If both the B1G and ACC wanted to add UCONN, which would you prefer and why?

[Cleanface]

This thread is starting to reak of tail-pipe.

Do I need to re-post my picture??

 

[RegisteredUconn]

ND sees itself as the national, Catholic university. It looks at the football program as a marketing arm of the university.

Being a national school, it has alumni and fans all over the country, not just located in a single state, region or area.

It wants to play games all over the country so that those people can come to the games and see ND play near them.

ND also recruits nationally, perhaps more than almost anyone. Its recruits come from all over.

ND wants the scheduling flexibility to play all over the country for recruiting exposure, especially in the Southeast, Southwest and California. Playing in those locations helps combat the "ND is too far away, you will never go to your son's games" negative recruiting that it encounters from Southern coaches. Besides, that is where most of the talented athletes are located.

Finally, ND's students come from all over the country. ND football is one way to market the university to those kids.



That is not me saying that. It is Jack Swarbrick, for one, saying that back in 2010:

"Our football independence is tied to the growth of the university," he said. "It goes back to 1913 when Jesse Harper was the coach. Jesse was the first coach in America to engage in a national schedule because he had to. No one in the Midwest would play him.

"In 27 days, he went to West Point, Texas, Nebraska and Christian Brothers. Won all four. It's one of the great stories in college football.

"People tend to think about (the independence) because of the NBC contract, but it's so much a part of the school's identity."



When ND rejected the Big Ten invitation in 1999, then ND president Father Edmund "Monk" Malloy said:

"The process of sharing information with the Big Ten and CIC has been of great value to Notre Dame. It encouraged us to consider a variety of issues integral to our pursuit of academic and athletic excellence, as well as to our distinct mission as a Catholic university. We have great respect for both the academic stature and the athletic integrity of the Big Ten universities.

Why, then, not take the ultimate step in partnership and become a member of the Big Ten? That answer, in the end result, transcends the many individual factors, academic and athletic, that weigh either for or against conference affiliation. Ultimately, the answer lies in the institutional identity of Notre Dame, its overarching definition. Just as the Universities of Michigan or Wisconsin or Illinois have core identities as the flagship institutions of their states, so Notre Dame has a core identity, and at that core are these characteristics—Catholic, private, independent."


In its 127 years of playing college football, ND has never been a member of a football conference. It has always been a football independent.

That is is status, identity, history and tradition.

Even with a five game ACC commitment, independence gives ND the ability to schedule games all over the country. More so than any conference team.

So, it is about identity, national schedule, national recruiting and other things that money cannot fulfill or buy.

Sorry for the long response, but you asked.

As they say on Family Feud, Terry, "Great answer." There are several nits I could pick but why bother? I'd just look petty. One thing I would caution is that, as an athletic partner, you're seen more as a "taker" than a "giver" (or better yet, "equal sharer"). If that sentiment grows it will damage the marketing of Notre Dame.

 

[NickyNewark]

As they say on Family Feud, Terry, "Great answer." There are several nits I could pick but why bother? I'd just look petty. One thing I would caution is that, as an athletic partner, you're seen more as a "taker" than a "giver" (or better yet, "equal sharer"). If that sentiment grows it will damage the marketing of Notre Dame.

I agree and truthfully I like and respect Terry D's loyalty...he takes a lot of heat and keeps on coming!

 

[TerryD]

So BC is going to become ND's biggest rival now?

No, it is Southern Cal, like it always has been.

 

[omniorange]

Neil, I'm still formulating a cogent response to your above posting to me, but, in the meantime, I thought I'd add my voice here. First, let me say that I've been reading your posts from the period of initial ACC raid on the Big East and like and admire your general position of choosing civility over acrimony. For that alone you deserve a free beer. Next time, tell the barkeep I said yours is on the house. Not sure it will do any good but, what the hell, probably can't hurt either.

My biggest problem with the ACC is their shortsightedness. The ACC either hasn't formulated a long term strategy that its members have bought into or they lack the confidence to execute that strategy and the result has been reactive decisions. Reactive decisions yield sub-optimized results. That history of reactive, directionless decisions may have given the ACC the exact opposite of what they sought. They may have effectively frozen themselves out of the northeast in a similar manner to the SEC freezing them out of the southeast. Should the B1G invite UConn, I just can't imagine BC, Syracuse, and Pitt presenting much competition for Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers, and us.

In terms of football, just having PSU is the huge advantage unless ND were to join full-time. Consistently the Northeast's top two teams in college football are PSU and ND and the rest don't come close to them. I do think BC, Pitt, and SU are slightly ahead of Maryland, Rutgers and UConn and I think the ACC is more top heavy in terms of football which might give an advantage to the first three in at least competing in terms of football whereas the BiG is deeper and might make it difficult for even one of the three teams to do well under the current divisional structure. But let's not fool ourselves, it's PSU and ND and then everyone else when it comes to college football.

College basketball is another matter. And while in terms of college realignment basketball is more an afterthought, in the northeast college basketball could actually be more popular than college football. UConn would literally be the only team the northeast would definitively rally around in the BiG, although Maryland could possibly join them if they can get out of their own way. Michigan, MSU, and OSU have their fans throughout the northeast, but the ACC has Duke, SU, UNC, Pitt, Louisville, and ND not to mention UVa for DC interest if Bennet keeps the Cavs revitalization going.

I can't disagree that the ACC's expansion efforts have been conflicted over identity (southern vs entire east coast; football vs basketball interests); academics; and often bargaining from a position of weakness but a lot of that has to do with the failure of Miami to live up to the Hurricanes of the 80s through early 90s or even the Miami of the early 00s. Had the ACC gotten what they thought they were getting then I'm not convinced this discussion is even being had.

However, I am getting the impression from reading your posts that perhaps you seem to believe that the BiG hasn't had any of that. And if that impression is accurate, I'm more inclined to say the jury is truly out on that. If the BiG expansion back in 2010 was truly only about getting one big time football program to get to 12, Nebraska was a worse get than Miami, imho. At least Miami started their decline after they joined the league, not 8 years prior to joining. (And let's be clear by decline, we aren't talking pathetic, just not up to the standards the Huskers and Hurricanes had grown accustomed to). And let's not forget that the BiG whiffed on who they truly coveted in not getting either Texas or ND. And that was with the huge advantage they have in terms of the BTN and a position of strength.

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers were reactive to the moves made by both the SEC and the ACC. Again the BiG made a lot of noise back in 2010 that if they chose to expand to 16 it would be both eastern and southern. Due to non-disclosure agreements we may never know for sure where the likes of UNC, UVa, and GT fell in terms of pecking order in relation to Maryland and Rutgers. At the very least taking the two programs whose athletic departments are perhaps the most fiscally unsound amongst BCS programs has to at least give pause to the notion was this a sound, coherent strategy, or was this more a desperate $$$ grab?

And I think there is also some evidence of an identity issue within the BiG between those who value its midwestern roots and are not as pleased with the eastern expansion as PSU and Delany especially since they may not see Michigan, OSU, and PSU as often on their schedule.

Time will tell.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[pj]

In terms of football, just having PSU is the huge advantage unless ND were to join full-time. Consistently the Northeast's top two teams in college football are PSU and ND and the rest don't come close to them. I do think BC, Pitt, and SU are slightly ahead of Maryland, Rutgers and UConn and I think the ACC is more top heavy in terms of football which might give an advantage to the first three in at least competing in terms of football whereas the BiG is deeper and might make it difficult for even one of the three teams to do well under the current divisional structure. But let's not fool ourselves, it's PSU and ND and then everyone else when it comes to college football.

In my youth, that was very much true. But PSU hasn't made a splash on the national stage much since Paterno was in his prime, Notre Dame also slipped performance-wise, and the sense of Catholic/Irish identity in the northeast has been fading. PSU is big in Pennsylvania but both PSU and ND have slipped.

BC, Pitt, and Cuse have had more historical football success than Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn, but the state flagships have the benefit of a much larger pool of fans who identify because of loyalty to their state. Recent football performance has not been anything special at those schools, and I think it's an easy bet that of those two groups, Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn will be the more successful and popular going forward.

I don't see innate advantages of PSU or ND which will prevent Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn from catching up to them in terms of northeast fan support. Notre Dame is explicitly shifting their scheduling and recruiting toward the southeast with their ACC deal. There will be reversion to the mean in fan support. Buy the underperformers.

However, I am getting the impression from reading your posts that perhaps you seem to believe that the BiG hasn't had any of that. And if that impression is accurate, I'm more inclined to say the jury is truly out on that. If the BiG expansion back in 2010 was truly only about getting one big time football program to get to 12, Nebraska was a worse get than Miami, imho. At least Miami started their decline after they joined the league, not 8 years prior to joining. (And let's be clear by decline, we aren't talking pathetic, just not up to the standards the Huskers and Hurricanes had grown accustomed to). And let's not forget that the BiG whiffed on who they truly coveted in not getting either Texas or ND. And that was with the huge advantage they have in terms of the BTN and a position of strength.

Nebraska was possibly a strategic mistake -- Missouri might have been a better choice, or Kansas -- but it's a mistake the B1G hasn't repeated. Instead of taking a small-state school with historical athletic over-performance, they've begun taking big-state schools with historical under-performance.

Miami's mean reversion was also to be expected. It's also why UCF and USF have upside.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Nebraska was possibly a strategic mistake -- Missouri might have been a better choice, or Kansas --.

Nebraska was a home run, even if they continue to underperform. Their brand value is easily head and shoulders above Missouri, as is their national reach. And they bring sports other than football to table, amazingly making a very good showing in basketball this year.

Nothing wrong with Mizzou, but they have 2 professional baseball and football teams to contend with, and they're not all that close to either Kansas City or St. Louis. When one or more of those football or baseball teams do well (which is most of the time with the Cards), Mizzou has a lot of contention for eyeballs. Not so much in Nebraska.

 

[pj]

Nebraska was a home run, even if they continue to underperform. Their brand value is easily head and shoulders above Missouri, as is their national reach. And they bring sports other than football to table, amazingly making a very good showing in basketball this year.

Nothing wrong with Mizzou, but they have 2 professional baseball and football teams to contend with, and they're not all that close to either Kansas City or St. Louis. When one or more of those football or baseball teams do well (which is most of the time with the Cards), Mizzou has a lot of contention for eyeballs. Not so much in Nebraska.

Good points about Missouri. Probably why the B1G passed on them and would prefer Kansas. But if that was the B1G's reasoning, it augurs well for UConn - a bigger state than Kansas, no in-state professional sports, similar branding and athletic prowess, comparable academics, and with the bonus of reach into nearby population centers in New York and New England (~ 25 million people within a 2 hour drive).

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Nebraska was a home run, even if they continue to underperform. Their brand value is easily head and shoulders above Missouri, as is their national reach. And they bring sports other than football to table, amazingly making a very good showing in basketball this year.

Nothing wrong with Mizzou, but they have 2 professional baseball and football teams to contend with, and they're not all that close to either Kansas City or St. Louis. When one or more of those football or baseball teams do well (which is most of the time with the Cards), Mizzou has a lot of contention for eyeballs. Not so much in Nebraska.

Connecticut approaches Nebraska in owning the population of their state,except its BB
The state has been slow to realize UConn plays football.
Not entirely the residents fault.
The B1G would change that and CT will become Nebraska East.
I don't want to hear NY or Boston, those are teams you support but not teams you can be a part of. Every citizen should feel a co-ownership in their flag ship school.
Because they actually are.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

I can't disagree that the ACC's expansion efforts have been conflicted over identity (southern vs entire east coast; football vs basketball interests); academics; and often bargaining from a position of weakness but a lot of that has to do with the failure of Miami to live up to the Hurricanes of the 80s through early 90s or even the Miami of the early 00s. Had the ACC gotten what they thought they were getting then I'm not convinced this discussion is even being had.

To me, to depend on one program was a risky move from the get go. Miami could still return to the level that they were because of the deep talent in that area. However, what's to stop the other ACC schools from recruiting there and improving their own football teams? This is exactly like the B1G depending on the Ohio State for football legitimacy. This is not where we should want the ACC to be. I prefer the conference to aim for the best in all sports: football, basketball, women's soccer, etc..

What also should be said is that the flagship model of three other conferences has drawbacks, one in particular having to accept or admit flagships with athletic programs that are (and this is me being as polite as I can) mediocre. UConn, while also a flagship, has proven to be successful in sports. The ACC has managed to compete despite some missteps but I think losing UConn to some other P5 conference, even if the risk is small now, would be a huge opportunity missed.

Will the ACC be able to prove skeptics at this board wrong?

 

[NickyNewark]

In my youth, that was very much true. But PSU hasn't made a splash on the national stage much since Paterno was in his prime, Notre Dame also slipped performance-wise, and the sense of Catholic/Irish identity in the northeast has been fading. PSU is big in Pennsylvania but both PSU and ND have slipped.

BC, Pitt, and Cuse have had more historical football success than Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn, but the state flagships have the benefit of a much larger pool of fans who identify because of loyalty to their state. Recent football performance has not been anything special at those schools, and I think it's an easy bet that of those two groups, Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn will be the more successful and popular going forward.

I don't see innate advantages of PSU or ND which will prevent Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn from catching up to them in terms of northeast fan support. Notre Dame is explicitly shifting their scheduling and recruiting toward the southeast with their ACC deal. There will be reversion to the mean in fan support. Buy the underperformers.



Nebraska was possibly a strategic mistake -- Missouri might have been a better choice, or Kansas -- but it's a mistake the B1G hasn't repeated. Instead of taking a small-state school with historical athletic over-performance, they've begun taking big-state schools with historical under-performance.

Miami's mean reversion was also to be expected. It's also why UCF and USF have upside.

I caught that too...he inflates his own school(naturally,I would argue RU AND UConn passed them 8 yrs ago) to the large State schools who have long sinced passed them in FB stature!! PSU is only a perceived eastern power and hasnt really been in 20 years!! ND....fantasy but their diehards will keep them buzzing until our generation passes...never again as the Irish become less Irish and more ingrained american.

 

[NickyNewark]

In terms of football, just having PSU is the huge advantage unless ND were to join full-time. Consistently the Northeast's top two teams in college football are PSU and ND and the rest don't come close to them. I do think BC, Pitt, and SU are slightly ahead of Maryland, Rutgers and UConn and I think the ACC is more top heavy in terms of football which might give an advantage to the first three in at least competing in terms of football whereas the BiG is deeper and might make it difficult for even one of the three teams to do well under the current divisional structure. But let's not fool ourselves, it's PSU and ND and then everyone else when it comes to college football.

College basketball is another matter. And while in terms of college realignment basketball is more an afterthought, in the northeast college basketball could actually be more popular than college football. UConn would literally be the only team the northeast would definitively rally around in the BiG, although Maryland could possibly join them if they can get out of their own way. Michigan, MSU, and OSU have their fans throughout the northeast, but the ACC has Duke, SU, UNC, Pitt, Louisville, and ND not to mention UVa for DC interest if Bennet keeps the Cavs revitalization going.

I can't disagree that the ACC's expansion efforts have been conflicted over identity (southern vs entire east coast; football vs basketball interests); academics; and often bargaining from a position of weakness but a lot of that has to do with the failure of Miami to live up to the Hurricanes of the 80s through early 90s or even the Miami of the early 00s. Had the ACC gotten what they thought they were getting then I'm not convinced this discussion is even being had.

However, I am getting the impression from reading your posts that perhaps you seem to believe that the BiG hasn't had any of that. And if that impression is accurate, I'm more inclined to say the jury is truly out on that. If the BiG expansion back in 2010 was truly only about getting one big time football program to get to 12, Nebraska was a worse get than Miami, imho. At least Miami started their decline after they joined the league, not 8 years prior to joining. (And let's be clear by decline, we aren't talking pathetic, just not up to the standards the Huskers and Hurricanes had grown accustomed to). And let's not forget that the BiG whiffed on who they truly coveted in not getting either Texas or ND. And that was with the huge advantage they have in terms of the BTN and a position of strength.

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers were reactive to the moves made by both the SEC and the ACC. Again the BiG made a lot of noise back in 2010 that if they chose to expand to 16 it would be both eastern and southern. Due to non-disclosure agreements we may never know for sure where the likes of UNC, UVa, and GT fell in terms of pecking order in relation to Maryland and Rutgers. At the very least taking the two programs whose athletic departments are perhaps the most fiscally unsound amongst BCS programs has to at least give pause to the notion was this a sound, coherent strategy, or was this more a desperate $ grab?

And I think there is also some evidence of an identity issue within the BiG between those who value its midwestern roots and are not as pleased with the eastern expansion as PSU and Delany especially since they may not see Michigan, OSU, and PSU as often on their schedule.

Time will tell.

Cheers,
Neil

You guys have a hard time understanding RU has been on the B1G's radar ever since the PSU transition but you guys were NEVER B1G matierial at least in the last 20 yrs...no growth potential or research opportunities not to mention fading FB perception!! I never got how you guys considered yourselves a PSU rival nomatter how many times you played them pre 90...what 2 W's against them in 24 tries? I'd agree that neither was RU who I only saw beat them once in "88" but at least our admins work together with similar vision! I also would venture after the B1G study you's realised this (along with Pitt) and THAT to avoid humiliation jumped to the ACC reading the writing on the wall!?! How would it look or where would you go with a perceived historically inferior left you redfaced and devalued?? Why didnt you guys admins push for UConn instead of Pitt? I lost any respect if I ever had any for the obvious works of you guys with help from Boston! Nothing personal Neil after all were all just fans but keep it real on SU's FB prowess since PP left! It was already trending down though I'll admit new HCSS has promise to lift your fortunes to mid ACC level.

 

[omniorange]

To me, to depend on one program was a risky move from the get go. Miami could still return to the level that they were because of the deep talent in that area. However, what's to stop the other ACC schools from recruiting there and improving their own football teams? This is exactly like the B1G depending on the Ohio State for football legitimacy. This is not where we should want the ACC to be. I prefer the conference to aim for the best in all sports: football, basketball, women's soccer, etc..

What also should be said is that the flagship model of three other conferences has drawbacks, one in particular having to accept or admit flagships with athletic programs that are (and this is me being as polite as I can) mediocre. UConn, while also a flagship, has proven to be successful in sports. The ACC has managed to compete despite some missteps but I think losing UConn to some other P5 conference, even if the risk is small now, would be a huge opportunity missed.

Will the ACC be able to prove skeptics at this board wrong?

I think you missed my point which I suppose was my doing by not being clearer. Had the ACC gotten what they thought they were getting with Miami (the Miami that had won 5 NCs over two decades) then they wouldn't have been in a position of weakness later on in 2010 when they started negotiating their next TV contract and in 2011 when they decided to expand again.

The whole idea of getting Miami back in 2003 is precisely so they wouldn't be considered a one program conference (FSU and the 8 dwarves). But because Miami almost immediately started to regress once in the ACC, as did FSU to a lesser extent, that left the ACC vulnerable.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Sea Goat]

In terms of football, just having PSU is the huge advantage unless ND were to join full-time. Consistently the Northeast's top two teams in college football are PSU and ND and the rest don't come close to them. I do think BC, Pitt, and SU are slightly ahead of Maryland, Rutgers and UConn and I think the ACC is more top heavy in terms of football which might give an advantage to the first three in at least competing in terms of football whereas the BiG is deeper and might make it difficult for even one of the three teams to do well under the current divisional structure. But let's not fool ourselves, it's PSU and ND and then everyone else when it comes to college football.

College basketball is another matter. And while in terms of college realignment basketball is more an afterthought, in the northeast college basketball could actually be more popular than college football. UConn would literally be the only team the northeast would definitively rally around in the BiG, although Maryland could possibly join them if they can get out of their own way. Michigan, MSU, and OSU have their fans throughout the northeast, but the ACC has Duke, SU, UNC, Pitt, Louisville, and ND not to mention UVa for DC interest if Bennet keeps the Cavs revitalization going.

I can't disagree that the ACC's expansion efforts have been conflicted over identity (southern vs entire east coast; football vs basketball interests); academics; and often bargaining from a position of weakness but a lot of that has to do with the failure of Miami to live up to the Hurricanes of the 80s through early 90s or even the Miami of the early 00s. Had the ACC gotten what they thought they were getting then I'm not convinced this discussion is even being had.

However, I am getting the impression from reading your posts that perhaps you seem to believe that the BiG hasn't had any of that. And if that impression is accurate, I'm more inclined to say the jury is truly out on that. If the BiG expansion back in 2010 was truly only about getting one big time football program to get to 12, Nebraska was a worse get than Miami, imho. At least Miami started their decline after they joined the league, not 8 years prior to joining. (And let's be clear by decline, we aren't talking pathetic, just not up to the standards the Huskers and Hurricanes had grown accustomed to). And let's not forget that the BiG whiffed on who they truly coveted in not getting either Texas or ND. And that was with the huge advantage they have in terms of the BTN and a position of strength.

The additions of Maryland and Rutgers were reactive to the moves made by both the SEC and the ACC. Again the BiG made a lot of noise back in 2010 that if they chose to expand to 16 it would be both eastern and southern. Due to non-disclosure agreements we may never know for sure where the likes of UNC, UVa, and GT fell in terms of pecking order in relation to Maryland and Rutgers. At the very least taking the two programs whose athletic departments are perhaps the most fiscally unsound amongst BCS programs has to at least give pause to the notion was this a sound, coherent strategy, or was this more a desperate $ grab?

And I think there is also some evidence of an identity issue within the BiG between those who value its midwestern roots and are not as pleased with the eastern expansion as PSU and Delany especially since they may not see Michigan, OSU, and PSU as often on their schedule.

Time will tell.

Cheers,
Neil

I'll stand down on commenting about the ACC's initial decision to add Syra and Pitt. While I'll never agree to a truce regarding such matters, an occasional cease fire is doable. Regarding the comment about the B1G being reactive in taking UMD and Rutgers, I think you're wrong. UMD made no bones about its desire to get into the B1G for financial reasons and cultural reasons. Rutgers was simply a play for NYC tv sets. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe the B1G had been checking them out for a while for that reason alone.

The "model" of reactive moves was the ACC's addition of Louisville. For some short term perceived benefit, the ACC was willing to sell its academic soul and degrade the quality of the conference - pure and simple. Another "model" of reactive behavior was the ACC giving ND "most favored nations status". It will create a sore that will fester over time. The ND "add" cheapened the credibility of the conference and the Louisville "add" sold it for a song.

Good luck with that.

 

[omniorange]

You guys have a hard time understanding RU has been on the B1G's radar ever since the PSU transition but you guys were NEVER B1G matierial at least in the last 20 yrs...no growth potential or research opportunities not to mention fading FB perception!! I never got how you guys considered yourselves a PSU rival nomatter how many times you played them pre 90...what 2 W's against them in 24 tries? I'd agree that neither was RU who I only saw beat them once in "88" but at least our admins work together with similar vision! I also would venture after the B1G study you's realised this (along with Pitt) and THAT to avoid humiliation jumped to the ACC reading the writing on the wall!?! How would it look or where would you go with a perceived historically inferior left you redfaced and devalued?? Why didnt you guys admins push for UConn instead of Pitt? I lost any respect if I ever had any for the obvious works of you guys with help from Boston! Nothing personal Neil after all were all just fans but keep it real on SU's FB prowess since PP left! It was already trending down though I'll admit new HCSS has promise to lift your fortunes to mid ACC level.

I believe I am keeping it real. If I thought that SU was what it was back in the late 80s through 1998 then I wouldn't have said that basically BC, Pitt, and SU were slightly ahead of Maryland, Rutgers, and UConn in football in terms of northeast college football interest. I would have stated it as a clear advantage. I recognize that the Orange are not what they once were in football.

As for SU taking the ACC offer, it's as simple as they took the first one available. Are you implying that had the ACC offered Rutgers, they'd have said, "No thanks. We're waiting on the Big Ten, even if they might never invite us"?

As for why SU didn't push for UConn instead of Pitt, it's my firm belief, as I have already stated, that UConn was out of the picture by that point and that Pitt was the target in order to try and get ND to bite on membership. Now I do believe there is some evidence that SU supported Louisville as Maryland's replacement but we have no idea what Syracuse admins said when asked about UConn. We only know, thanks to Jurich and Gross, that when ACC officials asked about Louisville TGD had a lot of good things to say about the Cards. I doubt he would have been any less gracious when asked about UConn, but we simply don't know.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[omniorange]

I'll stand down on commenting about the ACC's initial decision to add Syra and Pitt. While I'll never agree to a truce regarding such matters, an occasional cease fire is doable. Regarding the comment about the B1G being reactive in taking UMD and Rutgers, I think you're wrong. UMD made no bones about its desire to get into the B1G for financial reasons and cultural reasons. Rutgers was simply a play for NYC tv sets. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe the B1G had been checking them out for a while for that reason alone.

The "model" of reactive moves was the ACC's addition of Louisville. For some short term perceived benefit, the ACC was willing to sell its academic soul and degrade the quality of the conference - pure and simple. Another "model" of reactive behavior was the ACC giving ND "most favored nations status". It will create a sore that will fester over time. The ND "add" cheapened the credibility of the conference and the Louisville "add" sold it for a song.

Good luck with that.

I agree on the ACC. I think I have pretty much acknowledged that all of the ACC moves in this decade have been reactive and done from a position of weakness.

What the point of the post that you are responding to above is to question this notion that the BiG's moves were not also reactive. They were. And there was absolutely no need for them to rush to make those moves (even though they used the ACC contacting PSU about possible membership as an excuse). They were in a position of strength but ultimately at each step wound up with the less than what they had hoped to gain or were rumored to have wanted (Nebraska instead of Texas or ND; Maryland and Rutgers instead of Maryland, UNC, UVa, and Duke or GT).

Cheers,
Neil

 

[CL82]

I think you missed my point which I suppose was my doing by not being clearer. Had the ACC gotten what they thought they were getting with Miami (the Miami that had won 5 NCs over two decades) then they wouldn't have been in a position of weakness later on in 2010 when they started negotiating their next TV contract and in 2011 when they decided to expand again.

The whole idea of getting Miami back in 2003 is precisely so they wouldn't be considered a one program conference (FSU and the 8 dwarves). But because Miami almost immediately started to regress once in the ACC, as did FSU to a lesser extent, that left the ACC vulnerable.

Cheers,
Neil

I always enjoy your posts Neil, as I find them knowledgeable, particularly when they discuss the value of markets. I'm going to suggest, however, that Miami's performance likely didn't impact the latter expansion of the ACC. I suspect that it was more driven by ESPN's need to eliminate a valuable product (the Big East) form falling into a competitor's hands.

 

[Ldandy]

I caught that too...he inflates his own school(naturally,I would argue RU AND UConn passed them 8 yrs ago) to the large State schools who have long sinced passed them in FB stature!! PSU is only a perceived eastern power and hasnt really been in 20 years!! ND....fantasy but their diehards will keep them buzzing until our generation passes...never again as the Irish become less Irish and more ingrained american.

The last 20 years you say? Hmm... Don't they have an award given out to the top division 1 football team in the Northeast each year?

Lambert-Meadowlands Trophy Winners 1994-2014

PSU- 8 (29 Total including last season)
Miami- 4
WVU- 2
VPI -2
BC, Cincy, Ville, and yes CT -1

Rutgers-0

Please convince me again why PSU is not the lone power in the Northeast over the last two decades? I'll hang up and listen...

 

[woomba]

Miami won a Northeast trophy? 4 Times? Wha?

 

[Adios]

No, it is Southern Cal, like it always has been.

I understand that ND and USC want to think they're cool and all. But the game love you love comes from here.

 

[Ldandy]

Miami won a Northeast trophy? 4 Times? Wha?

Same way Cincy and Louisville did, by playing in the Big East. The trophy is open to any team who is located in the Northeast, or plays at least half of its games against other Lambert eligible teams.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

I agree on the ACC. I think I have pretty much acknowledged that all of the ACC moves in this decade have been reactive and done from a position of weakness.

What the point of the post that you are responding to above is to question this notion that the BiG's moves were not also reactive. They were. And there was absolutely no need for them to rush to make those moves (even though they used the ACC contacting PSU about possible membership as an excuse). They were in a position of strength but ultimately at each step wound up with the less than what they had hoped to gain or were rumored to have wanted (Nebraska instead of Texas or ND; Maryland and Rutgers instead of Maryland, UNC, UVa, and Duke or GT).

You can't discount the factor of political power. They think of themselves as the true movers and shakers of the academic world. What they're trying to do is to get into the Northeast academic circles. Also, there have been a migration of midwesterners to the East over the last decade, so they're also trying to "move" the midwest to the eastern cities. This is giving the T-shirt fans over in their core region a lot of fits. I can't blame Ruddy for accepting the invite but their fans should know what their school is in for.

 

[Kolumbo]

The last 20 years you say? Hmm... Don't they have an award given out to the top division 1 football team in the Northeast each year?

Lambert-Meadowlands Trophy Winners 1994-2014

PSU- 8 (29 Total including last season)
Miami- 4
WVU- 2
VPI -2
BC, Cincy, Ville, and yes CT -1

Rutgers-0

Please convince me again why PSU is not the lone power in the Northeast over the last two decades? I'll hang up and listen...

People in the Northeast don't watch Penn State much, and we don't like institutions that protect pedophiles.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

Miami won a Northeast trophy? 4 Times? Wha?

The majority of their schedule was from the east . If BYU played a majority of its schedule against the Old BE/PSU, they would be eligible too.

 

[Ldandy]

People in the Northeast don't watch Penn State much, and we don't like institutions that protect pedophiles.

You have an interesting idea of what states comprise the Northeast then.