Why the ACC took Louisville

[UConn990411]

The ACC chose Louisville because that was what FSU demanded at the time.

Let's not try to overcomplicate an incredibly simple matter.

 

[clmssun]

The ACC chose Louisville because that was what FSU demanded at the time.

Let's not try to overcomplicate an incredibly simple matter.

And last night Louisville put on quite a show to vindicate/justify FSU's demands. I wanted/want UConn in the ACC, but last night was a pretty strong affirmation for FSU's/ACC's choice.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The ACC chose Louisville because that was what FSU demanded at the time.

Let's not try to overcomplicate an incredibly simple matter.

And ask yourself why FSU wanted them. A. Better football program? B. Southern culture/not another Yankee school? C. Less likely to align with Tobacco Road? D. Lousiville and Jurich made great powerpoint presentations and lobbied effectively. E. All of A through C above? I think the answer is E. By the way, none of those things are Warde's fault.

 

[billybud]

Nostalgia....

All of us middle age dudes grew up with a Louisville Slugger in our hands...

 

[uconndogs]

Jurich has done a hell of a job at Louisville. No doubt about it.

He's dancing with the devil right now in Petrino. Hell of a football coach, but whenever someone tries to sell me on someone changing their spots I am very, very skeptical.

 

[pj]

The fact is that if college athletics were going to slim down from a P6 to a P5, essentially all the Big East schools deserved a spot in the P5. It was a bit random which schools got selected, more based on personal relationships than value, since most of the Big East schools were about equally valuable.

Further expansion will happen, since the G5 are going to wither and there are major TV markets still stuck in the G5. That money will be captured somehow. No idea how or when it will happen though.

 

[Calamitous]

Assuming you have a television that gets ESPN you don't ever need to question their decision again.

I'm still sticking to my guns that UConn would have been a better replacement for UMCP. UL has a strong AD and good fan support, but UConn does as well. As for the game, if not for the ineligible receiver call late in the 4th, the score could have been 24-20 (or 19 or 21) late in the game rather than giving UL the short field. Doesn't really matter though, because UL would have score again the way Miami's defense was playing. UL may win 9 or 10 games this year and could give FSU, Clemson & ND fits. Still waaaaayyyyy early, but UL may be the 2nd or 3rd best football team in the ACC this year.

 

[UConn990411]

And last night Louisville put on quite a show to vindicate/justify FSU's demands. I wanted/want UConn in the ACC, but last night was a pretty strong affirmation for FSU's/ACC's choice.

One game is a great sample size!

I've never criticized the ACC's addition of Louisville because I don't think it was a bad decision. They have a tremendous athletic department and strong commitment to athletics, and the conference will be stronger for it.

But the reality is that Louisville was chosen for the same shortsighted reasons that were behind most of the ACC's expansion initiatives - mostly that they had a nice football ranking at the time. That thought process (and the lack of attention to markets) will make the ACC far less appealing, and profitable, for the foreseeable future.

 

[whaler11]

I am pretty confused how anyone could have seen that game last night and think their decision was shortsighted.

UConn would obviously be a great addition for the ACC as well - but unless you are grasping at academic straws... Louisville steps in as a top 5 athletic department in the league.

Markets? Look at the television ratings in Louisville. They are completely off the charts. If you get that high of a percentage of people watching it doesn't matter that the market is smallish.

 

[UConn990411]

Louisville will make the ACC a stronger athletic conference. But they're in a nothing TV market, and therefore will have just a minor influence the next time the ACC bargains for a new TV deal (or better yet, the next time they attempt to start their imaginary network).

There's a reason the B1G, SEC and Pac-12 all approached conference realignment completely differently than the ACC. And not coincidentally, there's a reason those conferences are far more stable and profitable.

 

[CL82]

Louisville got into the ACC over UCONN because of what they did for the years leading up to that moment. They bet on themselves and now they are reaping the rewards.

True enough. Of course all that work could have squandered if Jurich had decided to a take that week off.

 

[CL82]

UConn would obviously be a great addition for the ACC as well - but unless you are grasping at academic straws... Louisville steps in as a top 5 athletic department in the league.

The thing is Whaler that prior to the Louisville addition academics were a core part of the ACC's identity and not a straw man issue. Time will tell if that choice will bite them in the butt.

 

[clmssun]

There's a reason the B1G, SEC and Pac-12 all approached conference realignment completely differently than the ACC. And not coincidentally, there's a reason those conferences are far more stable and profitable.

I don't think Colorado and Utah are good fits for the ACC.
I don't think Texas A&M and Missouri are good fits for the ACC.
I don't think Nebraska is a good fit for the ACC.
I don't think Texas Christian is a good fit for the ACC

Of the recent non-ACC expansion schools, that leave Rutgers and West Virginia:

Rutgers:
For all the chiding of the ACC's football performance (and recent suboptimal basketball performance):
1) There would have been all-out mutiny within the ACC's "football" ranks if the ACC had invited Rutgers prior to their B1G invitation.
1a) The BoneYard would have been *quite* entertaining if the ACC had somehow added Rutgers but not UConn.

West Virginia:
1) There has been long-standing academic dissension within ACC toward WVU (before Louisville invitation, of course).
2) I think strong arguments can be made that Louisville is a better "conference expansion target" than WVU (hence the Big XII debate of 3 years ago).
3) WVU is the key to an ACC Network? (Market size? Demographics? Seriously?)

Yes, history will always look back at early 1990s when B1G grabbed Penn State (and ACC grabbed Florida State). Understand at that time that SEC was interested in Florida State, having none of the contemporary concerns regarding "redundant markets". Without question, B1G grabbing Penn State was brilliant, and it has paid HUGE dividends; but to a large degree the B1G *had* to invite Penn State to avoid eventual irrelevance.

Yes, BC sucks and I would much rather have UConn than BC in the ACC. Delany wanted a piece of NYC so he grabbed Rutgers, Swofford grabbed Cuse with similar motivations. If you like Rutgers in B1G, that is fantastic; neither Rutgers nor Syracuse excite me greatly, but I'd rather have Cuse if forced to choose (just my opinion).

Beyond turning the clock back 24 years and adding Penn State, I am not sure what you think the ACC could have done "more like B1G, SEC, Pac-12" (all of whom have passed on WVU and UConn as well)/

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Louisville looks like a great add right now because they are doing well in FB and BB, and they just expanded their stadium. If they have couple 3-9 seasons, let's see how strong their fan support will be. Like someone else posted, they already had number of 30K attendance seasons due to Krapsthorpe. If we had number of seasons where we were winning conferences and got into a P5 conference, I have no doubt our fan support would be much better than now.

UCONN would still be a much BETTER add for the ACC in the long term. UL is looking good now, but UCONN is still a much better fit for the ACC. That being said, I really really hope we end up in the B1G and ACC can have UL.

 

[Dooley]

If the ACC felt like it was going to "lose" Louisville to the B12, then it was a good move. After seeing the B12 continue to drag their heels on expansion and insist upon a round-robin conference tournament, it doesn't seem like they were/are in a hurry to add anyone. But I guess the decision was whether or not they felt Louisville was at greater risk to be added by another conference before UCONN. Judging by how each school's football programs have performed and have/have not been supported by their fan bases, perhaps the B12 would have beed motivated to add Louisville (with possibly Cincinnati to give WVU an eastern "pod"). I think Louisville would have been added by the B12 long before the B1G would add UCONN, hence their decision.

 

[ZooCougar]

The ACC chose Louisville because that was what FSU demanded at the time.

Let's not try to overcomplicate an incredibly simple matter.

Don't forget Clempsun.

 

[UConn990411]

I don't think Colorado and Utah are good fits for the ACC.
I don't think Texas A&M and Missouri are good fits for the ACC.
I don't think Nebraska is a good fit for the ACC.
I don't think Texas Christian is a good fit for the ACC

Uh, what exactly is your point?

 

[whaler11]

The thing is Whaler that prior to the Louisville addition academics were a core part of the ACC's identity and not a straw man issue. Time will tell if that choice will bite them in the butt.

How could it 'bite them in the butt'.

Most people understand at this point major college sports has nothing to do with academics.

 

[clmssun]

Uh, what exactly is your point?

I was listing the schools that "successful" conferences added during conference realignment. If Delany. Slive, and Scott were brilliant leaders for adding these schools, I presume Swofford would be deemed brilliant if he had added some of these schools.

There's a reason the B1G, SEC and Pac-12 all approached conference realignment completely differently than the ACC.

I am trying to understand how the ACC could have approached realignment differently or more successfully. I don't think any of the schools added to the B1G*, SEC, or Pac-12 were good fits for the ACC; do you?

* UMd notwithstanding

 

[uconndogs]

Great atmosphere last night at Louisville.

Frankly, if UCONN had its debut in the ACC hosting Miami in a night game the Rent would have been packed (44k or whatever it was for Michigan). Folks make too much out of one game. Neither of those teams looked like all that to me.

 

[UConn990411]

I was listing the schools that "successful" conferences added during conference realignment. If Delany. Slive, and Scott were brilliant leaders for adding these schools, I presume Swofford would be deemed brilliant if he had added some of these schools.

I am trying to understand how the ACC could have approached realignment differently or more successfully. I don't think any of the schools added to the B1G*, SEC, or Pac-12 were good fits for the ACC; do you?

* UMd notwithstanding

And herein lies the point that so many ACC fans can't seem to grasp.

While the ACC was busy plucking away whichever Big East football programs were ranked at the time, the B1G, SEC and PAC-12 were expanding into new (major) markets. By adding new schools located near major metropolitans, those conferences have been able to drastically improve their financial situations ... to the point where they may double up the ACC in their TV contracts alone.

Who knows how things will play out in the future, but I suspect that gap in revenue will eventually lead to a gap on the field.

 

[whaler11]

And herein lies the point that so many ACC fans can't seem to grasp.

While the ACC was busy plucking away whichever Big East football programs were ranked at the time, the B1G, SEC and PAC-12 were expanding into new (major) markets. By adding new schools located near major metropolitans, those conferences have been able to drastically improve their financial situations ... to the point where they may double up the ACC in their TV contracts alone.

Who knows how things will play out in the future, but I suspect that gap in revenue will eventually lead to a gap on the field.

They were already worth a lot more. Sure Rutgers and Missouri for example helped. But even with no expansion they were going to get a lot more

 

[clmssun]

And herein lies the point that so many ACC fans can't seem to grasp.

While the ACC was busy plucking away whichever Big East football programs were ranked at the time, the B1G, SEC and PAC-12 were expanding into new (major) markets. By adding new schools located near major metropolitans, those conferences have been able to drastically improve their financial situations ... to the point where they may double up the ACC in their TV contracts alone.

Who knows how things will play out in the future, but I suspect that gap in revenue will eventually lead to a gap on the field.

The gamechanging event of the college athletics landscape was the B1G adding Penn State, period. If the ACC had added Penn State (alongside Florida State) at that time, the the ACC would be a titan of a conference right now (and the B1G would be withering). But that did not happen 24 years ago...

With Penn State demarcating the ACC and B1G for the last 24 years, there was no way the ACC was ever going to pry away Ohio State or Michigan... (and why would the ACC have any interest in Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota?)

South Carolina left the ACC in 1971. When they were added to the SEC in 1991 (alongside Arkansas), no one was talking about "markets". With the ACC getting Florida State (and with the past acrimony with South Carolina), the ACC had no interest in South Carolina. The ACC has since added Miami, increasing their share of the state of Florida.

I have never gathered that Florida, Georgia, or Tennessee were poach-able; have you?

I am still puzzled as to what white whale Swofford was supposed to harpoon (given my statements in previous posts about who was available).

 

[Cleanface]

Imma let the UCONN folks handle this thread.

Love your postings so far tho, clmssun. Do it again.

 

[UConn990411]

If he had added Rutgers and UConn after adding Syracuse (like many thought they should have), the ACC would have actually had a good presence in NYC and a stranglehold on New England. Sure, Boston and NYC will always be predominantly pro cities, but they're still valuable markets to have from a TV standpoint.

As it stands, the only markets the ACC owns are North Carolina and Virginia. Their presence in NYC and Boston, meanwhile, is virtually non-existent.

Good luck getting a network off the ground with that.

 

[larryredbull]

The OP was correct. Louisville had the home stands full and loud for their opening game and won. UConn only had 35k for a pretty good home opening opponent and was routed. Expansion was about football and Uconn is a BB school.

 

[UConn990411]

The OP was correct. Louisville had the home stands full and loud for their opening game and won. UConn only had 35k for a pretty good home opening opponent and was routed. Expansion was about football and Uconn is a BB school.

Guess what? Louisville is also a bball school.

Go home, clown.

 

[pj]

I am pretty confused how anyone could have seen that game last night and think their decision was shortsighted.

The outcome of one football game demonstrates farsightedness?

If the ultimate goal of realignment was to get good TV ratings in September 2014, then adding Louisville was farsighted, to be sure.

 

[Calamitous]

Look at the television ratings in Louisville. They are completely off the charts. If you get that high of a percentage of people watching it doesn't matter that the market is smallish.

I've never thought of it that way. Right now the big conferences are swallowing up the biggest TV markets they can find so cable companies can charge us unwittingly for networks we may never watch. Once consumers figure this out, potential lawsuits against cable companies may be filed. If so, the key may be having a TV market where TV ratings matter more than just the shear number of subscribers. In that case, Louisville is a great move. But then again, so is UConn. I still think Maryland was a homerun for the B1G no matter if it's shear cable subscriber numbers or TV ratings.

Right now, the ACC is good with the Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina markets. Georgia is Bulldog country. Florida is Gator country even if the ACC added USF and UCF. The majority of Northeast ACC schools will not be big ratings boosters except for maybe Syracuse during basketball season. The only two northeast schools that are good for TV ratings year round are Penn State and UConn. Another good addition would be WVU by this logic.

Also, will the Network media product quality be critical down the road? Right now, the B1G network and PAC networks seem to be a low grade product compared to the SEC Network. The SEC is already superior whether we like to admit it or not. The B1G and PAC at least have a network, but they have a lot of work to do to make their product sexy like the SEC has done. The ACC is still asleep behind the wheel with Raycom's high school production graphics.

 

[Cleanface]

How exactly is the wildly successful and ground-breaking BTN "low grade" vs the SEC Network that just started days ago??

Bc of their recent football success?? lol. We love our Big Ten football up north too.


edit; BTW - of course Maryland was a home-run. In every way. The only people who don't think so are ACC drones.