More ACC issues...now Virginia

[Kolumbo]

I fail to see how UVa and UNC becoming less attractive makes UConn more attractive.

Remember, we need a partner.

They are becoming our stootfish, as Coakley would say.

 

[Yawkey Way]

They'd have a hard time explaining to North Carolina, Virginia, Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, NC State, Wake, Duke, and Virginia Tech why they should accept less money in order to keep UConn from the ACC.

Exactly. If the ACC ( or any other P5 Conference for that matter ) wants Uconn in their league, BC and/ or Syracuse couldn't stop that. To think otherwise, is to automatically ( and logically ) ascribe to BC and Syracuse enormous political powers among their fellow school peers. But its the stuff of fantasy to believe that either of these 2 schools, either alone or together, wield this enormous power within the ACC. If these leagues schools want Uconn football in their league, they will invite Uconn into their league, pure and simple... and neither BC nor Syracuse could prevent it, despite what their expressed public position on the potential invite might be.

 

[pj]

Exactly. If the ACC ( or any other P5 Conference for that matter ) wants Uconn in their league, BC and/ or Syracuse couldn't stop that. To think otherwise, is to automatically ( and logically ) ascribe to BC and Syracuse enormous political powers among their fellow school peers. But its the stuff of fantasy to believe that either of these 2 schools, either alone or together, wield this enormous power within the ACC. If these leagues schools want Uconn football in their league, they will invite Uconn into their league, pure and simple... and neither BC nor Syracuse could prevent it, despite what their expressed public position on the potential invite might be.

Even small powers can tip the balance when decisions are close. Louisville was an attractive athletic program, especially to a conference with no network. Were it not for BC opposition, UConn's superior academics, location on the east coast, and large state market and following would have made it the preferred choice.

 

[ThetaZoo]

Exactly. If the ACC ( or any other P5 Conference for that matter ) wants Uconn in their league, BC and/ or Syracuse couldn't stop that. To think otherwise, is to automatically ( and logically ) ascribe to BC and Syracuse enormous political powers among their fellow school peers. But its the stuff of fantasy to believe that either of these 2 schools, either alone or together, wield this enormous power within the ACC. If these leagues schools want Uconn football in their league, they will invite Uconn into their league, pure and simple... and neither BC nor Syracuse could prevent it, despite what their expressed public position on the potential invite might be.

BC and Syracuse wielded enough power at the time of their invitation to join the ACC to keep UConn out. They may not have such power now but it doesn't matter. They got what they wanted and probably an assurance that UConn would not be offered before the statute of limitations on these things runs out.

 

[billybud]

Even small powers can tip the balance when decisions are close. Louisville was an attractive athletic program, especially to a conference with no network. Were it not for BC opposition, UConn's superior academics, location on the east coast, and large state market and following would have made it the preferred choice.

I think that Louisville was a football decision...and that BC had little or nothing to do with passing over UConn. It had more to do with an attempt to beef up the football schedule.

It was a confluence of bad timing for UConn recent football and good timing for recent Louisville football.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Exactly. If the ACC ( or any other P5 Conference for that matter ) wants Uconn in their league, BC and/ or Syracuse couldn't stop that. To think otherwise, is to automatically ( and logically ) ascribe to BC and Syracuse enormous political powers among their fellow school peers. But its the stuff of fantasy to believe that either of these 2 schools, either alone or together, wield this enormous power within the ACC. If these leagues schools want Uconn football in their league, they will invite Uconn into their league, pure and simple... and neither BC nor Syracuse could prevent it, despite what their expressed public position on the potential invite might be.

BC had significant influence over the ACC in the past and it continues to do so in the structure when it comes to the subject of adding new members. Why? Because in the ACC, it takes a super-majority to add a new member. Such a structure allows a very vocal minority to influence the body as a whole. Just ask Washington DC about the Tea Party.

At the that time that ACC was looking to replace Maryland with Louisville or UConn (Cincinnati may have also been an option), there were 11 voting members of the ACC and 4 votes No would block an potential new member. Miami, FSU, and Clemson vocally opposed the addition of any additional northern, basketball centric schools after Syracuse and Pitt were added. That is 3 solid no votes. BC, instead of seeing the big, long-term picture value of adding a local rival (sorry, BC to UConn is 80 miles, BC to Syracuse is 310 miles, which is only 50 miles less than it is from Syracuse to Pitt), can only see the potential short-term 'fear' of losing it's 'territory' blocked UConn from joining as they stated using the foolish Blementhal suit (hey BC, everyone has sued everyone during conference realignment). Thus, with 4 solid No votes, UConn could not be added because while UConn may have had a solid majority (6 votes from NC and VA schools), the minority blocked the move.

Going forward, the issue is not that much different other than it now takes 5 No votes to block a new member as there are 15 ACC members now. Miami's appears to be less against UConn than before due to a change of administration; but, BC (also with a new administration) has been joined by Syracuse in the 'protect my turf' category (which is laughable as UConn and BC are both closer to NYC than Syracuse). Plus, Louisville now owes FSU and Clemson for getting them into the ACC and will follow their votes. That equals 5 Solid No votes and even if the other 8 vote for UConn, it's still a losing bid.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Even small powers can tip the balance when decisions are close. Louisville was an attractive athletic program, especially to a conference with no network. Were it not for BC opposition, UConn's superior academics, location on the east coast, and large state market and following would have made it the preferred choice.

There is little from the ACC Commish Office that I've read as to the ACC school's discussion of the inclusion of Uconn to the ACC. I have no idea if Uconn was close to an invite or far from an invite... or something in the middle ( We know of BC's position on this, of course ). There has been speculation from sportwriters, TV commentators, etc and so forth. But as far as we know, nobody really knows what the school presidents are thinking on expansion, and invites, etc as none of them are going to tell us that directly until the decision is made. When the BIG expanded and invited Rutgers, Maryland, it caught all the so called experts totally by surprise with the rapidity of it, and the schools invited as well, and the reasons given for the unexpected choices. So you could be right that Uconn was close to an invite for your reasons given, and just as right it could be that Uconn was never close to an invite too( for whatever reasons ). The only thing we DO know, is how little we all know as to how close Uconn was.. or is... to an invite by a P5 Conference. God only knows, the media gets it wrong with what they publish every day of the week, so their insights, reporting, etc on this generally are not very reliable, imo.

 

[Yawkey Way]

BC and Syr. They got what they wanted and probably an assurance that UConn would not be offered before the statute of limitations on these things runs out.

I have no idea what this " statue of limitations " is that you are referring too. So I'm at a loss to attempt a reply on something I am unfamiliar with.

What is the " statue of limitations " on this ? Or are you commenting just euphemistically, symbolically, or some such with this ?

 

[Yawkey Way]

BC had significant influence over the ACC in the past and it continues to do so in the structure when it comes to the subject of adding new members.

Well, can we agree that this assessment.. if true.... runs totally against the overwhelming sentiment expressed by many Uconn fans before BC acc4epted the ACC invite that if BC went to the ACC, that they would be totally under the boot of the Tobacco Road schools in the ACC, and as a " northern, Yankee school " the repeated mantra, they would have no influence in anything at all once they got there ? If you are a long timer, you will remember this prevailing sentiment. Can we at least come around to the agreement that such predictions and assessments were wrong ... if as you claim now, BC could prevail upon the other schools to keep Uconn out once it got to the ACC.

As for the process... it is my understanding, that the ACC has a committee in place to discuss possible expansion. The process entails a recommended vote out of committee to full membership for discussion. It is the School Presidents that vote. Thats my understanding. I have no knowledge that Uconn has ever come up for a vote by the School presidents. if you want to cite the source for the vote for or against an Uconn invite, by these School Presidents, then I'd be more than happy to look at it.... and then comment on it, if you'd like.

 

[CL82]

BC and Syracuse wielded enough power at the time of their invitation to join the ACC to keep UConn out. They may not have such power now but it doesn't matter. They got what they wanted and probably an assurance that UConn would not be offered before the statute of limitations on these things runs out.

We've talked about this ad nauseum. Syracuse did not keep UConn out of the ACC. When polled they weren't in favor of it but they did not have a say. BC, while clearly not "wielding enormous power" within the league was uniquely situated to block UConn twice. Once as a member of the committee (1 of 3 I believe) vetting new members and once by joining the FSU/Clemson group. I believe Yawkey knows these narratives, he's been around long enough, but he consistently misstates the narrative. Believe no one, not even BC believes they wield enormous power. They are a well positioned cling on and nothing more. That said I absolutely envy their conference situation, if not their inability to win championship in any sport that doesn't involve wearing skates.

 

[Yawkey Way]

We've talked about this ad nauseum. Syracuse did not keep UConn out of the ACC. When polled they weren't in favor of it but they did not have a say. BC, while clearly not "wielding enormous power" within the league was uniquely situated to block UConn twice. Once as a member of the committee (1 of 3 I believe) vetting new members and once by joining the FSU/Clemson group. I believe Yawkey knows these narratives, he's been around long enough, but he consistently misstates the narrative. Believe no one, not even BC believes they wield enormous power. They are a well positioned cling on and nothing more. That said I absolutely envy their conference situation, if not their inability to win championship in any sport that doesn't involve wearing skates.

BC has won a National Championship in Major College Football, albeit of course it was a long time ago ( and we need not get into who has won National Championships in Football, and who hasn't as its essentially an irrelevant sidebar to the thread topic anyway ).

Here's the essential "narrative", as I see it, anyway : College Football decisions are essentially made on one thing and one thing alone : Money. If schools can be shown that making a decision re. sports, especially football, will make them money, they will vote to enrich themselves, period. It doesn't matter what another school wants or doesn't want as a member school. Show them the money possibilities, and they'll vote yes every time for themselves. The reverse is also true. Show a school that another league school is a money drain and they will not only not invite them, they will kick to the curb any school that is already a league member.. Remember the BE ? They had an academic bottom feeder as West Virginia in its league. But they made money. Money for the BE. Temple, on the other hand was a school that was not making money. So these " academic " school Presidents that tell us ad nauseum how important it is to be " Academic " decided to kick Temple to the curb... bounced them clear out of the BE. The fact that Temple is a fine school academically is irrelevant. What mattered was the money to these school presidents. Period. So... if its determined that Uconn will make money for the ACC, or any other P5 league for that matter, it doesn't matter what the preferred wishes are of any other school. These schools will beat a path to your door if they believe that an alignment with you will make them money. Now, I do not pretend to know what goes on behind closed doors in these meetings when it comes to who to invite and not to invite, but it seems to me that these schools are currently not yet convinced that adding Uconn football to their league will make these other schools money with that invite. Why they have currently concluded this is unclear to me, and open to any number of reasons. But fundamentally, these schools are about making money for their schools sports teams. Show them the money.. or future money opportunities.. convince them of that, and the dollars will trump revenge, spite, hesitation, loyalty, fidelity, collegiality, " defer to the wishes of another school ", and yada yada, etc every time. Thats the essential " narrative " on how league expansions are determined anyway in my view. Its the money. Its always about the money .. and only the money...when the school presidents get together to make future decisions about their leagues they are in, moving forward.

 

[Fishy]

You wonder what the ACC actually thinks of Boston College now.

Couldn't help but notice that they drew Marist in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge...

 

[Kolumbo]

BC has won a National Championship in Major College Football, albeit of course it was a long time ago ( and we need not get into who has won National Championships in Football, and who hasn't as its essentially an irrelevant sidebar to the thread topic anyway ).

Here's the essential "narrative", as I see it, anyway : College Football decisions are essentially made on one thing and one thing alone : Money. If schools can be shown that making a decision re. sports, especially football, will make them money, they will vote to enrich themselves, period. It doesn't matter what another school wants or doesn't want as a member school. Show them the money possibilities, and they'll vote yes every time for themselves. The reverse is also true. Show a school that another league school is a money drain and they will not only not invite them, they will kick to the curb any school that is already a league member.. Remember the BE ? They had an academic bottom feeder as West Virginia in its league. But they made money. Money for the BE. Temple, on the other hand was a school that was not making money. So these " academic " school Presidents that tell us ad nauseum how important it is to be " Academic " decided to kick Temple to the curb... bounced them clear out of the BE. The fact that Temple is a fine school academically is irrelevant. What mattered was the money to these school presidents. Period. So... if its determined that Uconn will make money for the ACC, or any other P5 league for that matter, it doesn't matter what the preferred wishes are of any other school. These schools will beat a path to your door if they believe that an alignment with you will make them money. Now, I do not pretend to know what goes on behind closed doors in these meetings when it comes to who to invite and not to invite, but it seems to me that these schools are currently not yet convinced that adding Uconn football to their league will make these other schools money with that invite. Why they have currently concluded this is unclear to me, and open to any number of reasons. But fundamentally, these schools are about making money for their schools sports teams. Show them the money.. or future money opportunities.. convince them of that, and the dollars will trump revenge, spite, hesitation, loyalty, fidelity, collegiality, " defer to the wishes of another school ", and yada yada, etc every time. Thats the essential " narrative " on how league expansions are determined anyway in my view. Its the money. Its always about the money .. and only the money...when the school presidents get together to make future decisions about their leagues they are in, moving forward.

I'm not gonna lie to you. I just can't invest enough time to read 20 lines of something which may or may not be of interest to me.

 

[Kolumbo]

You wonder what the ACC actually thinks of Boston College now.

Couldn't help but notice that they drew Marist in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge...

Don't sell short the Red Foxes of Marist - New York's college team.

 

[ThetaZoo]

I have no idea what this " statue of limitations " is that you are referring too. So I'm at a loss to attempt a reply on something I am unfamiliar with.

What is the " statue of limitations " on this ? Or are you commenting just euphemistically, symbolically, or some such with this ?

I was speaking euphemistically. I could have said, the number of years that the ACC promised BC that UConn would be blackballed.

 

[Yawkey Way]

You wonder what the ACC actually thinks of Boston College now.

.

Few ACC Schools have been to as many combined League Championship Games in basketball and football as BC, so my guess, unless its the jealousy in some quarters of the ACC, the School Presidents are making money. Except for the Spaz couple of football seasons, BC goes to Bowl Games most every year, so they are bringing in the money under revenue sharing guidelines... and we've been reading on here that BC can apparently single handedly use political muscle to " keep Uconn out of the ACC " ( not my belief, but apparently the belief of quite a few Uconn fans it appears )... add it all up, and it appears BC is a player in the ACC. But then again, who cares what other schools think of one another. Its a competitive situation, where schools are brought together to make money for each other, despite their differences. We could of course contemplate what all the AAC schools think of Uconn football these days too. But I suspect you don't care what they are thinking there either, I'd imagine.

 

[Fishy]

Oh, I'm sure they are all sorts of jealous of the heavyweight athletic program you all have put together.

It's clicking on all cylinders these days.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I was speaking euphemistically. I could have said, the number of years that the ACC promised BC that UConn would be blackballed.

I have no knowledge that the ACC has any agreement or promise with BC to keep Uconn out of the ACC. I suspect that due to the quickly changing college football landscape, the ACC would never ever put themselves in any position with any alleged promise to " blackball " a school with any timelines as an alleged agreement with any other ACC school. Its ludicrous to believe that the ACC has promised BC anything at all regarding what schools the league might or might not invite in the future thru membership voting. The claim that somehow the ACC member schools got together and came to a collective agreement among themselves, and then offered to BC a promise, with a date certain, to keep Uconn out of the ACC is such unbelievable fantasy . Its just too funny- weird to think that anyone would actually believe such nonsense. Scientists tell us that anger sometimes clouds one rational, reason based, thinking. I suspect that perhaps this might explain some of the things I'm reading here from some ( not all ) posters.

 

[buddy]

I have no knowledge that the ACC has any agreement or promise with BC to keep Uconn out of the ACC. I suspect that due to the quickly changing college football landscape, the ACC would never ever put themselves in any position with any alleged promise to " blackball " a school with any timelines as an alleged agreement with any other ACC school. Its ludicrous to believe that the ACC has promised BC anything at all regarding what schools the league might or might not invite in the future thru membership voting. The claim that somehow the ACC member schools got together and came to a collective agreement among themselves, and then offered to BC a promise, with a date certain, to keep Uconn out of the ACC is such unbelievable fantasy . Its just too funny- weird to think that anyone would actually believe such nonsense. Scientists tell us that anger sometimes clouds one rational, reason based, thinking. I suspect that perhaps this might explain some of the things I'm reading here from some ( not all ) posters.

I don't understand why you cannot accept the fact that through publicized statements from your former AD that they were opposed to UConn's admission to the ACC and it is clear that the ACC accepted that request. All the presidents, all the committees that may have said this or that are irrelevant. The fact is BC opposed UConn. Always did and probably always will. Why you keep defending BC on this board is unbelievable. You are the one living in fantasy world.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Oh, I'm sure they are all sorts of jealous of the heavyweight athletic program you all have put together.

It's clicking on all cylinders these days.

I never claimed that BC has great fans. Heck, if leagues made their choices of teams for their leagues on " fans", maybe you guys wouldn't be so angry and frustrated in the AAC now. As it is, despite the snapshot here, if you want to compare " fans ", BC has a higher football attendance at home games, and a higher TV viewership for its football games... including viewership in New England. You shouldn't change the topic like this either and sarcastically refer to basketball programs that are " clicking on all cylinders". It opens the door to football comparisons that are not to your favor. So don't even go there would be my suggestion re. athletic programs that are " clicking on all cylinders ".

 

[Fishy]

We're bad at football.

You're bad at damned near everything. No one give's a s--- about your football program and people sure as hell aren't interested in seeing it on television. As for hoops, again, the ACC sent you to play Marist while the grownups had their challenge with the Big Ten.

There you go, f--- stick.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

As for the process... it is my understanding, that the ACC has a committee in place to discuss possible expansion. The process entails a recommended vote out of committee to full membership for discussion. It is the School Presidents that vote. Thats my understanding. I have no knowledge that Uconn has ever come up for a vote by the School presidents. if you want to cite the source for the vote for or against an Uconn invite, by these School Presidents, then I'd be more than happy to look at it.... and then comment on it, if you'd like.

That part I agree with in that the University Presidents have final say and that is where the 2/3 super majority vote comes into play. In addition I also believe that UConn's admission into the ACC was never voted on. Why? Because like every other conference, no potential member will be voted on until it is a guarantee that said member will be approved. Neither the conference nor the proposed new ember want to lose face. Through the afore mentioned committee, which BC sat on, and other internal discussions, it was clear that the southern football block (Miami, FSU, Clemson) and BC would effectively block (4 votes equals a veto) UConn's entrance. Thus, it was never put to a vote.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I don't understand why you cannot accept the fact that through publicized statements from your former AD that they were opposed to UConn's admission to the ACC and it is clear that the ACC accepted that request. .

For the simple reason that I have evidence to support the first, but none whatsoever to support the 2nd.

Its is indisputable that BC AD made his wishes known that he did not support Uconn's entry into the ACC... and there is some evidence that he may have gone further and attempted to lobby for that position. What is unclear, and open to honest speculation is whether or not the other ACC Schools acted on the BC's position on this, or whether in fact they made their decision at the time, not to invite Uconn for reasons wholly apart from BC's position on this. As mentioned earlier, my best guess is that the ACC schools saw a Uconn fotball program that was in its comparative infancy, and at the time was transitional in coaches, and it was unclear how long Edsall would stay.. and whether or not Uconn football had lasting power. Plus, the ACC did have other schools it was exploring.. programs ith longer football histories. Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville come to mind. So while its easy to blame BC, its entirely possible that the schools really made their decision on factors unrelated to BC 's wishes... and of course the other variable, is that the ACC schools Uconn needed support from were sued... and Swofford sued personally, as well. That might have not been... well... politically helpful, to say the least. But if Uconn football demonstrates that the schools will all make money with an invite, Uconn will get that invite. And BC, or no other school could stop that... as money tops all, in regards to how schools look at expansion.

 

[Yawkey Way]

We're bad at football.

You're bad at damned near everything. No one give's a s--- about your football program and people sure as hell aren't interested in seeing it on television. As for hoops, again, the ACC sent you to play Marist while the grownups had their challenge with the Big Ten.

There you go, f--- stick.

Uconn is a Basketball School. BC is a football/ Hockey school. Thats how the schools are perceived by those outside of parochial New England. Your anger and profanity and insults to me doesn't change that dynamic. If you want to talk Basketball.... Marist.... etc... you have my understanding of where Uconn sits on the pecking order of College Basketball. As for football, your comment that " nobody is interested BC footbal on television " goes downhill quickly, as it invites comparisons of attendance, viewerships, etc... and thus I did suggest that you don't go that route as you lose the football.. attendance... viewership... discussion right away. Besides, I did not intend to take this thread discussion into that realm at all... and certainly did not intend to have it devolve into profanity, anger, and irrrationality.

 

[Fishy]

Thanks for your suggestions.

Go ahead - tell us where Boston College stands in the football world.

Impress us with your delusions.

 

[buddy]

For the simple reason that I have evidence to support the first, but none whatsoever to support the 2nd.

Its is indisputable that BC AD made his wishes known that he did not support Uconn's entry into the ACC... and there is some evidence that he may have gone further and attempted to lobby for that position. What is unclear, and open to honest speculation is whether or not the other ACC Schools acted on the BC's position on this, or whether in fact they made their decision at the time, not to invite Uconn for reasons wholly apart from BC's position on this. As mentioned earlier, my best guess is that the ACC schools saw a Uconn fotball program that was in its comparative infancy, and at the time was transitional in coaches, and it was unclear how long Edsall would stay.. and whether or not Uconn football had lasting power. Plus, the ACC did have other schools it was exploring.. programs ith longer football histories. Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville come to mind. So while its easy to blame BC, its entirely possible that the schools really made their decision on factors unrelated to BC 's wishes... and of course the other variable, is that the ACC schools Uconn needed support from were sued... and Swofford sued personally, as well. That might have not been... well... politically helpful, to say the least. But if Uconn football demonstrates that the schools will all make money with an invite, Uconn will get that invite. And BC, or no other school could stop that... as money tops all, in regards to how schools look at expansion.

If BC supported UConn at that time, UConn would be a member of the ACC. There is no question here. Other BE schools who are now members of the ACC were a party to that lawsuit. You seem have forgotten that the UConn and Syracuse were the initial schools considered in the next to last round of CR and because of BC, Pitt was invited instead of UConn. It was in 2012 that the southern schools and BC were looking for a "football" school and chose Louisville over UConn. But UConn should have been a member before that, but it was BC who was mostly responsible. I don't understand why you continually come here trying to defend BC. It is an indefensible position.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Few ACC Schools have been to as many combined League Championship Games in basketball and football as BC, so my guess, unless its the jealousy in some quarters of the ACC,

What ACC success? In the major ACC revenue sports - football, men's basketball, and women's basketball, BC has a conference record since 2005/6 and not including 2014/5 of just about .500 for all three sports. Within those sports, BC has been to 2 championship games since 2005/6, both in football, and lost both. Wake Forest has more ACC Championships in football than BC in footballs since BC joined - 1 (2005/6). Neither BC's men's nor women's basketball teams have won an ACC regular season title nor conference championship. Combined, the two have 4 NCAA Tournament appearances - 3 men, 1 women. BC does not even sponsor a team the ACC's next most high profile sport - men's lacrosse. The only sport that BC has been successful in since 2005/6 is men's hockey with the team having won 3 NCAA titles (lost 2 others) and that is a sport that the ACC does not sponsor. Don't see any reason within the ACC to be jealous of BC at all.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Thanks for your suggestions.

Go ahead - tell us where Boston College stands in the football world.

Impress us with your delusions.

No.. I don't think so. You appear to me to be way too angry a dude.. and a bit close minded frankly, for me to want to discuss anything further with you.

 

[auggie22]

As near as I can tell BC is a football school that averages 33k and fails to sell out home games against a top 10 ranked USC even in the midst of a competitive season, struggles getting alumni that live within 20 mins of campus to accept free football tickets despite playing a big boy schedule, carries selective appeal to bowl officials nationally, achieves modest to good tv ratings only when they play a nationally appealing opponent. And stirs ambivalence in their home market even when ranked in the top 5. By "football school" did you mean "not a basketball school"? I can get onboard with that.

 

[Fishy]

I'll help.

You're nowhere in college athletics. Your reach ends about a block from Cleveland Circle.

Boston College is great at hockey and cashing checks.

Past that...crickets.

But you know this in your lil mind even if your lil heart doesn't want to accept it.