Conference Realignment: Birds of a feather flock together | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Conference Realignment: Birds of a feather flock together

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was born in Virginia, but my parents are Connecticut Yankees (Norwich and Groton CT). Never really was a good ol' southern boy.
Oh yeah? Lots of them down there(NE expatriates) ! RU just beat out VA, Md,WF and 7 others for a 3* 6''7" 280 OL named Blake Camper(goes to HS in Va) for an early verbal because his folks went to HS in Ramapo,NJ 24 yrs ago and he still has pride in the NE! Maybe thats why so many Fla kids come up here?
 
This is why the B1G wants UVa, UNC, GT and maybe even FSU (a stretch???). Tons of Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, PSU and MSU alumni live down here. North Carolina, Georgia and Florida are all growing rapidly and Virginia is growing fairly well. Lot's of gowing cable subscribers. And VA, NC, GA & FL are geographically contiguous per B1G standards and all are AAU except for FSU. But hey, Nebraska lost their AAU status. Why not go for FSU? If not, be bold and ask the Gators to join the B1G. UF is a great school.
 
Oh yeah? Lots of them down there(NE expatriates) ! RU just beat out VA, Md,WF and 7 others for a 3* 6''7" 280 OL named Blake Camper(goes to HS in Va) for an early verbal because his folks went to HS in Ramapo,NJ 24 yrs ago and he still has pride in the NE! Maybe thats why so many Fla kids come up here?

Cool email his info to Coach Franklin. ;)
 
This is why the B1G wants UVa, UNC, GT and maybe even FSU (a stretch???). Tons of Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, PSU and MSU alumni live down here. North Carolina, Georgia and Florida are all growing rapidly and Virginia is growing fairly well. Lot's of gowing cable subscribers. And VA, NC, GA & FL are geographically contiguous per B1G standards and all are AAU except for FSU. But hey, Nebraska lost their AAU status. Why not go for FSU? If not, be bold and ask the Gators to join the B1G. UF is a great school.
Are you a troll...or just nutty?
 
Are you a troll...or just nutty?

Probably both :) Trolling because basketball and football are over and CR is very interesting. Plus this board gives me a better perspective from other points of view.

I am serious about VA, NC and GA being a big draw for the B1G because of NE expatriates as NickyNewark calls it. The Gator comment makes me as certifiable as the Dude though. If I'm trolling too much, just let me know. I'll try to calm it down. But I warn you, the summer is a boring time for college sports fans like myself.
 
The ACC likes living in the past I think. They probably still think Tony Dorsett and Dan Marino play for Pitt :D. In all seriousness, I would have liked the Pitt move had WVU been a part of that package. Back when SU and Pitt were added, WVU was never considered due to "poor academics." Ironically, Louisville is RIGHT THERE academically with WVU (within a few spots in the 160s per USNWR). So adding UL was a slap in the face to WVU IMO. FWIW, I think WVU is a good school, because they hold the most true to the land grant mission than any land grant university in the nation.

And if the ACC had the foresight like the SEC and thought in terms of rivalries, WVU-Pitt-VT-UMCP would have been perfect in a division together with common (sometime hated) rivalries. That makes for good TV. Yes, less cable subscribers, but more passionate and entertaining games. That's the SEC model and it works very well.

I think the ACC added Syracuse because they were afraid of losing them (and NYC) to the B1G. Then SU probably brokered the deal to make Pitt a package deal with them. After that, ND came along for the ride and the rest just smells like Mike Tranghese... I meant is history. The joke was on the ACC as Rutgers is more NYC than any P5 school in the country. After that, I dare say UConn has as much NYC presence as Syracuse.

Good post +1 for you sir.

It feels to me like the ACC is always reacting to something that could potentially happen in conference realignment, but could just as easily not. Some might call it being proactive, but to me it feels like repeated miscalculation. They took BC years ago and then left them on an island geographically and culturally for a decade. They passed on UCONN, a flagship state school and basketball power, to take Syracuse and Pitt when all were available to them. Both of these teams have marginal fan support and national appeal(outside of SU BBall) and could never create demand in their respective states for any far flung potential ACC Network.

When you factor in the idea that the only other conference that might potentially consider either was The Big 12, you have to question what their motivation was? UNC/UVA could have strengthened the conference's football brand by allowing FSU/Clemson to have WVU, but cited inferior academics as a reason to keep them out. They then take Ville, a school with a worse academic profile then the Eers.

Finally they fell for the ND con job. The one where they get everything they want, and you get the privilege of giving it to them. Wait until the first ACC School gets knocked down the bowl ladder for ND's benefit. SMH. Very glad my school is not a part of this circus. I'd love to see your school grab UCONN and join ours in The B1G. Unlikely but it would be fun. Imagine the possibility of a neutral site game at Fed Ex, half Maroon/Orange and half Blue/White. Cool stuff.
 
.-.
The ACC likes living in the past I think. They probably still think Tony Dorsett and Dan Marino play for Pitt :D. In all seriousness, I would have liked the Pitt move had WVU been a part of that package. Back when SU and Pitt were added, WVU was never considered due to "poor academics." Ironically, Louisville is RIGHT THERE academically with WVU (within a few spots in the 160s per USNWR). So adding UL was a slap in the face to WVU IMO. FWIW, I think WVU is a good school, because they hold the most true to the land grant mission than any land grant university in the nation.

And if the ACC had the foresight like the SEC and thought in terms of rivalries, WVU-Pitt-VT-UMCP would have been perfect in a division together with common (sometime hated) rivalries. That makes for good TV. Yes, less cable subscribers, but more passionate and entertaining games. That's the SEC model and it works very well.

I think the ACC added Syracuse because they were afraid of losing them (and NYC) to the B1G. Then SU probably brokered the deal to make Pitt a package deal with them. After that, ND came along for the ride and the rest just smells like Mike Tranghese... I meant is history. The joke was on the ACC as Rutgers is more NYC than any P5 school in the country. After that, I dare say UConn has as much NYC presence as Syracuse.

Couldn't have said it any better. Exactly how I feel. If the ACC really wanted football tradition and performance then WVU was the way to go, but they have bad academics. Then, two years later they take louisville who had a few really good years and the ACC acts like they just picked up a combination of Ohio St, Texas, and USC football-wise. Louisville's academics weren't an issue at that point. Kind of shows the moving metrics that has driven me nuts and I've read from lots of posters on this site.
 
Wait until the first ACC School gets knocked down the bowl ladder for ND's benefit.

Yup... been there and done that in our old Big East days. One of the biggest reasons I was excited when Tech left the Big East for the ACC in 2003. Then came Pitt, Syracuse and then.... NOTRE DAME. Smells like the Big East again. WVU, Rutgers and UConn fans probably feel it's Karma and we got what we deserved. They may be right.

And yes, a half blue/white and half maroon/orange stadium would be cool. But not at FedEx... we're winless in that place. Couldn't even beat Cincy.
 
Cool email his info to Coach Franklin. ;)
I saw today Pitt beat out PSU/Franlin for a Pa HS WR who was supposed to camp next week end at PSU and said its off...! PSU can't get all the local kids it wants I guess and and it's "winning" hasn't always been guaranteed by 4* kids! Haven't they always dominated the east in recruiting? The game still has to be played on the field.
 
Couldn't have said it any better. Exactly how I feel. If the ACC really wanted football tradition and performance then WVU was the way to go, but they have bad academics. Then, two years later they take louisville who had a few really good years and the ACC acts like they just picked up a combination of Ohio St, Texas, and USC football-wise. Louisville's academics weren't an issue at that point. Kind of shows the moving metrics that has driven me nuts and I've read from lots of posters on this site.

I wouldn't say WVU is poor academically. West Virginia is half the size in population than CT and 4.5 times larger in land area. Plus Huntington is their largest MSA which would be the 4th largest MSA in CT. They are a poor state and WVU doesn't have access to research like UConn or VT. Plus they hold true to their land grant mission and allow the residents of their state a chance to attend WVU. This is something VT has lost long ago and I'm sure UConn's admission standards are similar to Tech's. So when WVU opens their doors to the general public in West Virginia, their ranking is going to take a hit. But a large percentage of those who are admitted to WVU don't make it to Sophomore year.

Not trying to be a proponent for the 'Eers, but I don't think it's that bad of a school. Besides, I hear from my Hoos friends what an awful school Virginia Tech is.
 
Last edited:
I saw today Pitt beat out PSU/Franlin for a Pa HS WR who was supposed to camp next week end at PSU and said its off...! PSU can't get all the local kids it wants I guess and and it's "winning" hasn't always been guaranteed by 4* kids! Haven't they always dominated the east in recruiting? The game still has to be played on the field.

No disrespect to you or Pitt, but they didn't beat us out for anything. Pitt does not have one commit currently who could land a PSU offer. Again no disrespect to those kids, who are likely good players, just a statement of the reality of our current state of recruiting. The player you are referencing was scheduled to camp at PSU next weekend. Guess what? So will a hundred other kids. Every school hosts skills camps. Kids go to learn a thing or two, and hopefully raise their profile to college recruiters. The majority of the kids that attend these camps will likely never step foot on a college football field.

Where I agree with you is that games still need to be played on the field. There are plenty of examples one could cite of teams achieving great success with lesser regarded recruits. That said there still remains a direct correlation between the skill level of recruits and the success of the programs they select. I am glad our program is trending back to where we were on the recruiting trail prior to the dysfunction and entropy of the 2000's.
 
I could well be wrong here but my guess is that the SEC eventually wants a presence in both Virginia and North Carolina and Va Tech is their prime candidate for the state of Virginia.
 
.-.
No disrespect to you or Pitt, but they didn't beat us out for anything. Pitt does not have one commit currently who could land a PSU offer. Again no disrespect to those kids, who are likely good players, just a statement of the reality of our current state of recruiting. The player you are referencing was scheduled to camp at PSU next weekend. Guess what? So will a hundred other kids. Every school hosts skills camps. Kids go to learn a thing or two, and hopefully raise their profile to college recruiters. The majority of the kids that attend these camps will likely never step foot on a college football field.

Where I agree with you is that games still need to be played on the field. There are plenty of examples one could cite of teams achieving great success with lesser regarded recruits. That said there still remains a direct correlation between the skill level of recruits and the success of the programs they select. I am glad our program is trending back to where we were on the recruiting trail prior to the dysfunction and entropy of the 2000's.

He may have been invited by the coaches to get a better look at him. I understand that he may not have been a high priority, but it seems he was invited to the camp to earn an offer. If he were going just for "skills," why would he not go after paying several hundred dollars to attend? Many coaches offer kids to come to camp at discounted (or waived) fees. As a parent, I would have a very difficult time paying upward of $500 and throwing it away. I guess we will never know, but to just assume that he was there just for the skills is a bit disingenuous.

It's just like when a kid picks another school and the fans of the spurned school says the offer was "uncommittable," or they were only offered if another prospect didn't commit. Does that stuff happen? Absolutely, but not that often.

That being said, you are doing very well recruiting and my guess is he wasn't a high priority if he was one at all.
 
He may have been invited by the coaches to get a better look at him. I understand that he may not have been a high priority, but it seems he was invited to the camp to earn an offer. If he were going just for "skills," why would he not go after paying several hundred dollars to attend? Many coaches offer kids to come to camp at discounted (or waived) fees. As a parent, I would have a very difficult time paying upward of $500 and throwing it away. I guess we will never know, but to just assume that he was there just for the skills is a bit disingenuous. First we don't know if he was personally invited to the camp, or if he simply enrolled in it like a hundred other kids hoping to catch a coach's eye. These camps do serve multiple purposes:

For Coaches they are an opportunity to impress top prospects, bond with current commits, evaluate borderline potential offers, and network with HS Coaches.

For the higher end prospects that attend they are a means to showcase their abilities, raise their profile nationally, and see potential coaching staffs in action.

For mid level prospects they are an opportunity to learn from college coaches, showcase their abilities to teams they might hope to garner interest from, and continue to get their name out to other schools .

For marginal players they are purely instructional camps used to help them prepare for their upcoming HS Seasons. Ultimately they may aid in these kid earning lower level offers or academic/athletic assistance.

Back to Tre Tipton, the player NN was refering to. He falls into category two. He had lower level offers and was working to earn more and higher profile attention. Pitt offered, he accepted. Maybe he loved Pitt, or maybe he realized that offers from schools like PSU, OSU, UM, ND etc were not coming. He may have been happy to have a shot at a free education and to play football in The ACC. Plenty of kids do not like the process. If his goal in attending this camp was to try to earn an offer, that may have been a moot point to him after committing to Pitt. If I were his parents I wold be less upset about losing 500 bucks when I considered the two hundred thousand dollar education my son just earned.

Maybe he asked our staff if they were planning to take anymore WR and they told him they were full up? Personally I believe the only WR they would take at this time is Alex Ofodile from MO, or possibly Irvin Charles if more scholarships were to open up. There were a few prospects at camp last week like Scotty Washington who are good players, but will not get offers I know of a few current RU and Pitt Commits who have attended PSU Camps this year after committing to their respective schools, so I know some players commit but still flirt.




It's just like when a kid picks another school and the fans of the spurned school says the offer was "uncommittable," or they were only offered if another prospect didn't commit. Does that stuff happen? Absolutely, but not that often. Stop. That happens all the time... at OSU. ;)

That being said, you are doing very well recruiting and my guess is he wasn't a high priority if he was one at all. We are for a change which is fun, and he wasn't on the radar what so ever, no disrespect to the kid.
 
Last edited:
Yup... been there and done that in our old Big East days. One of the biggest reasons I was excited when Tech left the Big East for the ACC in 2003. Then came Pitt, Syracuse and then.... NOTRE DAME. Smells like the Big East again. WVU, Rutgers and UConn fans probably feel it's Karma and we got what we deserved. They may be right.

And yes, a half blue/white and half maroon/orange stadium would be cool. But not at FedEx... we're winless in that place. Couldn't even beat Cincy.

So Fed Ex it is.:)
 
I agree on esp WVU where my nephew is an "02" grad...imagine even here in the NE were mad about the snubbing of WVU but NOT L'ville? L'ville fans like RU fans but so do WVU fans like the "hillbilly/guido" games lol and miss them but that was a TERRIBLE decision by you're conference leadership and leaving this gap in NYC metro where us and UConn could have locked it up really was a head scratcher up here!?! L'ville tried supplanting WVU to the Big12 and it almost worked!! Wheres this influence coming from in Ky? Ive heard the ACC knew what was going on with re to RU and the B1G and tried to rally ahead of the curve with the Pitt/SU move but UConn/SU would at least have made sense but Pitt? Somethings wrong with that picture up here to reasonable fans!?! Now I actually like Pitt and their fans but intellectually the move seemed ridiculously dumb to us. So much so that many have lost any respect we might have felt for the ACC!! VT may have some arrogant fans but I've yet to meet one.

The ACC should have focused on rivalries. UConn-Cuse and UConn-BC adds two all-sports regional rivalries and UConn-Duke and UConn-UNC adds more to basketball rivalry than Duke-Cuse no matter what ESPN says. Pitt is a great school and makes sense for the ACC if they had brought their rivals WVU in with them.

Rutgers was probably unobtainable for the ACC but UConn-Rutgers would have been the most valuable add, followed by WVU-Pitt, followed by Cuse-Lville.
 
Good post +1 for you sir.

It feels to me like the ACC is always reacting to something that could potentially happen in conference realignment, but could just as easily not. Some might call it being proactive, but to me it feels like repeated miscalculation. They took BC years ago and then left them on an island geographically and culturally for a decade. They passed on UCONN, a flagship state school and basketball power, to take Syracuse and Pitt when all were available to them. Both of these teams have marginal fan support and national appeal(outside of SU BBall) and could never create demand in their respective states for any far flung potential ACC Network.

When you factor in the idea that the only other conference that might potentially consider either was The Big 12, you have to question what their motivation was? UNC/UVA could have strengthened the conference's football brand by allowing FSU/Clemson to have WVU, but cited inferior academics as a reason to keep them out. They then take Ville, a school with a worse academic profile then the Eers.

Finally they fell for the ND con job. The one where they get everything they want, and you get the privilege of giving it to them. Wait until the first ACC School gets knocked down the bowl ladder for ND's benefit. SMH. Very glad my school is not a part of this circus. I'd love to see your school grab UCONN and join ours in The B1G. Unlikely but it would be fun. Imagine the possibility of a neutral site game at Fed Ex, half Maroon/Orange and half Blue/White. Cool stuff.

Don't disagree with the first bolded statement but I would add they were always torn on other issues about how to properly react. Back in 2003 they were reacting to football now being the major driver in athletics and the need for a championship game in that sport in order to try and maintain their lead in conference payouts. If it were truly only about football though, their expansion back in 2003 logically should have been Miami, VT, and either WVU or SU. Instead, being torn about academics they decided to target Miami, BC, and SU. When they realized they couldn't get Miami without VT, they initially stopped at 11 and tried to get the championship game rule changed and failed. This resulted in BC being #12 four months later (for the invite) and a year longer wait than either Miami or VT.

In 2011, they were reacting to SEC expansion to 14 with TAMU and one other (possibly FSU or VT) and a terribly negotiated contract the year before that was being quickly passed over by the Big 12 and PAC since the year the ACC settled, ESPN and FOX were not negotiating together while the Big 12 and the PAC they did since Comcast/NBC enter the scene as a possible competitor. This resulted in both the PAC and Big 12 getting inflated TV contracts that their ratings did not deserve.

ESPN let it be known that they would renegotiate the ACC contract if they expanded, so the 2011 expansion had several goals - a buffer in case the league lost teams due to SEC or BiG expansion; a legitimate reason for ESPN to increase the TV contract somewhat; and make the league enticing for ND.

Which brings me to your second bolded point. Obviously, the ACC was in a position of weakness. But then so was the Big 12 at the same time when they were negotiated the same deal which would be for 4 games a year, with an annual game against Texas being one of the four. Considering this was from a position of weakness the fact that the ACC got from ND a 5 game deal (ND wanted 4, the ACC wanted 6); that ND had to cycle through all ACC teams and not have special privileges with Pitt and BC; that the tv contract went up again; got the GOR as a result of the ND deal; and that the ACC got in writing that if ND were to ever go full into a conference over the lifetime of the GOR it would be the ACC (perhaps meaningless since ND will remain indy at least until the end of the GOR and probably longer) isn't entirely bad for bargaining from a position of weakness.

Biggest issue with the ACC is really the CFB playoff/Event Bowl set-up and the fact that the ACC as a conference isn't conducive to a conference network similar to the BTN and SECN. And no matter how good UConn and West Virginia are, or how good Rutgers might potentially be, getting any one of them or two of them over SU and Pitt wasn't likely to change either of those factors.

Cheers,
Neil
 
I could well be wrong here but my guess is that the SEC eventually wants a presence in both Virginia and North Carolina and Va Tech is their prime candidate for the state of Virginia.

UVa may be more desirable than Tech in that situation as well. Doubt that day really ever comes though, much like my far-fetched ideas of either in the B1G.
 
.-.
No disrespect to you or Pitt, but they didn't beat us out for anything. Pitt does not have one commit currently who could land a PSU offer. Again no disrespect to those kids, who are likely good players, just a statement of the reality of our current state of recruiting. The player you are referencing was scheduled to camp at PSU next weekend. Guess what? So will a hundred other kids. Every school hosts skills camps. Kids go to learn a thing or two, and hopefully raise their profile to college recruiters. The majority of the kids that attend these camps will likely never step foot on a college football field.

Where I agree with you is that games still need to be played on the field. There are plenty of examples one could cite of teams achieving great success with lesser regarded recruits. That said there still remains a direct correlation between the skill level of recruits and the success of the programs they select. I am glad our program is trending back to where we were on the recruiting trail prior to the dysfunction and entropy of the 2000's.
Ldandy I'm not comparing Pitt to PSU because you can't? LOL But I just read about it so it was fresh in my mind(not to mention a rare event) and no doubt Franklin is a great recruiter. After rereading this post myself I don't know what was on my mind? Maybe hoping we can catch them before these last coupla recruiting classes kids develop and shock them lol!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,335
Messages
4,565,181
Members
10,465
Latest member
agiglax


Top Bottom