Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 4349420, member: 1673"] Folks like [USER=44]@CL82[/USER] , [USER=296]@ZooCougar[/USER] , [USER=38]@Fishy[/USER] and others who pay a lot more attention to this may correct me, but I think pointing to losing out to Louisville or Edsel’s actions as pivotal moments ignores root causes. Presumably, BC had no ardent objectors among the ACC members to it joining the ACC. By the time we might have had interest in joining the ACC there was at least one ardent objector among the members, BC. So the pivotal moment seems to be the BC entry into the ACC first. Otherwise, it is not obvious to me why BC’s resume should be more desirable than ours at the time of their entry. [/QUOTE]