As Predicted By Anyone With A Brain, The ACC Is NOT Getting A TV Network

[Pat125]

No. I came to my conclusions based on facts. Money in Texas's league, competition and strength of Texas' league and most importantly there hasn't been the slightest indication from any leader from Texas stating anything other than that they are happy with their situation and the BIG 12.

Ohio State's recently departed president on the other hand has spoken about the Big Ten keeping its hands out of OSU's pockets, and many in Buckeyeland are not happy that the rest of the league is bringing down OSU's strength of schedule.

You are making something up out of nothing, based on nothing.

Even assuming your facts, I come to the same conclusion. Your conclusions are clearly based on emotion and bias.

 

[SouthronCross]

Read Maryland's countersuit. The ACC did impose the exit fee. It was brought up and voted on in the same meeting. There was supposed to be a 15 day window for evaluation and comment and that didn't happen. There was supposed to be a year long wait for a change to the bylaws that didn't happen. It was slapped on the member institutions and more than Maryland commented on the illegality and punitive nature of the change.

Right now, it is still unclear that what you are saying is cut and dried. Maryland is alleging that it went the way that you say. Nobody knows for sure how it all went down just yet.

I have said all along, if the ACC followed its own bylaws, Maryland will pay. If the league didn't, Maryland wins.

Who else has commented on the illegality and punitive nature, aside from Maryland? If anybody has, its been under the radar, to my knowledge. Granted, I do not read every little story on this that is published.

Honest question: if something is voted on, and, passed by a 10-2 vote, how is it 'slapped' upon the league's members? That description is not accurate, IMHO.

 

[Pat125]

WRONG

The number of teams that have left the Big Ten--1--Chicago
The number of teams that have left the SEC--2--Tulane and Georgia Tech
The number of teams that have left the ACC--2--Maryland and South Carolina

The Pac 12 may not have any departures in the past--will check on that but don't think so.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with anything. The situation in the BIG 12 is not the same as it was 4 or 5 years ago and has 0 bearing on today.

Since 1936, the SEC has lost three (Sewanee, Tulane, Georgia Tech). PAC 12 lost two (Idaho, Montana). They lost three more (Oregon, Oregon St., Washington St.), but they rejoined. This was all before 1970.

 

[SouthronCross]

You ACC posters better take up this new ACC network with your conference mates. Both Syracuse and BC writers have expressed their concern and discontent with this new network-perhaps more.

When BC or Syracuse officials make comments about it, then you might be onto something. SU and BC writers = meh.

The ACC could of course squelch the entire conversation by reporting that this new ACC Network has nothing to do with the imaginary ACC network you have all been trumpeting for over a year, but hasn't materialized. Of course the ACC hasn't said anything at all--completely out of character for themselves.

What do you want the ACC to do? There is nothing to this nonsense you are posting. So there is nothing to say.

Which ACC posters on the BY have been trumpeting a new ACCN? All that we know is that it is a possibility. Nothing more at this point.

 

[buckaineer]

Even assuming your facts, I come to the same conclusion. Your conclusions are clearly based on emotion and bias.

What emotion and bias are my conclusions based on?

There is no bias in the amounts BIG 12 schools will earn as compared to others. There is no bias in statistical info that shows how strong the BIG 12 has been--and if you say it won't continue to be that is pure speculation based on nothing.

No poster has provided any information whatsoever that could possibly lead anyone to conclude that Texas is 50% more or even .0005% more likely to leave the BIG 12 than Ohio State is the Big Ten, yet they keep repeating this nonsense.

 

[buckaineer]

What do you want the ACC to do? There is nothing to this nonsense you are posting. So there is nothing to say.

Which ACC posters on the BY have been trumpeting a new ACCN? All that we know is that it is a possibility. Nothing more at this point.

We do know posters are denying this is an ACC network when it clearly is. ACC bloggers like Nunes and the one up at BC have also concluded that this very well be all there is as far as an ACC network. There isn't any evidence to support that there will be any other ACC network, yet posters here claim there will be.

It would be one thing to admit they don't know, but posters here are outright denying it, and denying that it is odd the ACC hasn't mentioned this recent development. I showed if you look above that it is very uncommon for the ACC not to recognize such a development and they act as though that isn't the case when anyone can look up ACC announcements and realize they announce virtually everything that happens for the conference.

Why the continued spin?

 

[Pat125]

What emotion and bias are my conclusions based on?

There is no bias in the amounts BIG 12 schools will earn as compared to others. There is no bias in statistical info that shows how strong the BIG 12 has been--and if you say it won't continue to be that is pure speculation based on nothing.

No poster has provided any information whatsoever that could possibly lead anyone to conclude that Texas is 50% more or even .0005% more likely to leave the BIG 12 than Ohio State is the Big Ten, yet they keep repeating this nonsense.

Reread your posts. They are laced with emotion and bias. I get you can quote stats on how much Big 12 schools make. They do not prove your conclusion any more than mine. The other fact is the Big 12 lost 4 teams in recent history. Yes, times have changed. My percentage for Texas leaving was > 90%, so things have improved. If the Big 10 loses 4 teams within two years, I'd surmise Ohio State's leaving the Big 10 would go to 50% or so. Anyway, we disagree. So what? No need to be so defensive.

 

[SouthronCross]

We do know posters are denying this is an ACC network when it clearly is. ACC bloggers like Nunes and the one up at BC have also concluded that this very well be all there is as far as an ACC network. There isn't any evidence to support that there will be any other ACC network, yet posters here claim there will be.

Which ACC posters here are claiming there will be an ACCN forthcoming? Name names here.

Give it a rest with the ACC bloggers nonsense. They do not have anymore of a clue about whether a dedicated ACCN would ever come to fruition than The Dude had about conference realignment.

When an announcement comes from the ACC itself about it, then you can know it for real.

It would be one thing to admit they don't know, but posters here are outright denying it, and denying that it is odd the ACC hasn't mentioned this recent development. I showed if you look above that it is very uncommon for the ACC not to recognize such a development and they act as though that isn't the case when anyone can look up ACC announcements and realize they announce virtually everything that happens for the conference.

Why the continued spin?

Again, who are these posters that are denying it? There are basically three of us ACC fans who post here pretty regularly...billybud, btstimpy, and, myself. Which of us have ever said for 100 percent certain that there will be a future ACCN? I know I haven't, and, I doubt either of them have, either.

There is nothing to spin here. The ACC hasn't said anything about it, because there is nothing to say. Nobody knows for certain whether there will be, or, won't be, an ACCN in the future.

What about this escapes you?

 

[whaler11]

I have been Googling, and, thus far, I can find no comment suggesting that this ACC "subchannel" of WatchESPN is streaming any additional events beyond those which WatchESPN has already been streaming. This sounds like a purely cosmetic, superficial, user-friendly "ease of searching" mechanism so that ACC fans can find all of their Watch ESPN events (that have always been there) more quickly and easily.

All you have to do is look at the site. These 'channels' are just folders. They happen to put enough ACC games on ESPN3 to make a folder worthwhile.

That this thread has 100 posts and goes from the Maryland lawsuit to Ohio State leaving the Big 10 is crazy.

 

[btstimpy]

All you have to do is look at the site. These 'channels' are just folders. They happen to put enough ACC games on ESPN3 to make a folder worthwhile.

That this thread has 100 posts and goes from the Maryland lawsuit to Ohio State leaving the Big 10 is crazy.

Well you have a new WVU poster on here posting nonsense so ludicrous that other posters read it and try to correct it. But after engaging in that futility three or four times each, they all give up. But it has now reached about 100 posts because the WVU poster continues to repeat the lunacy.

 

[clmssun]

Florida State fans equate success with national championships, conference championships, major bowl victories. In 2013-14, Florida State goes 14-0, wins an undisputed national championship, and pulls in a top 3 recruiting class (likely facilitating continued success).

West Virginia fans equate success with revenue. West Virginia will soon (if not already) reap more revenue that Florida State [I am not certain as to when WVU gets a full share of Big XII revenues]. In 2013-14, West Virginia finished 4-8 in football.

It seems like both sides would be happy; they are each getting what they value most. Yet WVU fans focus their concerns on Florida State's revenue "problems", rather than their own football problems.

 

[BC1978]

Well you have a new WVU poster on here posting nonsense so ludicrous that other posters read it and try to correct it. But after engaging in that futility three or four times each, they all give up. But it has now reached about 100 posts because the WVU poster continues to repeat the lunacy.

Agreed.

"Birthers," Truthers," "Faked Moon Landing", etc., etc. All of these conspiracy nuts have the same mind-set, IMO. They believe what they want to believe, despite whatever mountain of facts exist that would easily discredit their view in the mind of any sane person.

The "Truthers" are a classic case in point. They cling to the belief that the Government brought the twin towers down in some sort of controlled demolition. Forgetting for a minute the mountains upon montains of evidence that disproves their dribble and makes them look like idiots, a simple exercise in logic is all you need to see the absurdity of their view. In this instance, a planned controlled demolition of two 106 story adjoining towers plus surrounding buildings would have required thousands of people involved over many, many months in the elaborate planning and planting of charges in many specific locations in the buildings, including wiring, etc. It is a monumental task to legitimately implode a single small building - and this when the building has been gutted. One can only imaging the herculean effort to implode buildings that are fully funtional. Such an effort would have been easily observed by many, many people and it would have been impossible to cover-up.

When confronted with this logic, the "Truthers" often go to their talking points which typically involve some isolated piece of information having nothing to do with what happened. This logic is then insanely expanded to "prove" an idiotic premise (e.g., "if this is true...then that automatically means that this is true.....and this is true....and this is true....and this is true...etc.....etc."). Sane people understand that this is lunacy. However, conspiracy nuts, at least on the issue that they are obsessed with, are not sane, IMO.

I don't know this poster at all other than what he/she posts on here and on other boards. However, IMO, his/her train of logic on issues related to the ACC fits the pattern of the conspiracy nut. He/she has has talking points, which are easily discredited in the eyes of any sane person, yet he/she ignores the facts when they are presented and doubles down on their illogical thought process. His/her typical response is to write a litany of dribble having nothing to do with what he/she is trying to prove. IMO, any rational dialog with him/her on this issue will not be productive as he/she is incapable of considering anything that would discredit his/her view on this issue.

The poster has stated that he/she is an WVU fan. I know a number of WVU fans who are great people, including a guy who worked for me for a number of years. That said, IMO, - and strictly based on my observations - there seem to be a number of WVU fans who hold to these views re: the ACC and, frankly, I am baffled. I understand the frustration of Uconn fans given how this has played out to date. However, WVU has landed in a good place and it baffles me why so many of their fans don't just happily move on. Their continued preoccupation with the ACC is puzzling, IMO.

 

[btstimpy]

Florida State fans equate success with national championships, conference championships, major bowl victories. In 2013-14, Florida State goes 14-0, wins an undisputed national championship, and pulls in a top 3 recruiting class (likely facilitating continued success).

West Virginia fans equate success with revenue. West Virginia will soon (if not already) reap more revenue that Florida State [I am not certain as to when WVU gets a full share of Big XII revenues]. In 2013-14, West Virginia finished 4-8 in football.

It seems like both sides would be happy; they are each getting what they value most. Yet WVU fans focus their concerns on Florida State's revenue "problems", rather than their own football problems.

Florida State's Athletic Department takes in about $100,000 in Revenue. West Virginia takes in about $80,000 in Revenue.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

And yes I can easily imagine Buckaineer will be touting how WVU gets more Revenue than Florida State. That argument will appear perfectly valid in his imagination.

 

[whaler11]

Well you have a new WVU poster on here posting nonsense so ludicrous that other posters read it and try to correct it. But after engaging in that futility three or four times each, they all give up. But it has now reached about 100 posts because the WVU poster continues to repeat the lunacy.

There is a town just east of Hartford that still has some rattlesnakes. When I lived there I spent about 11% of my time on high alert watching for them.

I let someone talk me into biking in the woods and damned if there wasn't a 2 foot long rattler coiled in the middle of the damn trail.

While I hightailed it, the psycho I was with got closer to take pictures.

When you see a handle *****eer don't engage. Just back away quickly and be on your way. They will head back to their outcrop soon enough.

 

[BC1978]

There is a town just east of Hartford that still has some rattlesnakes. When I lived there I spent about 11% of my time on high alert watching for them.

I let someone talk me into biking in the woods and damned if there wasn't a 2 foot long rattler coiled in the middle of the damn trail.

While I hightailed it, the psycho I was with got closer for to take pictures.

When you see a handle *eer don't engage. Just back away quickly and be on your way. They will head back to their outcrop soon enough.

Very good analogy and very sound advice whaler!

 

[upstater]

Texas has recently discussed leaving the B12. Ohio St. hasn't discussed leaving the B1G. UCLA hasn't discussed leaving the Pac12.

Sane people will draw the only logical conclusion to these facts. One school is much likelier to leave than the others.

 

[buckaineer]

Reread your posts. They are laced with emotion and bias. I get you can quote stats on how much Big 12 schools make. They do not prove your conclusion any more than mine. The other fact is the Big 12 lost 4 teams in recent history. Yes, times have changed. My percentage for Texas leaving was > 90%, so things have improved. If the Big 10 loses 4 teams within two years, I'd surmise Ohio State's leaving the Big 10 would go to 50% or so. Anyway, we disagree. So what? No need to be so defensive.

You are making up percentages for Texas leaving the BIG 12. You haven't talked to Texas. You haven't seen anything whatsoever from anyone at Texas stating they have any reason, idea, thought, wish or desire to leave the BIG 12 now. Yet you are creating a percentage of the likelihood they are going to leave.

It's made up fantasy. There's nothing behind it or to it. Texas isn't leaving the BIG 12 and I'm not being defensive--you are. You obviously hope that Texas will leave the BIG 12 for some reason and are upset that someone has corrected that misguided thought based on nothing, but unfortunately for you, that doesn't mean Texas has any desire to leave the BIG 12.

 

[buckaineer]

Texas has recently discussed leaving the B12. Ohio St. hasn't discussed leaving the B1G. UCLA hasn't discussed leaving the Pac12.

Sane people will draw the only logical conclusion to these facts. One school is much likelier to leave than the others.

Texas has not recently discussed leaving the BIG 12. Several years ago now they considered it when Missouri was looking, Colorado decided to move to the Pac 12 and then Nebraska joined the Big Ten and A&M began looking around.

After Texas and the other BIG 12 schools decided to remain together and rebuild the BIG 12 Texas hasn't uttered anything but good thoughts about the BIG 12 and their desire to make it a strong and successful league.

 

[buckaineer]

Florida State's Athletic Department takes in about $100,000 in Revenue. West Virginia takes in about $80,000 in Revenue.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

And yes I can easily imagine Buckaineer will be touting how WVU gets more Revenue than Florida State. That argument will appear perfectly valid in his imagination.

FSU is the top revenue earner in the ACC. WVU is not the top revenue earner in the BIG 12. Texas is the top revenue earner in the BIG 12 and they make many tens of millions more than FSU does. That is a more realistic comparison.

As for WVU, WVUs revenues will grow significantly over the life of the present BIG 12 contract and their tier 3 deals. Oliver Luck has stated within a few years WVUs athletic budget will be $100 million or more.

Of course FSU's budget will increase as well over the years--but WVU's revenues will likely grow closer to FSU's than FSU's will to the University of Texas's.

 

[buckaineer]

Florida State fans equate success with national championships, conference championships, major bowl victories. In 2013-14, Florida State goes 14-0, wins an undisputed national championship, and pulls in a top 3 recruiting class (likely facilitating continued success).

West Virginia fans equate success with revenue. West Virginia will soon (if not already) reap more revenue that Florida State [I am not certain as to when WVU gets a full share of Big XII revenues]. In 2013-14, West Virginia finished 4-8 in football.

It seems like both sides would be happy; they are each getting what they value most. Yet WVU fans focus their concerns on Florida State's revenue "problems", rather than their own football problems.

Uh, no. WVU is one of the winningest programs not to yet win a national championship but want that as much as anyone and have played in a championship game and come close a few times. WVU was very successful in the BCS era--stomping Clemson btw in historic fashion just a couple of seasons back, as well as taking down the SEC and BIG 12 champions as well.

WVU having been in the Big East never had the opportunity to compete with the same revenues some were gettting, but that is changing and it will help them boost their programs and facilities.

FSU has certainly made much noise the past couple of years about financial issues from the ACC affecting them as well.

 

[upstater]

Texas has not recently discussed leaving the BIG 12. Several years ago now they considered it when Missouri was looking, Colorado decided to move to the Pac 12 and then Nebraska joined the Big Ten and A&M began looking around.

After Texas and the other BIG 12 schools decided to remain together and rebuild the BIG 12 Texas hasn't uttered anything but good thoughts about the BIG 12 and their desire to make it a strong and successful league.

2 years and 3 months ago. It was not several years. It was November of 2011. Ohio St and UCLA have never discussed leaving their conferences.

 

[buckaineer]

Well you have a new WVU poster on here posting nonsense so ludicrous that other posters read it and try to correct it. But after engaging in that futility three or four times each, they all give up. But it has now reached about 100 posts because the WVU poster continues to repeat the lunacy.

No lunacy has been posted by me, lunacy has been posted by ACC posters and others and your post continues that trend.

You can't comprehend the difference between fantasy or reality or admit when you are wrong.

Btw this thread-once again-was not created by anyone from WVU. ACC posters are the source of the original articles about this new ACC Network and the concern that it doesn't deliver what was promised. That's reality--but since you don't follow that, you've missed that simple yet important point.

 

[buckaineer]

Appreciate the link, and, the response. Now, thats the two who voted no.

The other 10 voted yes. Including schools with options to jump to other leagues...UNC, UVA, VPI, Clemson, NCSU, and Duke.

I have yet to hear any of them voice any dissent on the fee. Why is that?

I will tell you why that is. They have no place to go. No one has invited them anywhere. They know however that FSU is their lifeblood and if FSU leaves--and they may have options--then the league is gutted. That is why they were adamant the vote was needed--because they want to keep having FSU prop them up.

 

[Pat125]

You are making up percentages for Texas leaving the BIG 12. You haven't talked to Texas. You haven't seen anything whatsoever from anyone at Texas stating they have any reason, idea, thought, wish or desire to leave the BIG 12 now. Yet you are creating a percentage of the likelihood they are going to leave.

It's made up fantasy. There's nothing behind it or to it. Texas isn't leaving the BIG 12 and I'm not being defensive--you are. You obviously hope that Texas will leave the BIG 12 for some reason and are upset that someone has corrected that misguided thought based on nothing, but unfortunately for you, that doesn't mean Texas has any desire to leave the BIG 12.

And despite everything you say, 50% is still my estimate, a conservative one, by the way. No, I don't hope that Texas leaves. Actually, I don't have a horse in that race. You apparently do. And I never said that Texas (for now, at least) has any desire to leave. As far as I know, they may hope the Big 12 survives.

 

[buckaineer]

And despite everything you say, 50% is still my estimate, a conservative one, by the way. No, I don't hope that Texas leaves. Actually, I don't have a horse in that race. You apparently do. And I never said that Texas (for now, at least) has any desire to leave. As far as I know, they may hope the Big 12 survives.

Yes, if you are creating an imaginary estimate of Texas leaving the BIG 12 you do apparently have a horse in that race (which doesn't even exist), when there is nothing to support even the slightest desire of the school to do anything but to continue to be in the BIG 12 and remain the wealthiest and one of the most powerful schools in the nation,

No one in the BIG 12 is changing conferences. There isn't any reason to and no one is considering it.

 

[buckaineer]

2 years and 3 months ago. It was not several years. It was November of 2011. Ohio St and UCLA have never discussed leaving their conferences.

It was four or five years ago when schools began considering leaving the BIG 12 conference. Its been years since Texas considered leaving what they thought was a deteriorating situation. Everything has changed since that time.

 

[itgoeslike]

It was four or five years ago when schools began considering leaving the BIG 12 conference. Its been years since Texas considered leaving what they thought was a deteriorating situation. Everything has changed since that time.

Texas A&M announced they were leaving the B12 conference 2-1/2 years ago and formally left 18 months ago.. Texas and OU were in active discussions with PAC within that time frame. It's hardly ancient history.

 

[Pat125]

Yes, if you are creating an imaginary estimate of Texas leaving the BIG 12 you do apparently have a horse in that race (which doesn't even exist), when there is nothing to support even the slightest desire of the school to do anything but to continue to be in the BIG 12 and remain the wealthiest and one of the most powerful schools in the nation,

No one in the BIG 12 is changing conferences. There isn't any reason to and no one is considering it.

You're wrong about me having a horse in that race. And now we see you conveniently change facts to sport your case. You've made it clear that you are creating imaginary percentages.

 

[Pat125]

Buckaineer, We are obviously are not going to convince the other of our argument nor whose argument is more specious, so you can have the last word.

By the way, I do appreciate your optimism about Maryland, who I do actually have a horse in. I think they made the right move, but I am not as optimistic. There are plenty of pros and cons, and it's not certain if this will ultimately be the correct move.

 

[Ldandy]

I will tell you why that is. They have no place to go. No one has invited them anywhere. They know however that FSU is their lifeblood and if FSU leaves--and they may have options--then the league is gutted. That is why they were adamant the vote was needed--because they want to keep having FSU prop them up.

Since conference realignment plays out primarily behind closed doors, it is nearly impossible to know who may or may not have received an invitation from another conference. That said its pretty disingenuous to claim that no team in The ACC has an option to go elsewhere other than FSU. Sure Wake or BC might be up S**** Creek but I'm fairly certain several others would be just fine. In fact if not for The GOR being in place, Delany would take UNC and UVA the second either expressed an interest in joining.