dayooper
It's what I do. I drink and I know things.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2013
- Messages
- 1,676
- Reaction Score
- 4,387
From VT's CR board:
let's look at real history
1) When the B1G offered ND membership in the mid 1990's, they claimed the ONLY conference that they had anything in common was the ACC and declined the B1G offer, not once but twice. Immediately I posted that ND was negotiating with the ACC. I was dissed by a lot of posters but history has vindicated my position 1,000 fold. In hindsite this was really clear but NO ONE spotted it in the official media. NO ONE.
2) When Maryland left the ACC conference, one of their legal defenses was that the ACC was attempting to create a Monopoly by expanding. That expansion was to include Louisville, Penn State, Northwestern, ND (Full time) and Michigan. The ONLY Stumbling block was that the ACC had Purdue, but they wanted Indiana instead. While the ACC schools were not aware of the background negotiations, don't think for a minute that the B1G was not fully aware. Just based off the list above, you can bet Indiana went running to their commissioner, and so did Ohio State (who had to have declined). This fully explains why the B1G had to move so fast, had to take Rutgers when UVA declined, and the ACC could ad Louisville in 48 hours. They'd already vetted Louisville.
3) Texas had a meeting at ND regarding how their deal with the ACC worked, and rumor has it that our commissioner was there. This was NOT negotiations, but. Then just last month, on a podium, the Texas AD states that if Texas was to leave the B12, the only conference they'd be interested in was the ACC. Sounds reminiscent of the 1990's Notre Dame Situation. I will claim right now that TEXAS IS NEGOTIATING WITH THE ACC.
I realize that a lot of you are glass half full guys, but do you really think that the same affiliation that interests Penn State, Michigan, Notre Dame and Texas could be the wrong move?
Even worse, the administrations at Penn State have really knocked the research deal the B1G has. Why? The only reason is to convience their supporters that it ain't worth jack. Why? See above. What else could it be? If PSU leaves the B1G one can make a bet as to where they are headed. Now Ohio State blasts the B1G for adding Maryland, and especially Rutgers, and then says that the B1G economic model is not sustainable. I can tell you right now, the western schools in the B1G WILL NOT accept any additional schools in the east until they get two rivals out west. That is the deal the conference has. They do not sound like happy bedfellows.
My thoughts:
1. Sure, why not? Yet they partially joined the Big East first instead.
2. This is ridiculous. Yes, I have heard that The ACC was trying to woo PSU and NW, but I highly doubt that Indiana would be the sticking point for getting ND full, PSU, and Michigan. In fact, ND had no relationship with IU, but a strong one with Purdue. I understand IU is a better brand than Purdue, but to lose PSU, ND, and Michigan over it is dumb.
3. Of course Texas would say that; they are the only conference that would accept a partial Texas. Throw in the LHN and ACC owned by ESPN, and it's the only conference they can go to.
I think we have found the Dude of VT.
let's look at real history
1) When the B1G offered ND membership in the mid 1990's, they claimed the ONLY conference that they had anything in common was the ACC and declined the B1G offer, not once but twice. Immediately I posted that ND was negotiating with the ACC. I was dissed by a lot of posters but history has vindicated my position 1,000 fold. In hindsite this was really clear but NO ONE spotted it in the official media. NO ONE.
2) When Maryland left the ACC conference, one of their legal defenses was that the ACC was attempting to create a Monopoly by expanding. That expansion was to include Louisville, Penn State, Northwestern, ND (Full time) and Michigan. The ONLY Stumbling block was that the ACC had Purdue, but they wanted Indiana instead. While the ACC schools were not aware of the background negotiations, don't think for a minute that the B1G was not fully aware. Just based off the list above, you can bet Indiana went running to their commissioner, and so did Ohio State (who had to have declined). This fully explains why the B1G had to move so fast, had to take Rutgers when UVA declined, and the ACC could ad Louisville in 48 hours. They'd already vetted Louisville.
3) Texas had a meeting at ND regarding how their deal with the ACC worked, and rumor has it that our commissioner was there. This was NOT negotiations, but. Then just last month, on a podium, the Texas AD states that if Texas was to leave the B12, the only conference they'd be interested in was the ACC. Sounds reminiscent of the 1990's Notre Dame Situation. I will claim right now that TEXAS IS NEGOTIATING WITH THE ACC.
I realize that a lot of you are glass half full guys, but do you really think that the same affiliation that interests Penn State, Michigan, Notre Dame and Texas could be the wrong move?
Even worse, the administrations at Penn State have really knocked the research deal the B1G has. Why? The only reason is to convience their supporters that it ain't worth jack. Why? See above. What else could it be? If PSU leaves the B1G one can make a bet as to where they are headed. Now Ohio State blasts the B1G for adding Maryland, and especially Rutgers, and then says that the B1G economic model is not sustainable. I can tell you right now, the western schools in the B1G WILL NOT accept any additional schools in the east until they get two rivals out west. That is the deal the conference has. They do not sound like happy bedfellows.
My thoughts:
1. Sure, why not? Yet they partially joined the Big East first instead.
2. This is ridiculous. Yes, I have heard that The ACC was trying to woo PSU and NW, but I highly doubt that Indiana would be the sticking point for getting ND full, PSU, and Michigan. In fact, ND had no relationship with IU, but a strong one with Purdue. I understand IU is a better brand than Purdue, but to lose PSU, ND, and Michigan over it is dumb.
3. Of course Texas would say that; they are the only conference that would accept a partial Texas. Throw in the LHN and ACC owned by ESPN, and it's the only conference they can go to.
I think we have found the Dude of VT.