(06-01-2013 04:06 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 03:19 PM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 01:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 10:27 AM)XLance Wrote:  Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. I really don't want Notre Dame as a full member either, but I think it will eventually happen.

The current arrangement works for me...I actually don't want ND as a Full Member now either...if it does happen oh well...

I would never say I didn't want ND in for football, since, winning or losing, they're still the most prestigious "brand" in college sports. But I don't think it will ever happen, and I would hate to see ACC fans succumb to one of the old Big East's most frustrating maladies. I hope the 5-game arrangement can prevent this malady from becoming too acute, since I consider it a major bonus for most ACC programs. I know it'll be huge for the Cards.

ND has stated that they'll stay independent, and I think everybody accepts that, barring one of two things happening:

1. ND can't get an independent TV contract
2. ND can't gain access to a playoff system
   

Regarding #1: We just saw them renew their TV contract, so that's secure.

Regarding #2: With the current competitive climate among the P5 conferences, nobody wants anybody to gain more of an upper hand than they already have. With Notre Dame as the biggest wild card out there, and with the knowledge that, if Notre Dame were forced into a conference, it would be the ACC, the others will do all in their power to ensure that ND can get into the playoffs as an indy, rather than give the ACC a windfall.

Well said. It's taken me some time to come this conclusion, as Terry D can attest to, but I think I'm there now. But don't be surprised if I have an occasional relapse now and then.

It's why I hope that when things settle down over the next 5 years and assuming the ACC turns it around in football and knowing what the BiG's true intentions are, I wouldn't be against making a preemptive strike by getting Cincinnati and UConn in as 15 and 16 assuming both continue to show improvement under adverse circumstances.

Cheers,
Neil

I wouldn't want to add Cincy and UCONN until absolutely necessary. In truth, all the ACC has to do is win in football and they will become untouchable. ACC already has the best brands in basketball, top notch Olympic sports. Football really is the last piece.

(06-01-2013 04:06 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 03:19 PM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 01:54 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 10:27 AM)XLance Wrote:  Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. I really don't want Notre Dame as a full member either, but I think it will eventually happen.

The current arrangement works for me...I actually don't want ND as a Full Member now either...if it does happen oh well...

I would never say I didn't want ND in for football, since, winning or losing, they're still the most prestigious "brand" in college sports. But I don't think it will ever happen, and I would hate to see ACC fans succumb to one of the old Big East's most frustrating maladies. I hope the 5-game arrangement can prevent this malady from becoming too acute, since I consider it a major bonus for most ACC programs. I know it'll be huge for the Cards.

ND has stated that they'll stay independent, and I think everybody accepts that, barring one of two things happening:

1. ND can't get an independent TV contract
2. ND can't gain access to a playoff system
   

Regarding #1: We just saw them renew their TV contract, so that's secure.

Regarding #2: With the current competitive climate among the P5 conferences, nobody wants anybody to gain more of an upper hand than they already have. With Notre Dame as the biggest wild card out there, and with the knowledge that, if Notre Dame were forced into a conference, it would be the ACC, the others will do all in their power to ensure that ND can get into the playoffs as an indy, rather than give the ACC a windfall.

Well said. It's taken me some time to come this conclusion, as Terry D can attest to, but I think I'm there now. But don't be surprised if I have an occasional relapse now and then.

It's why I hope that when things settle down over the next 5 years and assuming the ACC turns it around in football and knowing what the BiG's true intentions are, I wouldn't be against making a preemptive strike by getting Cincinnati and UConn in as 15 and 16 assuming both continue to show improvement under adverse circumstances.

Cheers,
Neil

UCONN has no tradition, a stadium over 20 miles from campus, a terrible location for recruiting/fan support, and would compete for recruits with both SU and BC. Adding them in football would be a disaster. I don't mind playing them in football, and I don't mind adding them in everything but football, but UCONN football is a no go. We are better off without them, and we would be even better off if the B1G took them.

UC has weak academics, no history in football, a weak location, and an athletic dept. that doesn't make any money. They are also clearly below OSU in the pecking order of Ohio schools, so adding them only reinforces the perception of the ACC being below the B1G. Admittedly, UC has a rich history in basketball, has consistently fielded very good football teams as of late, fertile recruiting grounds, and is investing heavily in their athletics program. However, they are only a good cultural match for UL, the are only a good geographic match for a handful of teams, and, because Ohio is DOMINATED by tOSU, they are unlikely to open the state up for recruiting purposes.

Both UC and UCONN would cost more than they are worth. In an ideal world, the Big XII would take UC (they deserve to be in a G5 conference), and the Big XII would take UCONN (it would water down the B1G, which would make PSU that much more likely to jump with ND ). If the B1G really rants to divide the ACC by adding UMD, RU, and UCONN [rolls eyes], let them. We would A) not be any worse off, and B) simply send Penn State one heck of an offer letter that involves playing eastern teams, like rival Syracuse, arch rival Pitt, rival VT, rival ND (they have a ton of NYC fans), and BC and southern schools in talent-rich states, instead of RU, UMD, UCONN, and Midwestern schools located in the middle of nowhere.

Either way, unless ND or PSU want in, the ACC shouldn't move.

(06-01-2013 04:25 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  UCONN has no tradition, a stadium over 20 miles from campus, a terrible location for recruiting/fan support, and would compete for recruits with both SU and BC. Adding them in football would be a disaster. I don't mind playing them in football, and I don't mind adding them in everything but football, but UCONN football is a no go. We are better off without them, and we would be even better off if the B1G took them.

UC has weak academics, no history in football, a weak location, and an athletic dept. that doesn't make any money. They are also clearly below OSU in the pecking order of Ohio schools, so adding them only reinforces the perception of the ACC being below the B1G. Admittedly, UC has a rich history in basketball, has consistently fielded very good football teams as of late, fertile recruiting grounds, and is investing heavily in their athletics program. However, they are only a good cultural match for UL, the are only a good geographic match for a handful of teams, and, because Ohio is DOMINATED by tOSU, they are unlikely to open the state up for recruiting purposes.

Both UC and UCONN would cost more than they are worth. In an ideal world, the Big XII would take UC (they deserve to be in a G5 conference), and the Big XII would take UCONN (it would water down the B1G, which would make PSU that much more likely to jump with ND ). If the B1G really rants to divide the ACC by adding UMD, RU, and UCONN [rolls eyes], let them. We would A) not be any worse off, and B) simply send Penn State one heck of an offer letter that involves playing eastern teams, like rival Syracuse, arch rival Pitt, rival VT, rival ND (they have a ton of NYC fans), and BC and southern schools in talent-rich states, instead of RU, UMD, UCONN, and Midwestern schools located in the middle of nowhere.

Either way, unless ND or PSU want in, the ACC shouldn't move.

Though I hope with our new conference mates, national press, and athletic profits, we will leapfrog them, UC's academics have traditionally been above Louisville's. So if Louisville was invited into the ACC, I'm sure it won't be academics that will prevent UC from being invited.

I do admit that other things will probably keep UC out (nzmo has pointed them out, I think). The way I see it, they need to show that they can still grow their sports program, and that's gonna be difficult with their space limitations (their on-campus stadium really has no room for expansion) and in their environment (a city with multiple major league sports franchises).

Gordon Gee opened up a topic for discussion that I would hope people would now try to understand a bit better. Top rankings don't necessarily indicate a lack of academic integrity, despite what some jerk at Ohio State has to say on the subject. There is a great deal of academic integrity inherent in any institution whose mission it is to make higher education available to a state's major urban area. And there is a great challenge inherent in moving up in the rankings while staying true to the aforementioned mission. If I could point to two institutions who have fulfilled and continue to fulfill this mission the most admirably, it would be the University of Louisville and the University of Cincinnati - both very historic (1798 & 1819) and very venerable universities.

Though I have a different viewpoint, I would agree with NZMO's final statement, I guess (though I would leave it at ND only). Until some other school (and South Florida, Temple, Memphis, or somebody - anybody - else might come along and leapfrog either UC or UConn) adds more than they take, there's simply no compelling reason they should be invited.

(06-01-2013 04:21 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 04:11 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:39 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:19 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  He also poked fun at the ACC for considering, UCONN, CINCY, and Ville? Wow, he also mentioned how we were in a corner, sounds like the B1G was looking to destroy the ACC at the geographic heart of the conference. If we needed a new brand in MD we would have added Navy who is a national brand.

Big East fans, like myself, always thought it would come down to the Big East or the ACC to rule the northeast. At least until the ACC Armageddon Scenario came upon the scene.

The Big Ten talks a lot about being the midwestern conference, but it's becoming apparent they want to be top dog in the northeast and mid-atlantic as well.

Gee talked about a "T" strategy basically cutting the ACC in half by taking Maryland, Rutgers, UNC, Duke, and Virginia.

I hope Swofford truly realizes the ACC is in a real fight now, for both identity and survival.

Cheers,
Neil

Fortunately we don't have to think about that for 13 more years thanks to the GoR. And I think we all new the B1G was after UVA and UNC.

I continue to be amazed by those that somehow believe a GOR is bullet-proof. Is it better than a simple exit fee? Yes. But I don't think it's such a sure iron-clad thing as many others do.

I think sometime over the next 5 years either Texas or Oklahoma or both will challenge it and we'll find out how legal proof it is then. And if it fails to be upheld in the courts, I hope the conference has improved itself significantly in terms of on the field results and in terms of TV monies. If not then things could get very problematic in 6-7 years time.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil,

You are right, the GOR is a contract, nothing more. It is a means of measuring damages and is a starting point for negotiating a separation, a costly starting point, but a starting point nonetheless. I don't think a Baylor or TTech or WVU could be the one to break a GOR; however, as you stated, a Texas or Oklahoma with the power and TV might and the finances to do so.

(06-01-2013 04:21 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 04:11 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:39 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:19 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  He also poked fun at the ACC for considering, UCONN, CINCY, and Ville? Wow, he also mentioned how we were in a corner, sounds like the B1G was looking to destroy the ACC at the geographic heart of the conference. If we needed a new brand in MD we would have added Navy who is a national brand.

Big East fans, like myself, always thought it would come down to the Big East or the ACC to rule the northeast. At least until the ACC Armageddon Scenario came upon the scene.

The Big Ten talks a lot about being the midwestern conference, but it's becoming apparent they want to be top dog in the northeast and mid-atlantic as well.

Gee talked about a "T" strategy basically cutting the ACC in half by taking Maryland, Rutgers, UNC, Duke, and Virginia.

I hope Swofford truly realizes the ACC is in a real fight now, for both identity and survival.

Cheers,
Neil

Fortunately we don't have to think about that for 13 more years thanks to the GoR. And I think we all new the B1G was after UVA and UNC.

I continue to be amazed by those that somehow believe a GOR is bullet-proof. Is it better than a simple exit fee? Yes. But I don't think it's such a sure iron-clad thing as many others do.

I think sometime over the next 5 years either Texas or Oklahoma or both will challenge it and we'll find out how legal proof it is then. And if it fails to be upheld in the courts, I hope the conference has improved itself significantly in terms of on the field results and in terms of TV monies. If not then things could get very problematic in 6-7 years time.

Cheers,
Neil

Why worry about stuff that's out of your control when you don't have to?

(06-01-2013 04:59 PM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 04:25 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  UCONN has no tradition, a stadium over 20 miles from campus, a terrible location for recruiting/fan support, and would compete for recruits with both SU and BC. Adding them in football would be a disaster. I don't mind playing them in football, and I don't mind adding them in everything but football, but UCONN football is a no go. We are better off without them, and we would be even better off if the B1G took them.

UC has weak academics, no history in football, a weak location, and an athletic dept. that doesn't make any money. They are also clearly below OSU in the pecking order of Ohio schools, so adding them only reinforces the perception of the ACC being below the B1G. Admittedly, UC has a rich history in basketball, has consistently fielded very good football teams as of late, fertile recruiting grounds, and is investing heavily in their athletics program. However, they are only a good cultural match for UL, the are only a good geographic match for a handful of teams, and, because Ohio is DOMINATED by tOSU, they are unlikely to open the state up for recruiting purposes.

Both UC and UCONN would cost more than they are worth. In an ideal world, the Big XII would take UC (they deserve to be in a G5 conference), and the Big XII would take UCONN (it would water down the B1G, which would make PSU that much more likely to jump with ND ). If the B1G really rants to divide the ACC by adding UMD, RU, and UCONN [rolls eyes], let them. We would A) not be any worse off, and B) simply send Penn State one heck of an offer letter that involves playing eastern teams, like rival Syracuse, arch rival Pitt, rival VT, rival ND (they have a ton of NYC fans), and BC and southern schools in talent-rich states, instead of RU, UMD, UCONN, and Midwestern schools located in the middle of nowhere.

Either way, unless ND or PSU want in, the ACC shouldn't move.

Though I hope with our new conference mates, national press, and athletic profits, we will leapfrog them, UC's academics have traditionally been above Louisville's. So if Louisville was invited into the ACC, I'm sure it won't be academics that will prevent UC from being invited.

I do admit that other things will probably keep UC out (nzmo has pointed them out, I think). The way I see it, they need to show that they can still grow their sports program, and that's gonna be difficult with their space limitations (their on-campus stadium really has no room for expansion) and in their environment (a city with multiple major league sports franchises).

Gordon Gee opened up a topic for discussion that I would hope people would now try to understand a bit better. Top rankings don't necessarily indicate a lack of academic integrity, despite what some jerk at Ohio State has to say on the subject. There is a great deal of academic integrity inherent in any institution whose mission it is to make higher education available to a state's major urban area. And there is a great challenge inherent in moving up in the rankings while staying true to the aforementioned mission. If I could point to two institutions who have fulfilled and continue to fulfill this mission the most admirably, it would be the University of Louisville and the University of Cincinnati - both very historic (1798 & 1819) and very venerable universities.

Though I have a different viewpoint, I would agree with NZMO's final statement, I guess (though I would leave it at ND only). Until some other school (and South Florida, Temple, Memphis, or somebody - anybody - else might come along and leapfrog either UC or UConn) adds more than they take, there's simply no compelling reason they should be invited.

I think that it's more of a totality of circumstances argument with academics. If Memphis had an athletic department that was as good as UL's, as profitable as Texas', and as close to standout recruits as Miami's, then I am fairly confident that they would have an open invitation to join the ACC. Extreme outliers aside, I don't think that poor academics will completely block a school. I just think that it will make is much, much more expensive for the school to join. UL fields insanely competitive teams, is extremely profitable, and is in a talent-rich area, so it was worth it to look the other way and hope UL academics improve, which I think they will. That isn't the case for every school. So, just because UL made the grade doesn't mean that the next school will.

Not that you accused me of this, but to clarify anyway, I have no ill will towards UC and am sure that there are many smart/successful students and alumni who got/are getting a great education there, and I am sure that there are many future UC students who will get a great education at UC and go on to be successful. However, UC's academic reputation is weak by ACC standards and that matters to the ACC, as I think it should.

As for your second comment, I completely agree that there is absolutely no relationship between academics and integrity. For instance, MIT did research on special needs kids by tricking them into drinking radioactive milk. Furthermore, Stanford has even tortured test subjects in the name of psychology studies, and so has Yale. All three of those schools have great academic rankings, but have clearly demonstrated a complete lack of integrity (at times). Heck, look at OSU's peer institution, Penn State. PSU's athletic department is the poster child for lacking integrity. If Gordon Gee accused UL of lacking integrity because its academic ranking leaves something to be desired, then the irony is beyond thick given both his current employer, and OSU's current conference affiliation.* However, FWIW, I would rather be in a conference with great academic institutions than institutions with integrity. IMO, one institution's academic prowess (or lack thereof) affects related institutions, but an institution's integrity (or lack thereof) does not.

*I don't know what Mr. Gee's exact words were. IMO, he is a nice-enough guy who needs to learn how to keep his mouth shut. I met him years ago when he was running Vanderbilt and he hated football back then (his words), so for the life of me, I can't figure out why he feels the need to get so involved in OSU's athletic program. He should leave it to the AD and stick to what he knows.

(06-01-2013 05:50 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Why worry about stuff that's out of your control when you don't have to?

I'm a former Big East fan whose school was passed over twice by the ACC?

Cheers,
Neil

(06-01-2013 04:21 PM)omniorange Wrote:  I continue to be amazed by those that somehow believe a GOR is bullet-proof. Is it better than a simple exit fee? Yes. But I don't think it's such a sure iron-clad thing as many others do.

I think sometime over the next 5 years either Texas or Oklahoma or both will challenge it and we'll find out how legal proof it is then. And if it fails to be upheld in the courts, I hope the conference has improved itself significantly in terms of on the field results and in terms of TV monies. If not then things could get very problematic in 6-7 years time.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-01-2013 05:18 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  Neil,

You are right, the GOR is a contract, nothing more. It is a means of measuring damages and is a starting point for negotiating a separation, a costly starting point, but a starting point nonetheless. I don't think a Baylor or TTech or WVU could be the one to break a GOR; however, as you stated, a Texas or Oklahoma with the power and TV might and the finances to do so.

Isn't there a significant difference between the Big XII GoR and the Big Ten, Pac-12, and ACC GoRs? Specifically, the Big XII GoR doesn't cover 3rd Tier rights, while the other 3 GoRs do. I would think that distinction is HUGE.

(a little like locking 2 of your 3 exterior doors and thinking your home is secure)

(06-01-2013 08:08 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 05:50 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Why worry about stuff that's out of your control when you don't have to?

I'm a former Big East fan whose school was passed over twice by the ACC?

Cheers,
Neil

Now Neil.....Syracuse was not passed over, we both know that if Jake Crouthamel had been a little more receptive when the ACC called, Syracuse might have been invited instead of Florida State.
The ACC's mistake at the time was being short sighted in not inviting both Florida State and Syracuse to become a ten team league.

(06-01-2013 10:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 08:08 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 05:50 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Why worry about stuff that's out of your control when you don't have to?

I'm a former Big East fan whose school was passed over twice by the ACC?

Cheers,
Neil

Now Neil.....Syracuse was not passed over, we both know that if Jake Crouthamel had been a little more receptive when the ACC called, Syracuse might have been invited instead of Florida State.
The ACC's mistake at the time was being short sighted in not inviting both Florida State and Syracuse to become a ten team league.

Arguably and Miami (with baggage) and Pitt. That would have been a 12 team conference with a championship game, which could have been HUGE. Imagine FSU and Miami fighting for a NC every year with VT, Syracuse, GT, and Clemson fielding LEGIT teams.

(06-01-2013 08:17 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-01-2013 04:21 PM)omniorange Wrote:  I continue to be amazed by those that somehow believe a GOR is bullet-proof. Is it better than a simple exit fee? Yes. But I don't think it's such a sure iron-clad thing as many others do.

I think sometime over the next 5 years either Texas or Oklahoma or both will challenge it and we'll find out how legal proof it is then. And if it fails to be upheld in the courts, I hope the conference has improved itself significantly in terms of on the field results and in terms of TV monies. If not then things could get very problematic in 6-7 years time.
Cheers,
Neil

(06-01-2013 05:18 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  Neil,

You are right, the GOR is a contract, nothing more. It is a means of measuring damages and is a starting point for negotiating a separation, a costly starting point, but a starting point nonetheless. I don't think a Baylor or TTech or WVU could be the one to break a GOR; however, as you stated, a Texas or Oklahoma with the power and TV might and the finances to do so.

Isn't there a significant difference between the Big XII GoR and the Big Ten, Pac-12, and ACC GoRs? Specifically, the Big XII GoR doesn't cover 3rd Tier rights, while the other 3 GoRs do. I would think that distinction is HUGE.

In principal, GORs are similar. In practice they differ mainly in that the TV partnerships are stronger in the non Big 12 GORs. The lack of 3rd tier may be a part of this, but the other conferences have or are working towards conference networks. So your suggestion may be weigh heavily in the scheme of things. I think that if there ws a Big 12 conference network, the 3rd tier rights would be part of it.

In the Big 12, there is still less ties to hold a school in the agreement. This is greatly affected by the fact that the two premier teams can also financially afford to break the agreement, if they so choose. Incidently, these two schools have multiple options should they leave while the others are severely limited by one or more factors.

The net result is that the Acc, Pac 12, SEC and B1G have no real interst in breaking the GOR, especially by those that can afford to and would have options. The Big 12 remains safe unless UT and/or OU changes their mind.
(a little like locking 2 of your 3 exterior doors and thinking your home is secure)

The above opinion is mine only. As the GORs have not been tested, it is pure speculation. HM's suggestion that third tier rights may be the weaking point may be correct. At the least it is probably a big factor.

Gee, 69, said in a statement that he decided during a vacation last week to step down on July 1.

Gee out the door July 1

What the article doesn't tell you is that Delaney informed OSU over the weekend that Gee would be retiring at the end of the fiscal year due to his comments about the Commish and for sharing his plan for ultimate Atlantic seaboard domination.

I'm only half joking.

And College Foootball Live led off with it today. If people don't see their agenda to hate on OSU, then they have their head in the sand. I think Gee got as much coverage as the Miami scandal. That was 2 days and then pretty much over except snippets for C. Football Live.

Andre Ware saying something like "I guess all the pressure got to them" was amusing considering ESPN was a driving force behind a few bad jokes in fricken December. What a joke of a channel. The Big 10 should tell them to shove it and go to Fox.

(06-04-2013 05:44 PM)Ragu Wrote:  And College Foootball Live led off with it today. If people don't see their agenda to hate on OSU, then they have their head in the sand. I think Gee got as much coverage as the Miami scandal. That was 2 days and then pretty much over except snippets for C. Football Live.

Andre Ware saying something like "I guess all the pressure got to them" was amusing considering ESPN was a driving force behind a few bad jokes in fricken December. What a joke of a channel. The Big 10 should tell them to shove it and go to Fox.

That might be what the BiG plans on doing anyway regardless of what or how ESPN covers things.

Cheers,
Neil

Cincinnati and UCONN seriously dent the Big 10's path of destruction....Totally surround Ohio by ND, Pitt and UL then go at the heart by taking Cincy. This at least gives you presence in Indianapolis/Chicago , Louisville, Cincy-Dayton, and Pitts/west PA ...this puts a strangle on Columbus from 3 of the 4 sides and the only side not taken is Cleveland and it is not a College market town anyway... market anyway....Then take UConn and with BC you lock up the entire New England market. These are the areas where they are weakest. Cincinnati has the perfect location, top 28 tv market, great tv ratings, i billion dollar endowment, top 25 most beautiful campus in world, good to great academics, two top 25 teams in Football and Basketball ...tremendous recruiting area for ACC now would open..top research area and institution. We WOULD LOVE ACC, but you need to soon b-4 Big 12 realizes we would help there too.
We would even take less money until the next contract is done!

Please . Cincy is irrelevant to most of Ohio Don't try to pull that junk to fool people. The Cleveland and Toledo areas are way in favor of OSU over Cincy.

This conference doesn't need anymore northern teams. Never going to happen. Enjoy the AAC.

And Cincy does not have great academics