Why the ACC took Louisville

[ramses 2.0]

This was a athletic decision pure & simple. Louisville has the resources & willingness to spend those resources. Louisville having relationships with several schools like FSU&G. Tech from way back also helped. Also doesn't hurt when the school Pres. held a high level postion at UNC

 

[itgoeslike]

It was months before the GOR would come to pass and the ACC had just lost a founding member. It was very concerned the conference could be ripped apart at the seams. So, just as it did with Pitt, the ACC opted to take a Big 12 expansion candidate off the table. It was both reactive and strategic, but driven by the instinct to survive.

 

[itgoeslike]

As Zen said, it's the conferences with a network that would benefit most from UConn attributes (the Big Ten being the only viable option). It's unlikely that the ACC or the Big 12 ever get their own network. So, the only way to up their take is to add a high-profile football brands, the problem is, there really aren't any left. Additionally, neither conference can afford to lose any high profile football brands, which is why the ACC capitulated to FSU and Clemson. If the ACC ever does get a network, which I doubt, UConn would be looked at very differently.

 

[btstimpy]

I think there was a dual vision. One was to limit the power and perception of the Big East, the second was to gain an association with Notre Dame.

Getting BC, Miami, and the originally targeted Syracuse were steps towards both those goals. Politics intervened and VT came aboard instead. Still forward progress on both fronts.

After a period of consolidation, the Big XII was looking at Pittsburgh with rumors of some kind of talks with ND. The ACC was forced to act, perhaps quicker than desired. They managed to wrangle both Syracuse and Pittsburgh to come aboard, and shortly thereafter that coveted association with ND. These all demonstrated some skill as there was no leaking or foreshadowing that these moves were about to happen. To say there was no vision or skill is missing the obvious.

Rutgers and UCONN did nothing to increase the odds of a ND association. That's why Cuse and Pitt got the nod at that time.

Clearly losing Maryland was a blow. Maybe they could have accommodated them somehow. But all indications were that they were gone no matter what.

So, the selection of a replacement for Maryland was a reactionary move. The divisions had to be balanced. UCONN would have been a fine choice. But a few things worked against the Huskies...

- There was no thought of an ACC Network as there was no grant of rights, thus negating a potentially major positive for UCONN.

- The football centric schools were feeling like they where getting roughshod as none of the recent expansion moves had really helped football. So, they bowed up their backs and pushed for their preferred candidate.

- With all the talk of cultural and institution fit, no one ever mentions that Louisville fits with a predominately Southern conference better than UCONN. This is especially true for the Southern football schools.

So, before the yelling starts, I would just like to say that I support UCONN joining the ACC.

Actually there are three, and you've identified two of them albeit the limiting of the power and perception of the Big East would be better described as trying to assemble the best basketball league in the East. The Big East was marching into that role, and basically became that. So the ACC wanted to move itself into that role. Adding members that make ACC football scheduling more attractive to Notre Dame was part of the strategy. If you see Navy added in the future, you'll know why.

The third strategy is about football. The ACC had rivalries with SEC schools in three of the southern states. There was a desire to have more especially by the members that have them. There still is. This could put schools like Memphis, Tulane, Texas, etc. on future vetting plans. I don't think that the ACC should copy the SEC footprint, but some of the members like this idea.

Notre Dame was already partly in the ACC when Maryland left. Louisville at the time satisfied both of the other two strategies. UConn definitely helps with the basketball goals, and I think they fit best regionally. Syracuse and Pittsburgh accomplished the basketball goals too, and they have enough football history and tradition to meet acceptance by the ACC football schools.

Rivalries and competing with the Big Ten has never been a concern until recently. The Big Ten wasn't in the east. Now with Notre Dame and Pittsburgh in overlapping states it may become so as well as the presence in Maryland and New Jersey. But they have only been here for a year so we'll have to see how this develops.

The ACC hasn't thought like a TV network and considered taking underperforming athletic departments to add cable subscribers to this point. But that is looking more likely to be part of the picture soon. It will be interesting to watch this rollout.

 

[NickyNewark]

You have maintained it... incorrectly. As several people have pointed out to you several times, your 'insiders' consist of one public quote by Barry Alvarez that you hideously misconstrued.

Big Ten insiders suggest absolutely the contrary. The plan to add Rutgers and Maryland had been long, long in motion for several years as a possibility. They examined that scenario for two years before acting on it. The whole thing was anything but panic. It was thorough as thorough can be.

Its been stated in a few places which those more knowledgeable than me can dig up that it was the B1G or the'd prefer to sta in the AAC...common knowledge RU had zero interest in the ACC...Im not sure of the reasons?

 

[buddy]

I think there was a dual vision. One was to limit the power and perception of the Big East, the second was to gain an association with Notre Dame.

Getting BC, Miami, and the originally targeted Syracuse were steps towards both those goals. Politics intervened and VT came aboard instead. Still forward progress on both fronts.

After a period of consolidation, the Big XII was looking at Pittsburgh with rumors of some kind of talks with ND. The ACC was forced to act, perhaps quicker than desired. They managed to wrangle both Syracuse and Pittsburgh to come aboard, and shortly thereafter that coveted association with ND. These all demonstrated some skill as there was no leaking or foreshadowing that these moves were about to happen. To say there was no vision or skill is missing the obvious.

Rutgers and UCONN did nothing to increase the odds of a ND association. That's why Cuse and Pitt got the nod at that time.

Clearly losing Maryland was a blow. Maybe they could have accommodated them somehow. But all indications were that they were gone no matter what.

So, the selection of a replacement for Maryland was a reactionary move. The divisions had to be balanced. UCONN would have been a fine choice. But a few things worked against the Huskies...

- There was no thought of an ACC Network as there was no grant of rights, thus negating a potentially major positive for UCONN.

- The football centric schools were feeling like they where getting roughshod as none of the recent expansion moves had really helped football. So, they bowed up their backs and pushed for their preferred candidate.

- With all the talk of cultural and institution fit, no one ever mentions that Louisville fits with a predominately Southern conference better than UCONN. This is especially true for the Southern football schools.

So, before the yelling starts, I would just like to say that I support UCONN joining the ACC.

The ACC actually wanted Syracuse and UConn, not Pitt, but took Pitt because of BC's objection to UConn

 

[ramses 2.0]

Its been stated in a few places which those more knowledgeable than me can dig up that it was the B1G or the'd prefer to sta in the AAC...common knowledge RU had zero interest in the ACC...Im not sure of the reasons?

I'm sure Rutgers preferred the B1G but they were in no postion to turn any conference upgrade. Every team from the former Big East/AAC lobbied to be included in ACC & would have taken a invite period.

 

[ramses 2.0]

It's UOTE="buddy, post: 1053532, member: 3489"]The ACC actually wanted Syracuse and UConn, not Pitt, but took Pitt because of BC's objection to UConn[/QUOTE]
BC is one of several schools currently opposed to UConn but that could change over time since it's doubtful that either Louisville or Notre Dame could have been admitted 10 yrs ago

 

[Dooley]

I know there is a lot of animosity over the lawsuit, but the ACC would be incredibly foolish to let UCONN slip through their fingers. I hope that relations, at least on an Administrative level, have been eased between BC and UCONN since BC seems to be UCONN's biggest opponent to membership. The football schools won the last debate with inviting Louisville and rightly so. But what's the worst thing that would happen to the ACC if they invite UCONN? ND decides to never join full-time but keep a part-time football scheduling arrangement? In that case, the ACC could add Cincinnati (good football and hoops) or UCF (for the football schools). Both would add good markets for a potential ACCN...something the conference desperately needs.

We can accuse Swofford of many things but he's made all the right moves in successfully killing off the ACC's biggest eastern competitor conference and elevate his conference firmly into the P5 structure. Now, his conference needs a Network and it needs one badly to compete with the SEC and B1G. I can't imagine Swofford and the ACC Presidents sitting idly around content to make less than half the TV revenue of their SEC and B1G competitors. If they add UCONN and Cincinnati/UCF, they will add 2 good schools that bring in markets (UCF more so than Cincinnati). Then they can continue the part-time partnership with ND in football, keep the B1G out of any more eastward expansion, and lock up every single huge TV market (other than DC) on the eastward seaboard. As a bonus, the presence of UCONN/Cuse/Duke/UNC/ND/Pitt (to a lesser degree) should really entice MSG officials for a hoops conference tourney. I'm positive that if scheduled far enough in advance, the ACC and "Big East" could share the venue.

 

[billybud]

Once I was in an unfamiliar city on business. We had worked late into the evening and a local offered me a ride to the train station. When we got there, there was a huge crowd milling about. He offered to go inside and find out what was going on. He returned to say there were no train arriving or departing. Seems there had been a fire on a stopped train but that wasn't the real problem. Seems some poor fellow had panicked at the thought of being incinerated and leapt off the train only to be killed by another train passing through.

My point? You're either lying about your B1G "insiders" or you need to look up the definition of skeptic and try to incorporate it into your everyday life cause what you said either didn't happen or somebody was pulling your leg. People who panic don't typically lurch into something that has all the hallmarks of a well thought out strategy. Picking up a moribund Rutgers and seducing a bankrupt Maryland with cash at a time when the B1G could have proceeded indefinitely as a 12 team conference makes all the sense in the world if Delany's objective had been exactly what he said it was: the northeast. The strategy was NYC/DC; the tactic was Rutgers/Md. Delany was merely waiting for the optimum moment to act. I realize you might be unfamiliar with such common business methods, Billy, because you're used to a commissioner who's, well, an idiot.

How about fro the BTN staff writer's article?

"There sat the Big Ten, quiet amid the chaos. Finally, Delany had to act. The tipping point: The ACC’s move into the Big Ten’s geographic region. “At that point, there was more risk to not do anything,” said Delany. “It was worth the risk to change. To not change with other leagues coming into our areas … “ Enter Rutgers and Maryland. "

How about the Wisconsin AD?

"Speaking Friday to Wisconsin's athletic board, Alvarez said the Big Ten's recent additions of Maryland and Rutgers were motivated in part by the concern of losing Penn State to another conference. Alvarez didn't specify which league, but everyone knows it's the ACC.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
"Jim [Delany] felt that someday, if we didn’t have anyone else in that corridor, someday it wouldn't make sense maybe for Penn State to be in our league. That they would go into a league somewhere on the east coast. By doing that, it keeps us in the northeast corridor."

 

[billybud]

The B1G was reacting to the ACC moving into Indiana with Notre Dame, right in the heart of Big Ten country and the possible threat of losing Penn State....

Delaney was worried and hit the button.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

How about fro the BTN staff writer's article?

"There sat the Big Ten, quiet amid the chaos. Finally, Delany had to act. The tipping point: The ACC’s move into the Big Ten’s geographic region. “At that point, there was more risk to not do anything,” said Delany. “It was worth the risk to change. To not change with other leagues coming into our areas … “ Enter Rutgers and Maryland. "

How about the Wisconsin AD?

"Speaking Friday to Wisconsin's athletic board, Alvarez said the Big Ten's recent additions of Maryland and Rutgers were motivated in part by the concern of losing Penn State to another conference. Alvarez didn't specify which league, but everyone knows it's the ACC.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
"Jim [Delany] felt that someday, if we didn’t have anyone else in that corridor, someday it wouldn't make sense maybe for Penn State to be in our league. That they would go into a league somewhere on the east coast. By doing that, it keeps us in the northeast corridor."

Absolutely none of that sounds like somebody panicking. Sounds like some sort of risk/reward analysis was undertaken, probably had been on-going but I don't know that. As far as the Alvarez quote goes, that sounds like risk amelioration practice, not a serious concern about Penn State bolting.

 

[kyleslamb]

Apparently some folks don't understand the concept of a 'tipping point.'

Some would have you believe that it means a state of panic and solely caused someone to do something. Most rational folks that understand the phrase know it to mean that a variety of factors were considered and that the addition of that scenario was enough to go ahead with the plan that had long been discussed rather than wait any longer. Kind of like when your car gets 120,000 miles on it and you start having to replace new parts and you start looking around for a new one; then one day it breaks down and you finally decide not to wait any longer and get a new car. Was it a panic move? No, it was something you felt necessary for a while, but it was the 'tipping point' that caused you to finally break down and do it.

I was on record many months before Notre Dame's announcement that the Big Ten was very interested in adding Maryland and Rutgers. It wasn't a state secret. They had already long studied the possibility and felt it was worth it financially to add both. The move, when it was made, was absolutely not a panic but as Registered said above me, a calculated move to be proactive less there be any chance whatsoever they would wind up having to be reactive.

 

[Kolumbo]

Apparently some folks don't understand the concept of a 'tipping point.'

Some would have you believe that it means a state of panic and solely caused someone to do something. Most rational folks that understand the phrase know it to mean that a variety of factors were considered and that the addition of that scenario was enough to go ahead with the plan that had long been discussed rather than wait any longer. Kind of like when your car gets 120,000 miles on it and you start having to replace new parts and you start looking around for a new one; then one day it breaks down and you finally decide not to wait any longer and get a new car. Was it a panic move? No, it was something you felt necessary for a while, but it was the 'tipping point' that caused you to finally break down and do it.

I was on record many months before Notre Dame's announcement that the Big Ten was very interested in adding Maryland and Rutgers. It wasn't a state secret. They had already long studied the possibility and felt it was worth it financially to add both. The move, when it was made, was absolutely not a panic but as Registered said above me, a calculated move to be proactive less there be any chance whatsoever they would wind up having to be reactive.

Reading these boards is a hoot. Because of our plight, we believe there are layers of strategy and extremely complex algorithms determining how conferences are reacting. In reality, they probably just flip a coin and say, sure, let's invite another school. It's college sports for crying out loud and they are raking in millions regardless.

 

[SouthronCross]

I never said he should have made a case for UConn. I'm saying he should have a vision. I'm saying it's the CEO's job to have a vision, and if he doesn't, he's the wrong man for the job. You want to hitch your wagon to that star, go right ahead.

Well, I'm a glass half full type person. And, I think he's done what some know-it-alls in and out of the media didn't think he'd do 2-3 years ago...keep the ACC together, and, keep it relevant. Thats a pretty major accomplishment.

Is he the best conference commissioner in the NCAA? No. Is he the worst? No.

JMHO...

 

[SouthronCross]

He isn't in a position to have a vision. He was in a position where survival was a good outcome.

I don't think the guy is great - but to date all he has lost is Maryland and no one has tested a GOR.

As long as UNC, FSU, CU, and, UVA all decide to stay, the ACC will be fine going forward.

Any of them leave, and, all bets are off.

 

[SouthronCross]

Its been stated in a few places which those more knowledgeable than me can dig up that it was the B1G or the'd prefer to sta in the AAC...common knowledge RU had zero interest in the ACC...Im not sure of the reasons?

Nicky, I don't ever remember either RU, or, the ACC, ever stating even a passing interest in each other. I could be wrong about that. Its just that I never heard anything from one about the other.

 

[clmssun]

Well, I'm a glass half full type person. And, I think he's done what some know-it-alls in and out of the media didn't think he'd do 2-3 years ago...keep the ACC together, and, keep it relevant. Thats a pretty major accomplishment.

Is he the best conference commissioner in the NCAA? No. Is he the worst? No.

JMHO...

I'd definitely take him over Bowlsby, and I'd probably take him over Scott. But I certainly rank Delany and Slive above him.

 

[SouthronCross]

The ACC actually wanted Syracuse and UConn, not Pitt, but took Pitt because of BC's objection to UConn

BC does not have now, nor has ever had, that kind of stroke within the ACC. And, never will have.

It was FSU-GT-CU-VPI-Miami who objected. BC might've thrown in with them, but, to say that UConn is not in the ACC because of BC is very incorrect.

 

[SouthronCross]

I'd definitely take him over Bowlsby, and I'd probably take him over Scott. But I certainly rank Delany and Slive above him.

A pretty fair assessment.

 

[Seaa Blue]

The B1G was reacting to the ACC moving into Indiana with Notre Dame, right in the heart of Big Ten country .

I live here. We don't care.

 

[clmssun]

I live here. We don't care.

That's what I say about the B1G. "I live here (Ohio). I don't care."

 

[Seaa Blue]

That's what I say about the B1G. "I live here (Ohio). I don't care."

I thought you all did the O H I O thing?

 

[Cleanface]

That's what I say about the B1G. "I live here (Ohio). I don't care."

It makes me smile to know you are surrounded by Buckeye Nuts 24/7...

I used to work for a co. whose corporate office is in CBus, and yesterday and today drove from Louisville > Cleveland and back. I probably saw 846948765398746398475632086 tOSU stickers, plates, flags, etc etc. Enjoy!!!

 

[The Viking]

BC does not have now, nor has ever had, that kind of stroke within the ACC. And, never will have.

It was FSU-GT-CU-VPI-Miami who objected. BC might've thrown in with them, but, to say that UConn is not in the ACC because of BC is very incorrect.

You may want to read this article. I just re-read it and Pitt can burn in hell.

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/mens_basketball/articles/2011/10/09/power_move_by_acc/?page=1