(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 09:34 AM)texasorange Wrote:  No, Texas is the rich, spoiled, manipulative, adolescent compulsive liar who never had a honest days work in his life. Don't believe anything they say because truth & ethics are a situational concept. Don't try to befriend them because they will leave you high & dry & broke. Unfortunately, unless you live down here & have done so for a while you won't understand.

Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

I have been lurking on some Scout boards, just watching the conversations unfold and then blow up. It seems to me like the most used response to any talk about FSU and Clemson leaving is always about demonizing Texas. The problem with that line is that Clemson and FSU folks have already demonized UNC. Demonizing Texas isn't really a deterrent, its just telling the CU and FSU folks that they will be seeing more of the same while they get paid more.

All the points I see CU and FSU folks making are about horrible ACC scheduling, perceived weakness of the ACC in any post season BCS tournament, lesser programs making more money in other conferences and most importantly how they are falling behind their regional rivals in the SEC.

Talking about the demons in Texas does not respond at all to the major issues Clemson and FSU folks are bringing up. I say this not to stir the pot but to maybe get folks to focus on what is really aggrivating Clemson and FSU fans.

See, you get it. Sadly the sheep will never get it because football has never been a priority to them.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I have been lurking on some Scout boards, just watching the conversations unfold and then blow up. It seems to me like the most used response to any talk about FSU and Clemson leaving is always about demonizing Texas. The problem with that line is that Clemson and FSU folks have already demonized UNC. Demonizing Texas isn't really a deterrent, its just telling the CU and FSU folks that they will be seeing more of the same

I think that is exactly the point other ACC posters are making - that Texas is just as bad as UNC.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  ...while they get paid more.

True. Costs will also be million$ more. I forget who, but one FSU website pointed that out - that the NET may not be a whole lot more.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  All the points I see CU and FSU folks making are about horrible ACC scheduling, perceived weakness of the ACC in any post season BCS tournament

True, but with a caveat. Whether the Big12 would be better depends in part on who else would be in their division. If it's West Virginia, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State, that's not much different than NC State, Wake Forest, Maryland, and Boston College - good enough to beat you, but not good enough to sell-out your home games. Only now the road games are too far.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  ...lesser programs making more money in other conferences and most importantly how they are falling behind their regional rivals in the SEC

YEP. The question is, with the much higher costs involved, would the Big12 bring in enough more money (over what a renegotiated ACC deal will yield) to keep up with the Jones (SEC).

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  They only hate UNC because UNC and their "puppet" are not addressing these issues. If that changed I bet they would love UNC and Swofford. I use the word love very loosely CatDaddy.

BINGO

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  They only hate UNC because UNC and their "puppet" are not addressing these issues. If that changed I bet they would love UNC and Swofford. I use the word love very loosely CatDaddy.

No, I doubt you'll ever even loosely be able to use the word love to describe the relationship between Clemson and the lying, cheating, baby blue underoos wearing snake in the grass Swofford. You tend to not to have very favorable feelings towards someone who blatantly tried to destroy something you love.

If FSU and Clemson agree to move to the Big 12 as numbers 11 and 12 with no one else coming in then I think they find Texas to be everything everyone is warning them about. That won't be because Texas are demons, that will be because Texas are the Lions and the Big 12 is their prideland.

IF you are FSU and Clemson you do not agree to join unless you bring one other with you. That way you know Louisville is also going to be brought in for 14. That gives you five in the East. That focuses all future expansion to the East for sure and as FSU, you have a lot of continued power in the conference. You have a three team voting bloc already and surely WVU and Louisville will vote with you in the future so long as one out of 15 and 16 is to be up in their area.

By making sure and negotiating for 14 instead of just 12, you go into the Big 12 with some clout.

That is how FSU and Clemson nullify how much power Texas will wield over them.


With that being said there are definitely some things that the ACC can do to maintain FSU. I seriously question whether those in power though would be willing to do what is necessary.

As it stands, the spotlight in regards to college sports is on FSU and the ACC. The rest of the country waits.

(05-06-2012 02:42 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  They only hate UNC because UNC and their "puppet" are not addressing these issues. If that changed I bet they would love UNC and Swofford. I use the word love very loosely CatDaddy.

No, I doubt you'll ever even loosely be able to use the word love to describe the relationship between Clemson and the lying, cheating, baby blue underoos wearing snake in the grass Swofford. You tend to not to have very favorable feelings towards someone who blatantly tried to destroy something you love.

You are correct, it is impossible for me to have a full understanding of the internal politics in the ACC. Its all very important to the rest of the country though.

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

(05-06-2012 02:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I have been lurking on some Scout boards, just watching the conversations unfold and then blow up. It seems to me like the most used response to any talk about FSU and Clemson leaving is always about demonizing Texas. The problem with that line is that Clemson and FSU folks have already demonized UNC. Demonizing Texas isn't really a deterrent, its just telling the CU and FSU folks that they will be seeing more of the same

I think that is exactly the point other ACC posters are making - that Texas is just as bad as UNC.

The point is, calling Texas the devil doesn't phase us because we have to deal with Tobacco Road already. If we can make significantly more money in the Big 12 and have some of our wishes actually tended to we'll be just fine. Heck, someone could argue that going from the TR schools to just Texas is an upgrade.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  ...while they get paid more.

True. Costs will also be million$ more. I forget who, but one FSU website pointed that out - that the NET may not be a whole lot more.

Are you talking travel costs? I'd really like to see this. At first glance it sounds completely bogus. FSU will be in a division with Boston College, Syracuse and Maryland. EVERY Big 12 school is closer than Boston College. I'm just not seeing it.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  All the points I see CU and FSU folks making are about horrible ACC scheduling, perceived weakness of the ACC in any post season BCS tournament

True, but with a caveat. Whether the Big12 would be better depends in part on who else would be in their division. If it's West Virginia, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State, that's not much different than NC State, Wake Forest, Maryland, and Boston College - good enough to beat you, but not good enough to sell-out your home games. Only now the road games are too far.

We would obviously also have Clemson in our division. And I'm not sure we'd make the move if the Big 12 didn't at least expand to 14 schools with 4 eastern additions (hello, GT and Miami). We may have a permanent crossover game which FSU would get one of Texas/OU most likely and I don't know who out of WVU or Clemson would get the other. And FSU will do whatever it can to play UF and UM annually. So I don't think it's all that bad.

(05-06-2012 02:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  ...lesser programs making more money in other conferences and most importantly how they are falling behind their regional rivals in the SEC

YEP. The question is, with the much higher costs involved, would the Big12 bring in enough more money (over what a renegotiated ACC deal will yield) to keep up with the Jones (SEC).

See above. I'd think having better matchups (still have UF, UM and Clemson every year but adding WVU and maybe GT and UT/OU) would increase season ticket sales, increasing ticket prices, increasing revenue. I'm still not seeing how travel costs would be significantly worse for FSU than currently. Not sure what other costs you could possibly be referring to.

As much as I tease Clemson fans and dislike their athletic teams I can honestly say I would genuinely miss them. I'm still getting used to the idea of Syracuse and Pittsburgh as new mates, and I respect their institutions. I would rather add Tulane and Rice, based on this method of thinking, than a sports centric school like Louisville. Nowadays academic allegiance isn't a priority. We sort of took a step in being an eastern seaboard magnolia conference. I understand where Clemson and FSU fans are coming from and maybe it is best to stick Clemson, GaTech, FSU, VaTech, and Miami in the same division? :soapbox:

(05-06-2012 04:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  As much as I tease Clemson fans and dislike their athletic teams I can honestly say I would genuinely miss them. I'm still getting used to the idea of Syracuse and Pittsburgh as new mates, and I respect their institutions. I would rather add Tulane and Rice, based on this method of thinking, than a sports centric school like Louisville. Nowadays academic allegiance isn't a priority. We sort of took a step in being an eastern seaboard magnolia conference. I understand where Clemson and FSU fans are coming from and maybe it is best to stick Clemson, GaTech, FSU, VaTech, and Miami in the same division? :soapbox:

I understand the sympathy, however, placing five power schools will leave at least two and probably three in the dust. Assuming your division, the five would play each other and two more divisional teams for six games. Only one team can go spotless. Everyone else is removed from playoff and; therefore, championship play. Of the remaining squads, only one can go with one loss, relegating all others to lesser bowls. Further, at least two will have three or four losses, still bowl eligible, but nowhere near what they are accustomed to.

Alternatively, you get parity with everyone having at least 2-3 losses and the divisional winner playing for the ACC championship with no hope of playing in the playoffs. Parity is killing the Big East and has for the last few seasons, no team is really stepping ahead of everyone else which looks real bad on the national scene.

Also, an unbalanced weaker division makes it more possible for a mediocre team to win the division, play for the ACC and still be left out of the playoffs.

The above also applies to a Big 12 that attempts to bring in too many power schools (since FSU, CU, VAtech and Miami are the alleged 4 team targets). Not everyone can win, this isn't kiddie soccer or tee-ball. Not everyone gets a trophy.

(05-06-2012 04:36 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  Costs will also be million$ more. I forget who, but one FSU website pointed that out - that the NET may not be a whole lot more.
Are you talking travel costs? I'd really like to see this. At first glance it sounds completely bogus. FSU will be in a division with Boston College, Syracuse and Maryland. EVERY Big 12 school is closer than Boston College. I'm just not seeing it... I'm still not seeing how travel costs would be significantly worse for FSU than currently. Not sure what other costs you could possibly be referring to.

TRAVEL COSTS: $/mile varies, so I'm not going to estimate $, but miles are easy.
avg mileage for FSU away games, current ACC divisions* = 754 miles per school
avg mileage for FSU away games, proposed Big-12# = 945 miles/school

* the current arrangement is nearly the worst possible for FSU in terms of miles
# since we don't know what the divisions or schedule would be, I just averaged all 10 current teams plus Clemson

ACC teams further than the Big12 avg = 2: BC = 1304; Syracuse = 1178
Proposed Big 12 teams closer than current ACC avg = 1: Clemson = 354

What this means is that if FSU & Clemson leave the ACC and go to the Big12 they would be looking at an extra 191 miles/game. For 4 away football games/year, that doesn't sound too bad, right? But wait, you do play other sports, right? How many total conference away games do you think you play every year? Multiply that number by 191 miles.

Keep in mind too that the current ACC divisional arrangement is just about the worst possible for FSU in terms of mileage. What that means is the ACC can do a whole lot better - but the Big 12 will always have 9 schools on the other side of the Mississippi River.

avg mileage for FSU away games, proposed ACC N/S divisions** = 481 miles/school
** as proposed in my blog

BOTTOM LINE: I don't know how many athletes would make how many road trips or how much those trips would cost, but I do know this - they will be further, and with fuel costs what they are that cost is only going to go up.

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 09:34 AM)texasorange Wrote:  No, Texas is the rich, spoiled, manipulative, adolescent compulsive liar who never had a honest days work in his life. Don't believe anything they say because truth & ethics are a situational concept. Don't try to befriend them because they will leave you high & dry & broke. Unfortunately, unless you live down here & have done so for a while you won't understand.

Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

Not even close Catdaddy. I hope you never find out, but if Clemson goes to the Big 12 you will have instant 2nd class status as Missouri and Colorado found out. And you will want out too.

(05-06-2012 04:24 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

It isn't "all these Cuse fans", it's me. And I know because I've been down here since 1992. You think you have it bad now? UNC is nothing compared to UT. Ask Nebraska fans.

(05-06-2012 04:24 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

At least we know what school we root for.

(05-06-2012 04:24 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

For one reason or another, there are several of us who live in Texas. We get to see how UT runs the Big 12 daily. I don't hate UT, I don't care whether they win or lose. I do think that FSU fans are focused on a few $$ and ignore the whole story. It will not be the sweet deal you dream of. If FSU and Clemson look deeply into what they are doing and decide that being Texas' lapdog is more in their interests than being kings in their own conference, I wish them well.

It's funny to Texans that FSU would want to join their conference. Most UT fans openly discuss ND, BYU and Louisville, but not FSU or Clemson. Most fans of other teams ask what on earth possesses FSU and Clemson to to sell their souls.

(05-06-2012 08:32 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 04:24 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

It isn't "all these Cuse fans", it's me. And I know because I've been down here since 1992. You think you have it bad now? UNC is nothing compared to UT. Ask Nebraska fans.

No, it's several of you. Have you lived in ACC territory?

(05-06-2012 08:49 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 04:24 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

At least we know what school we root for.

BURN (baby, burn)!

(05-06-2012 10:23 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 08:32 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 04:24 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 02:00 PM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Hmm...sounds like EweNC to me.

It's really odd seeing all these Cuse peoples' hatred for Texas.

It isn't "all these Cuse fans", it's me. And I know because I've been down here since 1992. You think you have it bad now? UNC is nothing compared to UT. Ask Nebraska fans.

No, it's several of you. Have you lived in ACC territory?

Have you lived in Texas?? I doubt it. More the fool...

(05-06-2012 09:10 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I do think that FSU fans are focused on a few $$ and ignore the whole story. It will not be the sweet deal you dream of. If you say so. Not really sure how it can be worse than Tobacco Road. I don't care that they have the LHN. I just care that they have fair scheduling practices, don't have completely incompetent officiating and make much more money than the ACC. If FSU and Clemson look deeply into what they are doing and decide that being Texas' lapdog is more in their interests than being kings in their own conference, I wish them well. Lapdog. Blah blah blah. More of the same from the Big Easters and TR'ers. You really don't think you'll be stuck with whatever TR wants?

It's funny to Texans that FSU would want to join their conference. Most UT fans openly discuss ND, BYU and Louisville, but not FSU or Clemson. That's wonderful. I've looked at a few Texas sites and they seem quite receptive to FSU and want it to happen. Most fans of other teams ask what on earth possesses FSU and Clemson to to sell their souls. This I believe. I've seen it myself. You Cusers are some of those people. And I think the reasons are obvious and have been stated repeatedly.

(05-06-2012 10:30 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(05-06-2012 09:10 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I do think that FSU fans are focused on a few $$ and ignore the whole story. It will not be the sweet deal you dream of. If you say so. Not really sure how it can be worse than Tobacco Road. I don't care that they have the LHN. I just care that they have fair scheduling practices, don't have completely incompetent officiating and make much more money than the ACC. If FSU and Clemson look deeply into what they are doing and decide that being Texas' lapdog is more in their interests than being kings in their own conference, I wish them well. Lapdog. Blah blah blah. More of the same from the Big Easters and TR'ers. You really don't think you'll be stuck with whatever TR wants?

It's funny to Texans that FSU would want to join their conference. Most UT fans openly discuss ND, BYU and Louisville, but not FSU or Clemson. That's wonderful. I've looked at a few Texas sites and they seem quite receptive to FSU and want it to happen. Most fans of other teams ask what on earth possesses FSU and Clemson to to sell their souls. This I believe. I've seen it myself. You Cusers are some of those people. And I think the reasons are obvious and have been stated repeatedly.

Let's see:

You completely ignore Arkansas, TAMU, Nebraska, Colorado, Mizzou who have successfully left Texas' shadow. You ignore the fact that OU, OSU, TTech, Kansas, KState, Iowa State and Baylor attempted to leave UT shadow but cannot. You ignore people who live in areas affected by UT. I hope you enjoy your stay.

By the way, officiating tends to lean towards Texas and Oklahoma. At least you are used to that. Scheduling is in accordance with Texas, as are divisions. 14 teams in the ACC, SEC or Big 12 is still 14 teams. If you don't like it in the ACC you will not like it in the Big 12.

As I have said, best of luck.

More of the same.