Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="dwalks93, post: 1570027, member: 5598"] Initially I thought the ACC just wanted the Big East marque football teams (Miami, VT, BC.) That actually made sense minus BC. Miami and VT were not BE schools. The BE was a screwed up league and the "football first" programs were never going to be happy. There was going to need to be a football/basketball separation for the schools that played both in the BE and the south of the mason-dixon line football schools were better fits in the ACC But, by the end, it was readily apparent the ACC truly wanted to destroy the BE. Syracuse and Pitt were marginal adds at best and their addition did more to kill the BE than help the ACC. Instead of trying to assume the BE's position in the NE the ACC elected to try exclude several geographically important programs like Rutgers, WVU, and UConn. It was almost as if the ACC bought enough of the BE Teams to put the conference out of business and then abandoned the region. The irony is the ACC won the war but the cost of winning may be the ACC becomes the new BE. Not one core BE program the ACC acquired has flourished. Syracuse, Pitt and BC have decreased in athletic performance and conference value. When the ACC destroyed the natural rivalries in the NE, the fans lost interest. BC may have asked to be "NE's team" and left on an island but their program has suffered. WVU/Pitt was one of the greatest, most hated rivalries in the sport. Now what do Pitt fans get excited for? While the old BE schools have declined in value, the ACC is burdened with those teams drawing a full conference share. It is very foreseeable ACC programs with options will eventually leave for more money in the BIG/SEC. That will not be enough to kill the ACC but it won't have some of its marque names. What will be left in the ACC is a lot of the old BE teams and non-flagship universities. I suppose that is the circle of life... [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach