Total power)
They are using whatever influence they have to try and block us. They fear us and have for a long time. They are unable and unwilling to articulate a good reason for not wanting us but will move behind the scenes to block us from the ACC. They are the reason Pitt was included and not us last week. It's something our administration will have to overcome, and I have a lot of confidence in our new president.Please reconcile these two widely held beliefs:
BC is the unwanted red headed step child of the ACC. (No power)
BC is blocking Uconn's admission to the ACC (Total power)
It's never been proven that BC was spearheading an effort to block us. They are probably just one of enough schools in that conference that aren't interested.
It's pretty obvious UConn isn't worth adding on it's own merits. We're good filler to come along with another big fish.
As good as our basketball teams may be, the ACC has no shortage of good basketball. So they can afford to wait. UConn is in the same situation as UCF or ECU. We're here. We're not going anywhere and they'll get back to us if they feel like it.
A good friend of mine from Boston told me the Eagles didn't get a call from the refs for years after joining the ACC. So the fans clearly felt like the red headed step child but it sounds like a perception issue.
As to BC blocking UConn, I don't know what the admission requirements are for the ACC re voting. I believe the Big East used to require 75% of existing members approve a new member. I don't know if that is still true. That said, BC doesn't want to compete with UConn for recruits in New England. I suspect they are trying to block UConn. They have been in the league since 2005, so they probably have some solid relationships with other ACC schools. Obviously, this is all speculation on my part.
i have a feeling if the ACC were starting from scratch today NC would do whatever they could to keep NCSTate out. there was a time when colelge athletics were about playing rivals and creating tradition. apparently now it's a grab for market share and cash. is there anyone that thinks this is the path we should be travelling down?Which is why Herbst "reached out" to Fr. Leahy. But a good reason to block Uconn is that we're they're de facto instate rival. All teams try to block an in state rival. Not all: North Carolina's the exception.
Someone posted the expansion committee. There were 12 members on it, one from each ACC school. The AD's included BC, Duke, UNC and FSU. The rest were 4 presidents and 4 academic people. One would assume each member of the committee had equal votes. Is it possible that any of the 4 presidents or 4 academic reps had problems with Uconn that they did not have with Cuse/Pitt? Not saying they did, but that possibility does exist, be it concerns over APR for BB, compliance, etc. Until there is a smoking gun, nobody knows why Pitt and Cuse were selected. Who knows, it could be the AD and presidential transition at Uconn. Was there anyone that was empowered to make a decision when the initial discussions started? Was Uconn even talking to the ACC at any time showing interest in moving during the entirely too long Hathaway 360 review/Herbst transition? Did Hathaway respond to anyone that may have reached out to him about this during his review period? Was he effectively useless during that time? Seems like Pitt and Cuse were in communication with the ACC during that period based on sources that are just as good as Blaudschuns or that conclude BC blocked Uconn. Sources in this day and age are message boards and tweets and are generally unreliable, but if you believe his, you should believe the others too. Everyone here believes that Uconn should have been the first choice, yet they weren't, so find blame anywhere outside the program/institution. As always, BC is a good scapegoat. You guys give them way too much credit.The 75% rule doesn't apply until the school comes up for a vote after it's application. The ACC had an expansion committee. BC was on it. Some sources have stated that BC blocked UConn which was the first choice.
Someone posted the expansion committee. There were 12 members on it, one from each ACC school. The AD's included BC, Duke, UNC and FSU. The rest were 4 presidents and 4 academic people. One would assume each member of the committee had equal votes. Is it possible that any of the 4 presidents or 4 academic reps had problems with Uconn that they did not have with Cuse/Pitt? Not saying they did, but that possibility does exist, be it concerns over APR for BB, compliance, etc. Until there is a smoking gun, nobody knows why Pitt and Cuse were selected. Who knows, it could be the AD and presidential transition at Uconn. Was there anyone that was empowered to make a decision when the initial discussions started? Was Uconn even talking to the ACC at any time showing interest in moving during the entirely too long Hathaway 360 review/Herbst transition? Did Hathaway respond to anyone that may have reached out to him about this during his review period? Was he effectively useless during that time? Seems like Pitt and Cuse were in communication with the ACC during that period based on sources that are just as good as Blaudschuns or that conclude BC blocked Uconn. Sources in this day and age are message boards and tweets and are generally unreliable, but if you believe his, you should believe the others too. Everyone here believes that Uconn should have been the first choice, yet they weren't, so find blame anywhere outside the program/institution. As always, BC is a good scapegoat. You guys give them way too much credit.