Expansion Rumors site profiles UConn

[SouthronCross]

While what you say is true, the longer term outlook shows that long before ACC expansion in 2003 the Boston Globe was running stories from the likes of Bob Ryan about how BC feared UConn jumping to D1. He had quotes from BC AD sources. And BC feared losing football players because the heyday of BC basketball in the 1980s (when they made the Elite 8) coincided with Ct. heavy bball team.

Those 80s teams had players like John Bagley, Michael Adams, John Garris, Jay Murphy and others. These were all Connecticut products. So Calhoun moves in, and he not only grabs the best Connecticut players but regional talent. By the end of his career, he was grabbing Boston kids. There is a case to be made that losing Conn. players hurt BC basketball, since their heyday coincided with a time when they grabbed pretty good players.

I knew Bagley and Garris were Connecticut kids, but, not the others, so, that explains a lot of their negativity towards UConn.

BC had some pretty good teams back then. I wonder why they didn't just expand their recruiting base to NYC, Philadelphia, and, the Baltimore-DC corridor. They were a good program, competing well in a tough league. They had plenty to sell to kids, in both sports.

Fear of UConn succeeding is a part of their reluctance, but, to me anyways, a lot of it seems like laziness. Its almost like 'Why compete with UConn, when we can move to try and block them from joining?'

Thats a sorry ass attitude.

 

[SouthronCross]

The ACC in 1981 is a very different beast from today - none of the other ACC members back then would be considered a "power FB school" in the current ACC aside from Clemson. Since expansion the ACC FB title has been won by the original members just 4 times (and one of them is Maryland)...just once by Clemson.

All true. But, my point was that Clemson believes that they can still compete for the national title from here. I believe they are correct in that assumption.

The ACC's naysayers have been putting out the thought that its champion would basically be automatically left out of the 4-team playoff annually, and, thats just not true. In 2011, CU were ranked No 5, until late-season losses at NCSU and South Carolina. VPI was later ranked in the top 5, until CU spanked them in the ACCCG. Had either of them won out, they would've been ranked in the Top 4, and thus, eligible for the playoff. Ditto FSU last season. Like CU, they suffered a late-season loss to NCSU, and, then tanked vs Florida. Had FSU won out, they, not Alabama, would have played ND for the title.

The ACC chances to make a statement win have been there for the taking, but, have gone begging.

 

[ctchamps]

Those who think BC is the only problem are naive. We have schools lined up against us for different reasons...
Florida St and Clemson will want Cincy instead of us for football
Syracuse and Pitt want us left out because of recruiting
Louisville wants us out because rather have Cincy as a partner... have more history with them and natural regional rival
BC wants us out because of regional turf

None of these reasons are logical, we are the better overall choice and university, but these feeling are out there. We are a great fit for the ACC and it make sense to land there. But it is not going to be easy.

The Ville position is the only one that makes sense from a standpoint of strategic development of the league. All the rest of the points you make demonstrate pettiness and myopic decision making although FSU and Clemson have some rationality to their thinking.

It's a conference composed of desperate and short sighted decision makers. It's BE2. It really bothers me because it would be the conference I would love to see UConn land.

 

[SouthronCross]

I agree it is stable now (much to my disappointment...nothing personal) but I suspect it was far closer to coming apart than you suggest. If FSU had bolted the wheels likely would have come of the bus. Swofford is a master of the high pressure, sxhxixt or get off the pot choice. I think he offered that choice to FSU GOR. I think he used some schools testing the water of a conference affiliation change to put pressure on all of them to be in or out. It was masterful. I hate the guy but the ACC was nearly as fragile as the Big East and it has survived. You have to respect that.

I do agree that FSU leaving would've been huge, but, unless Clemson agreed to go with them, they would not go it alone. They see how tough it has been, and will be, on WVU in the Big 12.

So, for the sake of discussion, lets say FSU and CU leave for the Big 12.

If UNC decides to stay, then the UNC System BOGs is not letting NCSU go anywhere. And, vice versa. If those two stay, I think UVA and VPI stay. All of which saves Duke, and Wake Forest. Pitt and Syracuse still come aboard. That makes 8 teams.

Miami and GT are the wild cards. If they stay, thats 10 teams, and, a fair mid-major league. If not, now, they have some decisions to make. Do they expand back to 10 teams (the optimum number, IMHO), or, go all the way back to 12, so as to continue holding a football CCG?

Thankfully, we do not have to go through those scenarios, since everybody decided to stay.

 

[junglehusky]

There's deep-seated hatred that goes back generations between people who swear by the UConn Dairy Bar and those who swear by the Penn State Creamery.

Middle East conflicts come and go, but ice cream wars are forever.

And before that were the Pennamite-Yankee Wars. #NeverForget

 

[woomba]

All true. But, my point was that Clemson believes that they can still compete for the national title from here. I believe they are correct in that assumption.

The ACC's naysayers have been putting out the thought that its champion would basically be automatically left out of the 4-team playoff annually, and, thats just not true. In 2011, CU were ranked No 5, until late-season losses at NCSU and South Carolina. VPI was later ranked in the top 5, until CU spanked them in the ACCCG. Had either of them won out, they would've been ranked in the Top 4, and thus, eligible for the playoff. Ditto FSU last season. Like CU, they suffered a late-season loss to NCSU, and, then tanked vs Florida. Had FSU won out, they, not Alabama, would have played ND for the title.

The ACC chances to make a statement win have been there for the taking, but, have gone begging.

A 13-0 ACC champ will be fine. I think the danger will be in a hypothetical where there are multiple one-loss champs vying for the #4 spot. In that situation the ACC will be outside looking in most years unless there's something screwy with the schedule that year (i.e. only loss is a OT loss to a #1 ranked SEC team early in the season)

The problem is that it's hard to predict how often that will happen - my guess is 2-3 times over the next 12 years, which I personally don't think is enough to justify switching conferences over.

 

[pj]

Blue Chip college players...vs. New York? Pretty sure that's not the case. You can make a case vs. Massachusetts depending on how you define "blue chip"

I mis-spoke when I said New York. Here are NFL players by state of high school: http://www.maxpreps.com/news/J_G3Ol...ery-active-nfl-player-went-to-high-school.htm

Connecticut doubles up Massachusetts and has 71% more NFL players than the other NE states combined. It produces more than 3/4 as many NFL players as NY despite having less than 1/5 the population.

You're right about FBS players which tracks population more closely, although Connecticut has equalled Massachusetts in recent years as a source of FBS players (eg 2013, see http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1470883). But as you go to better quality -- I said BCS -- Connecticut does better relative to Mass, New England, and NY.

 

[NickyNewark]

And before that were the Pennamite-Yankee Wars. #NeverForget

Funny you would think of that particular conflict?My moms a Jackson from Tunkhannock,Wyoming County,Pa whose ancestor's were part of the Connecticut Yank contingent!!LOL...not talked about much!!

 

[Pudge]

BC basketball was never all that good.

 

[Adios]

And before that were the Pennamite-Yankee Wars. #NeverForget

Stuff like this goes to show we are culturally similar to the B1G. Because we used to own some of their land! Let's take it back!

Is that the first civil strife in the US after the American Revolutionary War?

 

[woomba]

I mis-spoke when I said New York. Here are NFL players by state of high school: http://www.maxpreps.com/news/J_G3Ol...ery-active-nfl-player-went-to-high-school.htm

Connecticut doubles up Massachusetts and has 71% more NFL players than the other NE states combined. It produces more than 3/4 as many NFL players as NY despite having less than 1/5 the population.

You're right about FBS players which tracks population more closely, although Connecticut has equalled Massachusetts in recent years as a source of FBS players (eg 2013, see http://footballrecruiting. /content.asp?CID=1470883). But as you go to better quality -- I said BCS -- Connecticut does better relative to Mass, New England, and NY.

BCS is an odd metric to use since that term is dying this year - but it doesn't really change much. Massachusetts actually did better than I thought they would when I looked up the past few years on r_i_v_a_l_s:

2011 NY - 32 (!!! not sure what happened here)
2012 NY - 15
2013 NY - 13
2011 Conn - 7
2012 Conn - 3
2013 Conn -9
2011 Mass - 10
2012 Mass - 12
2013 Mass - 8

 

[NEforceUConn]

All true. But, my point was that Clemson believes that they can still compete for the national title from here. I believe they are correct in that assumption.

The ACC's naysayers have been putting out the thought that its champion would basically be automatically left out of the 4-team playoff annually, and, thats just not true. In 2011, CU were ranked No 5, until late-season losses at NCSU and South Carolina. VPI was later ranked in the top 5, until CU spanked them in the ACCCG. Had either of them won out, they would've been ranked in the Top 4, and thus, eligible for the playoff. Ditto FSU last season. Like CU, they suffered a late-season loss to NCSU, and, then tanked vs Florida. Had FSU won out, they, not Alabama, would have played ND for the title.

The ACC chances to make a statement win have been there for the taking, but, have gone begging.

Lets assume the ACC champ has 2 losses and so does ND.

Lets assume its (another) off year in the PAC 12 ie a 3 loss Champ, so we have SEC, B1G, and BIG 12 champs claiming 3 spots. Who does the last one go to - the 2 loss ACC champ, a 2 loss ND, or a 2 loss SEC runner up?

Notice I don't even mention a 1 loss Boise or a 1 loss AAC.

 

[woomba]

Lets assume the ACC champ has 2 losses and so does ND.

Lets assume its (another) off year in the PAC 12 ie a 3 loss Champ, so we have SEC, B1G, and BIG 12 champs claiming 3 spots. Who does the last one go to - the 2 loss ACC champ, a 2 loss ND, or a 2 loss SEC runner up?

Notice I don't even mention a 1 loss Boise or a 1 loss AAC.

A 10-2 ND is an interesting situation - if they're undefeated in ACC play which includes the ACC winner I have to think that they would get the nod there

 

[upstater]

BCS is an odd metric to use since that term is dying this year - but it doesn't really change much. Massachusetts actually did better than I thought they would when I looked up the past few years on r_i_v_a_l_s:

2011 NY - 32 (!!! not sure what happened here)
2012 NY - 15
2013 NY - 13
2011 Conn - 7
2012 Conn - 3
2013 Conn -9
2011 Mass - 10
2012 Mass - 12
2013 Mass - 8

I guarantee something is very wrong in those numbers. Rivals has 7 for Conn in 2012, and 10 for 2013, and 10 for 2011. The link above somehow missed 8 players.

 

[woomba]

I guarantee something is very wrong in those numbers. Rivals has 7 for Conn in 2012, and 10 for 2013, and 10 for 2011. The link above somehow missed 8 players.

Ah - I filtered out non-'BCS' conference schools in the numbers since that's what he was referring to.

I included schools like Temple and UCF that are now AAC since AAC is technically BCS but even if you take those schools out the general numbers don't really move much.

 

[BlueHen]

A 13-0 ACC champ will be fine. I think the danger will be in a hypothetical where there are multiple one-loss champs vying for the #4 spot. In that situation the ACC will be outside looking in most years unless there's something screwy with the schedule that year (i.e. only loss is a OT loss to a #1 ranked SEC team early in the season)

The problem is that it's hard to predict how often that will happen - my guess is 2-3 times over the next 12 years, which I personally don't think is enough to justify switching conferences over.

I think the playoffs will be expanded to 8 teams fairly quickly. 5 "power" conferences don't fit into a 4 team playoff, especially when it's possible for 1 conference to have 2 teams in the playoff and a good Notre Dame team can also get a spot.

The ACC is in the weakest position for a 4 team playoff. It is regarded as the 5th best "power" conference and it has to deal with Notre Dame. If Notre Dame makes the playoffs it will be doing so in large part at the ACC's expense.

 

[btstimpy]

No, it has not been good for them. Nobody currently in the ACC will ever see them as a true rival, in the way that UConn would. Or, in the way that they should see UConn. That they're so willingly blind about it tells me all I need to know about their leadership.

This is true. UConn, BC, and Syracuse for that matter would generate a great rivalry. I could even have an Ice Hockey element to it. BC would have to pick it up a notch in basketball, but that is not outside the realm of possibility. Right now BC is sitting as Virginia Tech's designated rival in football. No Hokie that I know, and I know more than I care to, thinks of BC as their rival school in football. In fact if you go on their conference realignment board many of them want West Virginia. They view West Virginia as their second rival after UVA. Pittsburgh might even like that too. West Virginia isn't available though.

But back to Boston College, the reasoning they give for not wanting Connecticut is short sighted and a foreign concept for those of us that are of a competitive nature. It would boost interest in college sports in New England, and it would be good for student athletes. It would also help out the ACC.

Now the Southern members of the ACC would want something in return for inviting UConn. They don't like travelling north as much as they do now. Plus the fans of the northern schools don't travel to games at their place much either. So the ACC would have to rework the divisions. With 16 we would have to anyway.

 

[pj]

I don't understand why the ACC doesn't have south-north divisions as it is. That would give more juice to the championship game.

 

[Dooley]

I have to admit, I'm pulling for UCONN to the B1G. But because CR beggars can't be choosers, here are my highly scientific, highly hypothetical division alignments should the ACC expand to 16 without ND as a full member.

ACC North - BCu, Fruit, Pitt, UCONN, UVA, Va Tech, UNC, NC State
ACC South - Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Ga Tech, FSU, Duke, Wake, USF/UCF

7 division games and 2 alternating/rotating division games (rotation with Notre Dame also) for 9 total conference games. Division winners play for conference championship, highest BCS rating (or whatever rating they want to use to measure schedule strength) hosts at their home stadium. More often than not, an ACC South team is going to have the higher SOS rating because more of the typical football powers are in that division. However, the undefeated ACC North winner will also have a shot at hosting. Bottomline: North hosts if they run the table, South hosts if they don't. That should keep the southern schools happy, no? Not to mention, the money making machines of the southern football schools will continue to sellout based on the traveling fanbases of the south and quality of the games.

Basketball: annually held at MSG or Barclay's. The roles reverse once winter comes. The North is the unequaled heavyweight by far so they are rewarded with a closer tourney location. Plus, NYC > Greensboro (sorry Greensboro residents). UNC and Duke are big enough heavyweights where they will get very good representation in NYC.

 

[billybud]

N-S divisions makes too much sense in a 16 team ACC...

There are some internal problems...

...GT wants to be with UNC, Duke, VT and likes where they are.

...Everybody in the North wants access to play either Miami and FSU for recruiting reasons. Thus splitting up Miami and FSU.. (adding USF to the south only complicates recruiting needs)

...UNC and Duke want to be together.

...and on & on

The south...with FSU, Miami, Clemson, GT, USF just would make great sense...thus, it ain't going to happem

 

[btstimpy]

I have to admit, I'm pulling for UCONN to the B1G. But because CR beggars can't be choosers, here are my highly scientific, highly hypothetical division alignments should the ACC expand to 16 without ND as a full member.

ACC North - BCu, Fruit, Pitt, UCONN, UVA, Va Tech, UNC, NC State
ACC South - Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Ga Tech, FSU, Duke, Wake, USF/UCF

7 division games and 2 alternating/rotating division games (rotation with Notre Dame also) for 9 total conference games. Division winners play for conference championship, highest BCS rating (or whatever rating they want to use to measure schedule strength) hosts at their home stadium. More often than not, an ACC South team is going to have the higher SOS rating because more of the typical football powers are in that division. However, the undefeated ACC North winner will also have a shot at hosting. Bottomline: North hosts if they run the table, South hosts if they don't. That should keep the southern schools happy, no? Not to mention, the money making machines of the southern football schools will continue to sellout based on the traveling fanbases of the south and quality of the games.

Basketball: annually held at MSG or Barclay's. The roles reverse once winter comes. The North is the unequaled heavyweight by far so they are rewarded with a closer tourney location. Plus, NYC > Greensboro (sorry Greensboro residents). UNC and Duke are big enough heavyweights where they will get very good representation in NYC.

I could support this as a compromise. I'd let FSU and Miami choose between USF and UCF. They have both been playing USF quite a bit lately. They might prefer USF. I have no idea what TV would prefer, Tampa or Orlando. I would schedule differently though with rotating PODS of 4 schools where the divisions of 8 would change every couple of years so that it gives a better chance to play everybody more often. We could then potentially stay at 8 conference games.

I personally would prefer Temple because of the gap in the Mid-Atlantic, but we probably would need to add another southern school in order to secure the votes for another northern school in UConn.

 

[upstater]

I could support this as a compromise. I'd let FSU and Miami choose between USF and UCF. They have both been playing USF quite a bit lately. They might prefer USF. I have no idea what TV would prefer, Tampa or Orlando. I would schedule differently though with rotating PODS of 4 schools where the divisions of 8 would change every couple of years so that it gives a better chance to play everybody more often. We could then potentially stay at 8 conference games.

I personally would prefer Temple because of the gap in the Mid-Atlantic, but we probably would need to add another southern school in order to secure the votes for another northern school in UConn.

The ACC should be more concerned that in 5 years, recent AAU inductee UConn lands in the B1G and ends this stuff about the ACC being the best basketball conference out there. I think the ACC should be a little concerned about that.

 

[Fishy]

The ACC should be more concerned that in 5 years, recent inductee UConn lands in the B1G and ends this stuff about the ACC being the best basketball conference out there. I think the ACC should be a little concerned about that.

I doubt that particularly worry has crept into their minds.

They're still hungover from the "we destroyed the Big East" kegger that ESPN threw for them.

 

[billybud]

With Duke, UNC, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, etc...I don't think that the ACC thinks that not having UConn threatens their basketball....and, when you get right down to it, football is still how a conference is judged.

Baseball IS important in the ACC, unlike the Big Ten where baseball falls way behind wrestling. But who cares if the Big 12, ACC, and SEC love their baseball....it is football, football, football.

Who cares in the end about women's basketball and soccer? How do they really draw?

 

[ctchamps]

With Duke, UNC, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, etc...I don't think that the ACC thinks that not having UConn threatens their basketball....and, when you get right down to it, football is still how a conference is judged.

Baseball IS important in the ACC, unlike the Big Ten where baseball falls way behind wrestling. But who cares if the Big 12, ACC, and SEC love their baseball....it is football, football, football.

Who cares in the end about women's basketball and soccer? How do they really draw?

That's why most of us want to go to the B!G. Relevant football conference.