Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HuskyHawk, post: 2510992, member: 1414"] You're just trolling at this point. Every conference has different needs every time it expands. The B1G needed a football brand when it grabbed Nebraska. Later, it decided that due to the changing landscape, and the BTN, it needed more TV sets and bigger markets. It ignored on field performance that time and grabbed RU and Maryland. At the time the ACC grabbed Louisville, football was at historic lows for the league. Miami stunk. VT wasn't doing well and even FSU and Clemson were not where they have been since. The ACC has very strong tv markets, and had no network, so that was not a factor for them. Louiville and UConn both had strong basketball, but Louisville had much strong football. Additionally, they had a more southern culture, and the southern ACC schools didn't want another Yankee school to shift the balance of power. The Big 12 grabbed TCU because it was in footprint and good at football. It took WVU because it was desperate for a 10th member to retain it's AQ status and TV contract and couldn't lure anybody from the SEC or B1G. The SEC took A&M because it was strong across the board and brought them into the TX/Houston market. Mizzou also had solid programs, and good TV markets that complimented what the SEC had (Mizzou and Arkansas are traditional rivals...it not at the level of Mizzou KU). The Pac was and is geographically isolated. It saw a chance to get beyond its borders and get a strong program in a good market with Colorado and pounced. Good cultural fit too, as CU is as granola as UC Berkeley. They grabbed Utah as the next best available program in the region, and a geographic bridge to Colorado. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,796

Messages: 4,410,975

Members: 10,236

Latest member: Hoopster80