ACC rumor from the Fat White Guy

[UPitt]

Its been a while since I posted, but there are a couple things to consider when discussing trading Pitt, Ville, and Cuse for Maryland, Uconn, Rutgers. Conference realignment was not done at the same instant, so we really should consider the timeline of events when considering how the dominos fell. Rutgers was likely not an option for the ACC. The ACC would probably like to have both Rutgers and Maryland, but the B1G had more to offer them and they took it. Rutgers and Maryland were likely in talks for years with the B1G, and likely had principle agreements in place before the ACC could have made the move for Rutgers.

Also, I see a lot of posts saying Pitt belongs in the B12. Although not an atlantic coastal school, no one in Pittsburgh would consider Pitt to be a midwestern/plains school, especially not a B12 southern midwestern/plains school. The only selling point to Pitt fans for Pitt in the B1G, was to be in a conference with Penn State. Aside from that, the B1G was nothing Pitt fans were interested in. Pittsburgh is located in the eastern time zone and pro sports teams from Pittsburgh compete mostly with other eastern foes. I understand the culture in Pittsburgh is not that of NYC, Boston, DC, Philly, Atlanta, and Miami. But aside from BC, GT, and Miami, how many ACC schools have that big city culture. Pitt was better aligned with the Big East than the ACC, but with the Big East now imploded, I see the ACC as a better landing spot than the B12.

As for Uconn to the B1G or ACC, I am actually suprised that nothing has been anounced yet. Both the B1G and ACC have said that 16 is better than 14, but neither have made a move to expand. The B1G has more options for expansion if you include existing P5 conference teams than the ACC, but if we assume no one will leave a P5 conference for another, then the remaining candidates are Uconn, Cincy, BYU, UCF, USF, maybe Houston, maybe Tulane. Spare me the Boise St, Fresno St, Buffalo, Memphis, Temple argument, becuase they are not on the same level as the first group. I just don't see the other teams as being on the same level as Uconn and if the end game is 16 teams, then why risk losing Uconn to the other conference. The only explaination is that the B1G can not find another quality school to partner with Uconn, or that the ACC is waiting on ND.

 

[BoatShow]

Its been a while since I posted, but there are a couple things to consider when discussing trading Pitt, Ville, and Cuse for Maryland, Uconn, Rutgers. Conference realignment was not done at the same instant, so we really should consider the timeline of events when considering how the dominos fell. Rutgers was likely not an option for the ACC. The ACC would probably like to have both Rutgers and Maryland, but the B1G had more to offer them and they took it. Rutgers and Maryland were likely in talks for years with the B1G, and likely had principle agreements in place before the ACC could have made the move for Rutgers.

Also, I see a lot of posts saying Pitt belongs in the B12. Although not an atlantic coastal school, no one in Pittsburgh would consider Pitt to be a midwestern/plains school, especially not a B12 southern midwestern/plains school. The only selling point to Pitt fans for Pitt in the B1G, was to be in a conference with Penn State. Aside from that, the B1G was nothing Pitt fans were interested in. Pittsburgh is located in the eastern time zone and pro sports teams from Pittsburgh compete mostly with other eastern foes. I understand the culture in Pittsburgh is not that of NYC, Boston, DC, Philly, Atlanta, and Miami. But aside from BC, GT, and Miami, how many ACC schools have that big city culture. Pitt was better aligned with the Big East than the ACC, but with the Big East now imploded, I see the ACC as a better landing spot than the B12.

As for Uconn to the B1G or ACC, I am actually suprised that nothing has been anounced yet. Both the B1G and ACC have said that 16 is better than 14, but neither have made a move to expand. The B1G has more options for expansion if you include existing P5 conference teams than the ACC, but if we assume no one will leave a P5 conference for another, then the remaining candidates are Uconn, Cincy, BYU, UCF, USF, maybe Houston, maybe Tulane. Spare me the Boise St, Fresno St, Buffalo, Memphis, Temple argument, becuase they are not on the same level as the first group. I just don't see the other teams as being on the same level as Uconn and if the end game is 16 teams, then why risk losing Uconn to the other conference. The only explaination is that the B1G can not find another quality school to partner with Uconn, or that the ACC is waiting on ND.

I read the first line of your post and was like "hmmm PITT, Ville, Cuse, UConn, Rutgers, that's a decent start to a conference."

 

[UPitt]

I read the first line of your post and was like "hmmm PITT, Ville, Cuse, UConn, Rutgers, that's a decent start to a conference."

Completely agree. Include WVU, and maybe include BC, VT, and Miami and you have a really good start to a conference.

I will miss the Big East and the regional rivalries.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Its been a while since I posted, but there are a couple things to consider when discussing trading Pitt, Ville, and Cuse for Maryland, Uconn, Rutgers. Conference realignment was not done at the same instant, so we really should consider the timeline of events when considering how the dominos fell. Rutgers was likely not an option for the ACC. The ACC would probably like to have both Rutgers and Maryland, but the B1G had more to offer them and they took it. Rutgers and Maryland were likely in talks for years with the B1G, and likely had principle agreements in place before the ACC could have made the move for Rutgers.

Also, I see a lot of posts saying Pitt belongs in the B12. Although not an atlantic coastal school, no one in Pittsburgh would consider Pitt to be a midwestern/plains school, especially not a B12 southern midwestern/plains school. The only selling point to Pitt fans for Pitt in the B1G, was to be in a conference with Penn State. Aside from that, the B1G was nothing Pitt fans were interested in. Pittsburgh is located in the eastern time zone and pro sports teams from Pittsburgh compete mostly with other eastern foes. I understand the culture in Pittsburgh is not that of NYC, Boston, DC, Philly, Atlanta, and Miami. But aside from BC, GT, and Miami, how many ACC schools have that big city culture. Pitt was better aligned with the Big East than the ACC, but with the Big East now imploded, I see the ACC as a better landing spot than the B12.

As for Uconn to the B1G or ACC, I am actually suprised that nothing has been anounced yet. Both the B1G and ACC have said that 16 is better than 14, but neither have made a move to expand. The B1G has more options for expansion if you include existing P5 conference teams than the ACC, but if we assume no one will leave a P5 conference for another, then the remaining candidates are Uconn, Cincy, BYU, UCF, USF, maybe Houston, maybe Tulane. Spare me the Boise St, Fresno St, Buffalo, Memphis, Temple argument, becuase they are not on the same level as the first group. I just don't see the other teams as being on the same level as Uconn and if the end game is 16 teams, then why risk losing Uconn to the other conference. The only explaination is that the B1G can not find another quality school to partner with Uconn, or that the ACC is waiting on ND.

I agree that the XII is a desperation pass for just about anyone in the East, just ask the Mountaineers. While most of Pitt's historical rivals (outside of the afore mentioned 'folks' from Morgantown) are in the ACC just like UConn, quite a few Pitt alumni who I know through work would prefer the B1G. The B1G is perceived as a stronger academic conference than the ACC (money/grant wise via the CIC it is) than the ACC and access to the B1G would also put Pitt on a more level field with the 500 pound gorilla in Penn State. Plus, without WV, Pitt's nearest rival in the ACC is a 5 hour drive away (Syracuse, Louisville, VT), which is the same distance as it is from Pitt to Michigan or Rutgers while is 2 hours away from Penn St and Ohio St and 3 hours away from Ohio St and Maryland.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Look - I get the consternation from people here, but Pitt was a fairly valuable piece in the conference realignment game and scored high in virtually every metric that university presidents said was important: it's an AAU school with a long football history located in a good-sized market and an excellent football recruiting ground. They would have been in the Big Ten years ago if they had been located virtually anywhere other than a Big Ten state. Pitt also had a second suitor to play off of the ACC: the Big 12. Believe me - the Big 12 didn't want WVU just hanging out east by itself as a geographic outlier. They were targeting Pitt, WVU and Louisville for a 3-team expansion and would have gone to 12 with that combo. (Just think of how much more the northern part of the Big 12 would make more sense if that expansion had occurred, which is why that's what they originally wanted.) The ACC nixed that plan by getting Pitt first (and to be sure, Pitt *definitely* preferred the ACC to the Big 12) and the Big 12's plan fell apart to where they basically had to take one of either WVU or Louisville alone for spackling. Whatever people might think of Swofford (and I tend to think that people outside of the ACC underestimate him while people within the ACC overestimate him), he blocked the Big 12's options big-time with both its preemptive taking of Pitt and then further grabbing Louisville.

The logic of the B12 using a pod of Louisville, Pitt, and WVU to both stabilize membership and instigate an intrusion into a new territory make imminent sense. Adding Cincy (balanced by a southwest school) for a four pod region may have made even more sense. To the extent a model for sports expansion into a new market exists, it certainly must include content driven in part by regional rivalries. In fact, it makes so much sense to me, I used that argument many times myself. That's what perplexes me when others argue UConn has no chance of getting to the B1G. Admittedly it will (and should) be a long, tough slog, but nonsensical? No.

Build versus Buy? That's one of the preeminent decisions in expanding businesses. Conference realignment might have been more accurately labeled conference expansion for that's what it's been for 4 of the P5. Trouble is, for the B1G's expansion into the northeast megalopolis, there were no clear "buy" options. Neither was there a pure "build" play. They only real opportunity lay in buying small and building. Enter Maryland and Rutgers. In theory, both have potential. Unfortunately, the B1G's prior experience has been of the buy (Penn State, Nebraska) variety. Delany is venturing into unknown waters and I'm sure he knows it. That's why UConn sits and waits. Why tackle three projects when you are unsure of the speed (or indeed the certainty) of accomplishing one?

Delany knows it will take more than Maryland, Rutgers, and existing B1G alums to conquer the northeast. Move Michigan to College Park and Ohio State to Piscataway and it still would be an extremely difficult undertaking to make inroads into a region as populous as the entire B1G prior to its most recent expansion. Of course I don't think UConn is THE answer, but the B1G will need all the help it can get and that's a large part of UConn's true value.

 

[UPitt]

I agree that the XII is a desperation pass for just about anyone in the East, just ask the Mountaineers. While most of Pitt's historical rivals (outside of the afore mentioned 'folks' from Morgantown) are in the ACC just like UConn, quite a few Pitt alumni who I know through work would prefer the B1G. The B1G is perceived as a stronger academic conference than the ACC (money/grant wise via the CIC it is) than the ACC and access to the B1G would also put Pitt on a more level field with the 500 pound gorilla in Penn State. Plus, without WV, Pitt's nearest rival in the ACC is a 5 hour drive away (Syracuse, Louisville, VT), which is the same distance as it is from Pitt to Michigan or Rutgers while is 2 hours away from Penn St and Ohio St and 3 hours away from Ohio St and Maryland.

10-15 years ago, I did prefer the B1G. Even as recent as 5 years ago. For academics, the B1G has a percieved edge over the ACC, but I believe that gap is closer than percieved. I think it would be hard to argue that the ACC is percieved to be weak academically. As for athletics, I have always wanted nothing more than to be in a conference with Penn State and Ohio State and maybe even ND. But, a lot has changed in the past few years and I just do not know if schools like Pitt, Cuse, and BC can compete with the larger state universities when it comes to resources. The B1G has only one small private university. The ACC has a mix of larger universities and smaller private universities. Also, with most of Pitt's former conference rivals moving to the ACC (Rutgers was not as much a rival as Cuse, ND, VT, or Miami), there are familiar opponents.

I would like to see Uconn in the ACC for many of the same reasons as I listed above. I consider Uconn to be a former conference foe that we have a good history with. I think Uconn would fit very well in the ACC footprint and would compete right away in terms of sports and resources. I think Uconn could also make the jump to the B1G, as there is more opportunity for growth in athletic resources and university growth than most other schools.

 

[NickyNewark]

10-15 years ago, I did prefer the B1G. Even as recent as 5 years ago. For academics, the B1G has a percieved edge over the ACC, but I believe that gap is closer than percieved. I think it would be hard to argue that the ACC is percieved to be weak academically. As for athletics, I have always wanted nothing more than to be in a conference with Penn State and Ohio State and maybe even ND. But, a lot has changed in the past few years and I just do not know if schools like Pitt, Cuse, and BC can compete with the larger state universities when it comes to resources. The B1G has only one small private university. The ACC has a mix of larger universities and smaller private universities. Also, with most of Pitt's former conference rivals moving to the ACC (Rutgers was not as much a rival as Cuse, ND, VT, or Miami), there are familiar opponents.

I would like to see Uconn in the ACC for many of the same reasons as I listed above. I consider Uconn to be a former conference foe that we have a good history with. I think Uconn would fit very well in the ACC footprint and would compete right away in terms of sports and resources. I think Uconn could also make the jump to the B1G, as there is more opportunity for growth in athletic resources and university growth than most other schools.

Very nicely laid out from a Pitt fans perspective! I've seen other of his posts here and more on RUs riv*ls site I believe? Theres one who usually finishes with Hail Pitt a regular on RU's board along with some WVU posters and naturally B!G welcome wagon-types.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

Dooley, that was an excellent read. I appreciate the effort that must have taken.

...even after an APR blip last season.

In the long term it will be a blip, but it couldn't have happenned at a worse time. The last thing we needed to do was give anyone a reason to deny us. I'm not suggesting it was used that way since I have no insider knowledge, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.

B1G or Bust. F the ACC.

I'm not a religious man, but I can muster up an AMEN to this. AMEN!

 

[B1GEast]

I dont like how the acc treated uconn, but geographically, the acc makes the most sense, and who wouldn't want to see uconn play duke, unc and cuse yearly in bball? it just makes too much sense, but on the flip side playing mich, ohio st and penn st in football would be equally appealing. This will be a dance with the devil if it ever comes down to both conferences suiting uconn. herbst and warde will make the right call.

ultimately, I think it will come down to the large pile of cash that the 10 will throw our way. This will happen someday, and it will be so nice to watch how it unfolds and I'll enjoy watching Swofford put lipstick on the acc pig.

 

[adbern7]

every other week the same old BC vs. UConn argument gets rehashed. Fellas:

1) BC did not want UConn
2) #1 doesn't matter, because BC has no stroke within the ACC. If UNC, UVA, and FSU wanted UConn, you'd be in.
3) Pitt was a very solid addition to ACC given combined academics, athletics, and geography. Unprovable whether Pitt would be better than UConn.

All three of above can co-exist.

 

[SouthronCross]

I disagree UConn will get an ACC offer if UConn has a remote B1g chance.
We might even accept. Why. Because of BC and Syracuse.
along with no

Even you are dissing BCU who is on the Atlantic.

Damn, I did, didn't I? Well now, I am ashamed for doing so. Bad ACC fan that I am.

 

[HawkHusky]

every other week the same old BC vs. UConn argument gets rehashed. Fellas:

1) BC did not want UConn
2) #1 doesn't matter, because BC has no stroke within the ACC. If UNC, UVA, and FSU wanted UConn, you'd be in.
3) Pitt was a very solid addition to ACC given combined academics, athletics, and geography. Unprovable whether Pitt would be better than UConn.

All three of above can co-exist.

Why do so many people like to post inaccurate information?

#1 is correct

In regards to #2: UVA, UNC, Duke, and Wake (basketball focused schools) were pro UCONN to join the league. It was the deeper south football contingent that voted otherwise.

In regards to #3: Academics are good (not as good as UConn in most rankings). Modern day athletics are mediocre at best. Geographically Pitt is a pro sports city - the few that care about U of Pitt are in Pitt - the rest of PA sways Penn State or Philly schools.

I may be new to this board, but I can spot a troll when I see one.

 

[pj]

Damn, I did, didn't I? Well now, I am ashamed for doing so. Bad ACC fan that I am.

don't give in so easily. BC is at least 2 miles from the Atlantic coast.

 

[CL82]

I understand the point you are trying to make here. But what bothers me about the argument that the ACC has missed out on New York somehow because it doesn't have Syracuse, UConn, Rutgers, and Notre Dame is that the Big East had all four just 3 years ago and couldn't get ESPN excited. Why would putting all four in the ACC get ESPN any more excited? I don't think having all four would for football. I think ESPN would view the addition of UConn as having additional value in basketball, men and women. The question is how much is ESPN willing to pay for that?

The Big Ten's goals are different. The Presidents want collaberation with AAU universities. Jim Delaney and the BTN want new territories to shakedown cable subcribers. Whomever they take needs to satisfy both goals. Obviously inviting someone with a lot of athletic achievement is not one of their goals right now.

ESPN was excited enough about them to finance the evisceration of the Big East when they threatened to go elsewhere. I agree in principal with your second paragraph. The B1G will invite whichever institutions advance their goals and satisfy their needs. I do think that they have much longer term view than the ACC. I think Swofford has done well, in that it could have very well been the ACC that was scavenged to death, but his moves were short term and reactionary. Time will tell how they'll hold up.

 

[SouthronCross]

don't give in so easily. BC is at least 2 miles from the Atlantic coast.

I just can't bring myself to do that. Sorry, dude.

 

[btstimpy]

ESPN was excited enough about them to finance the evisceration of the Big East when they threatened to go elsewhere. I agree in principal with your second paragraph. The B1G will whichever institutions advance their goals and satisfy their needs. I do think that they have much longer term view than the ACC. I think Swofford has done well, in that it could have very well been the ACC that was scavenged to death, but his moves were short term and reactionary. Time will tell how they'll hold up.

Do you really believe that ESPN was vindictive toward the Big East? Big East basketball pretty well made ESPN what it is today in college sports. I think the Big East was the first conference to get a big contract with ESPN in the 80s. I'm not sure that I believe that. I just don't know how much ESPN is willing to pay the ACC per year to add another school or two. The ACC won't add just to add. I don't know how much they would pay the Big Ten either, or how much FOX would pay the Big Ten.

What happened to the Big East was more the result of the shift in audience appetite from basketball to football. The core of the Big East was a basketball conference like the Atlantic 10. The Big East tried to bolt on some outside football programs, but the configuration was not workable long term, and the decision makers remained at Providence who doesn't even play football. The Big East is now back to its roots. That's my opinion anyway.

 

[upstater]

Dooley, that was an excellent read. I appreciate the effort that must have taken.



In the long term it will be a blip, but it couldn't have happenned at a worse time. The last thing we needed to do was give anyone a reason to deny us. I'm not suggesting it was used that way since I have no insider knowledge, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.



I'm not a religious man, but I can muster up an AMEN to this. AMEN!

Louisville failed the APR for football.

So...

And UNC had its troubles.

I suspect APR wasn't a big issue since Louisville was docked scholarships in football.

 

[upstater]

Do you really believe that ESPN was vindictive toward the Big East? Big East basketball pretty well made ESPN what it is today in college sports. I think the Big East was the first conference to get a big contract with ESPN in the 80s. I'm not sure that I believe that. I just don't know how much ESPN is willing to pay the ACC per year to add another school or two. The ACC won't add just to add. I don't know how much they would pay the Big Ten either, or how much FOX would pay the Big Ten.

What happened to the Big East was more the result of the shift in audience appetite from basketball to football. The core of the Big East was a basketball conference like the Atlantic 10. The Big East tried to bolt on some outside football programs, but the configuration was not workable long term, and the decision makers remained at Providence who doesn't even play football. The Big East is now back to its roots. That's my opinion anyway.

The core? You mean the teams that weren't relevant for 24 years? The core all played football, and the tacked on teams were Louisville, Cincy and USF.

 

[btstimpy]

Why do so many people like to post inaccurate information?

#1 is correct

In regards to #2: UVA, UNC, Duke, and Wake (basketball focused schools) were pro UCONN to join the league. It was the deeper south football contingent that voted otherwise.

In regards to #3: Academics are good (not as good as UConn in most rankings). Modern day athletics are mediocre at best. Geographically Pitt is a pro sports city - the few that care about U of Pitt are in Pitt - the rest of PA sways Penn State or Philly schools.

I may be new to this board, but I can spot a troll when I see one.

Should the ACC decide to look at new members again, UConn has support in the ACC. It's with the schools that care the most about academics and the schools that care the most about basketball. Work needs to be done to convince the schools that care the most about football within the ACC. And then there is the BC issue that doesn't make sense to me.

However, much of the sentiment around here is for UConn's preference for the Big Ten. I imagine that the Big Ten's eastern schools (PSU, Rutgers, and Maryland) would support UConn. Beyond that no clue with the midwestern schools. Frank the Tank would be able to give you a better idea.

 

[btstimpy]

The core? You mean the teams that weren't relevant for 24 years? The core all played football, and the tacked on teams were Louisville, Cincy and USF.

To me the Core are Syracuse, Connecticut, Georgetown, Providence, Seton Hall, Villanova, St. John's, and Boston College. Out of that core only Syracuse and Boston College played FBS football for most of the life of the Big East. UConn added it about 10 years ago.

20 years ago, the Big East bolted on Virginia Tech, Miami, West Virginia, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, and Temple. And the core was really selective with whom they allowed to play ball so to speak in basketball. Basketball was their main mission. I can remember Virginia Tech bolted on for a long time while playing basketball in the Atlantic 10. Temple was bolted on too. I'm not sure about Miami. Don't remember.

My original point was that the Big East was a basketball conference trying to accomodate football on the side. On of the benefits of the American is that everyone is on the same page.

 

[upstater]

To me the Core are Syracuse, Connecticut, Georgetown, Providence, Seton Hall, Villanova, St. John's, and Boston College. Out of that core only Syracuse and Boston College played FBS football for most of the life of the Big East. UConn added it about 10 years ago.

20 years ago, the Big East bolted on Virginia Tech, Miami, West Virginia, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, and Temple. And the core was really selective with whom they allowed to play ball so to speak in basketball. Basketball was their main mission. I can remember Virginia Tech bolted on for a long time while playing basketball in the Atlantic 10. Temple was bolted on too. I'm not sure about Miami. Don't remember.

My original point was that the Big East was a basketball conference trying to accomodate football on the side. On of the benefits of the American is that everyone is on the same page.

This wasn't true since 1992. It was in that year that the football schools told the Catholic schools that they were leaving the conference. Basketball wasn't the main mission as of 1992. The VT thing was a result of Cuse getting cold feet in the end, and when that happened, the Catholics agreed to enlarge with football schools, though VT bball wasn't added. Since 1992, the original mission of the conference changed. That was 20 years ago, and in the ensuing years, Pitt, UConn and Cuse dominated BE basketball. Only Louisville joined them decade later, another football school.

 

[kingdobbs]

Also, Pitt is not a member of the "football group" that came aboard in the late 90s; they were in point of fact a full member of the conference since 1982.

If Villanova (member since 1980, but not since founding) is a core member, so is Pitt.

 

[btstimpy]

Also, Pitt is not a member of the "football group" that came aboard in the late 90s; they were in point of fact a full member of the conference since 1982.

If Villanova (member since 1980, but not since founding) is a core member, so is Pitt.

Ok. Didn't realize Pitt joined that far back. Thought they came with West Virginia.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

I suspect APR wasn't a big issue since Louisville was docked scholarships in football.

It seemed to me, and maybe it's because of reading the BY, that we were the poster boys for failing the APR. Again, I'm not suggesting it was used against us, but when someone already doesn't want us it gives them another card to play.

 

[btstimpy]

This wasn't true since 1992. It was in that year that the football schools told the Catholic schools that they were leaving the conference. Basketball wasn't the main mission as of 1992. The VT thing was a result of Cuse getting cold feet in the end, and when that happened, the Catholics agreed to enlarge with football schools, though VT bball wasn't added. Since 1992, the original mission of the conference changed. That was 20 years ago, and in the ensuing years, Pitt, UConn and Cuse dominated BE basketball. Only Louisville joined them decade later, another football school.

Ok. Given this then there were a lot of transitional things going on elsewhere that led to more changes. In 1992, the ACC added Florida State and considered Syracuse. But Syracuse wanted to only join the ACC in football keeping the rest in the Big East. The ACC didn't want that. This was part of the cold feet. Jake Crouthamel really wanted to keep basketball in the Big East. The SEC added USC and Arkansas and started the whole conference championship game in football idea. The Big XII did the same when it was formed a few years later. The strong success of those championship games convinced the ACC that it needed one, which led to the ACC expansion of 2002. It's ironic that the Big XII's is caput. That's what happens when a No 1 Texas or Kansas State gets knocked out of the BCS Championship by losing its conference championship game I guess.

I wonder if the Catholics had spit off in 1992 if it would have made a difference with the Big East adding Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Miami, etc. as far as keeping that group together. I hadn't realized that the Catholics (Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, etc) didn't do much in basketball after 1992. They've been NCAA tournament teams, but I guess not title contenders. UConn was playing FCS football in 1992. Would UConn have gone with the Catholics? It's just gut speculation at this point, but it's an interesting to ponder.

 

[upstater]

Ok. Given this then there were a lot of transitional things going on elsewhere that led to more changes. In 1992, the ACC added Florida State and considered Syracuse. But Syracuse wanted to only join the ACC in football keeping the rest in the Big East. The ACC didn't want that. This was part of the cold feet. Jake Crouthamel really wanted to keep basketball in the Big East. The SEC added USC and Arkansas and started the whole conference championship game in football idea. The Big XII did the same when it was formed a few years later. The strong success of those championship games convinced the ACC that it needed one, which led to the ACC expansion of 2002. It's ironic that the Big XII's is caput. That's what happens when a No 1 Texas or Kansas State gets knocked out of the BCS Championship by losing its conference championship game I guess.

I wonder if the Catholics had spit off in 1992 if it would have made a difference with the Big East adding Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Miami, etc. as far as keeping that group together. I hadn't realized that the Catholics (Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, etc) didn't do much in basketball after 1992. They've been NCAA tournament teams, but I guess not title contenders. UConn was playing FCS football in 1992. Would UConn have gone with the Catholics? It's just gut speculation at this point, but it's an interesting to ponder.

There was a lot going on, you're right. Actually, the league was going to split but UConn played the intermediary, and got the Catholics to reconcile. UConn's president saved the conference. UConn would have gone with the football schools. Prior to the 1992 almost-split, UConn's AD was already moving toward D1. I suspect the breakup of the BE would have accelerated things. As it was, the AD battled first to build an on-campus stadium. That was shot down. Then, after UConn's move up was approved, the state got involved with the New England Patriots potentially moving to Conn. This happened in the mid to late 1990s. That delayed everything for UConn. Until the Patriots decided to go back to Foxboro in 1999, UConn was slated to move into a domed stadium in Hartford. When the Patriots left, the school went back to square one. Which was unfortunate because UConn actually went up to FBS in 2000, not 2004. The BE had already agreed to accept UConn as a football member prior to that. The ACC split accelerated UConn's buy-in.

By the way, G'town went 20 years between Final 8s.

 

[CL82]

Do you really believe that ESPN was vindictive toward the Big East? Big East basketball pretty well made ESPN what it is today in college sports. I think the Big East was the first conference to get a big contract with ESPN in the 80s. I'm not sure that I believe that. I just don't know how much ESPN is willing to pay the ACC per year to add another school or two. The ACC won't add just to add. I don't know how much they would pay the Big Ten either, or how much FOX would pay the Big Ten.

What happened to the Big East was more the result of the shift in audience appetite from basketball to football. The core of the Big East was a basketball conference like the Atlantic 10. The Big East tried to bolt on some outside football programs, but the configuration was not workable long term, and the decision makers remained at Providence who doesn't even play football. The Big East is now back to its roots. That's my opinion anyway.

No I don't believe they were vindictive at all. I believe they were ruthless in pursuing what made the most business sense to them. The establishment of another effective all sports network was a dangerous to them. They prevented it from happening. We were collateral damage.

If ESPN did not finance the ACC's raids on the Big East by repeatedly renegotiating the ACC contract upward after every raid, the Big East is intact today. There's no doubt that ESPN is the villain, (or catalyst, if you prefer) in all of this. Their actions are well documented. That doesn't make them "vindictive" it makes them pragmatic... ruthlessly pragmatic.

 

[CL82]

. I imagine that the Big Ten's eastern schools (PSU, Rutgers, and Maryland) would support UConn. Beyond that no clue with the midwestern schools. Frank the Tank would be able to give you a better idea.

Hmmn, I prefer B1GALUM's take.

 

[SouthronCross]

It seemed to me, and maybe it's because of reading the BY, that we were the poster boys for failing the APR. Again, I'm not suggesting it was used against us, but when someone already doesn't want us it gives them another card to play.

No, your APR situation had nothing to do with how the ACC schools voted, in regards to UConn.

From what we found out here on Tobacco Road, it was the four NC schools, UVA, and, UMD who supported UConn.

FSU and Clemson were the most outspoken against you. Ga Tech and Miami voted with them, as did VPI and BC.

I cannot speak on how Pitt or Syracuse voted, or, if they even had a vote, for adding you all to the league.

I do still hold out hope that you will get in.

 

[billybud]

There had been a mini war going on in the ACC for several years....the feeling, by some programs like FSU, that the Tobacco Road mob wanted to control the conference....and UConn might have been colllateral damage in that guerilla war.

This impression of North Carolina control was abetted by the fact that Swofford was an ex UNC athletic director and had a building on campus named for him.

The crap hit the fan when it was FSU always traveling to a Thursday night game, year after year...including all the way to Boston, while UNC rarely was assigned such a game and when they did play on Thursday night, it was a short hop down the road. The whole schedulling by the ACC was getting under folks' skin. FSU always had a conference game before the Florida game while Florida played their subs against Jacksonville State, FIU. the Citadel, etc. the week before.

It was also the appearance of biased officiating (finally FSU did a 5 year study on calls on FSU vs Carolina schools and published the info), and it was out right war between Coach K and the football factions regarding which sport should take precedence in future planning.

Coach K, Roy Williams, and John Swofford were seen as a ruling triumvirate. FSU made a lot of noise, played a bluff card or two, built its own voting block...and decided that there would be another voice in the conference.