Every time someone points out the ACC's problems doesn't mean we need 50 rebuttal posts of "I wish we were in the ACC". Just take the original post at face value. That said, I don't know if I agree with the OP.
I agree that Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse are perennial Top 15 programs, and only Louisville is up there this year. Notre Dame would have a Top 15 team every 5 years or so, and that trend appears to be continuing. That said, of the 7 likely ACC tournament teams, Louisville, Pitt and Notre Dame are all recent Big East teams, and the bottom 7 teams in the league are all 10+ year ACC members. I think Louisville, Syracuse and Notre Dame will be fine long term. I think Pitt will decline as a program without better access to NYC talent. I think Dixon is an absolute wizard to get his team in position for a tournament bid because I think the team sucks. If Dixon is smart, he will find another job this offseason.
Virginia Tech and Boston College will suck no matter what league they are in. I believe those two, plus Miami, used to cost the Big East a tournament bid a year because of the damage they would do to the conference RPI. Nothing changed when they moved into the ACC, and I don't think it is a problem of coaching because those 3 have had some decent coaches over the years. They just suck in basketball and will always suck.
In football, it is hard to argue that the ACC has been bad for Virginia Tech or Boston College. Both programs were middle of the pack or worse in the Big East other than when Michael Vick was in Blacksburg. Both have had a great run in the ACC. Louisville and Pitt look fine in the ACC for football, and Syracuse was not exactly lighting it up in the Big East the last 10 years anyway. The ACC got exactly what it should have expected to get with that program.
