With all due respect, being rivals with someone doesn't make you equals. You guys have a nice basketball history and even that doesn't touch Louisville's. The same ESPN rankings has Louisville #6 and Memphis #19...big difference.

Leadership is a big deal too. I've heard Memphis fans saying "watch over the next couple of years" for way more than a couple of years. As many have said, it's great you have passion for your school and no one is saying that Memphis is a bad school. We're just saying it's not a good choice right now and not what we need.

It doesn't help that most of your arguments are based purely on speculation, "what ifs" and "could be's". If what you say is true and Memphis, Louisville and Cincy are equals then you would have stepped up and dominated CUSA once we left. You'd be in a better position than you are now. Unfortunately it didn't happen and that falls back on your leadership. No one is saying it's fair...we're just saying it is what it is.

Well, I think we've thoroughly exhausted the subject. Thanks for the debate guys.

(12-08-2012 12:05 PM)GrandmasterTiger Wrote:  1. It is true that perception becomes reality. But, would you not agree that if Memphis were accepted into the ACC, that perception would be elevated? And then the rankings would follow. You know as well as I that rankings are simply popularity contests and for the most part don't really tell you much about how good teachers and curriculum are. Perhaps the more accurate measure of a universities education is the professionals that come out of that university.

2. I said the size and culture of the town ARE the reasons WHY the NBA team and the University team are BOTH successful. But, again, its not about the reason that this is, it is about the fact that this is. It proves that the NBA team did not take away from the success of the U of M basketball program. In fact, as I stated before, it has enhanced it. Kids in Memphis grow up thinking they can play for the Tigers and then the Grizzlies. In a place that has so much high school talent, that improves the basketball product at all levels -- including church leagues, AAU, and the like.

3. Again, Memphis has yet to "Max out". I submit that joining the ACC would give them the chance to see what maxing out looks like.

4. I think this is possible because the only difference between Memphis and Louisville/Cincinnati is money and affiliation. These 3 programs were equals in football until Memphis was left behind in CUSA. Also, I have seen what we have done with basketball. We have great talent here in football as well, we just don't get that talent currently because of conference affiliation. But, like I said earlier, the money and value is now being placed into football regardless.

Watch the Memphis program over the next couple years and see what happens. FedEx is pumping money into the program and had a major hand in the hiring of our AD and Coaching staff. We won more games this year than the last 3 combined. Next year we'll see more improvement and the next we should be respectable. I foresee emphasis being placed on football from this point forward.

Memphis Basketball will compete for a national championship over the next few years, and football will get to top 25 status within the next 3 years. I think that will help the ACC.

1. Yes, I am sure Memphis' academic ranking would improve. But, as it stands right now, Memphis has well over 100 spots to go (maybe as high as 170). And, conversely just as Memphis would improve, wouldn't every existing ACC school take a hit? Why would the existing ACC schools want that?

2. It doesn't prove anything. Didn't you just say that the Grizzlies JUST threw down a lot of money to elevate their on-court product. How do you know how that's going to workout? It isn't that colleges can't get good with a pro team. It's that colelges can't stay good with a pro team, because as soon as the college has a bad season, everyone forgets that they exist (see pic of a Miami football game). Anyway, who established that it did work? Other than when Paypal Cal bought a team, when has Memphis been great while the Grizzlies were in town?

Miami 18 minutes before kickoff in a bad year:
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODA...2a14e2a4ec

Miami in a good year:
http://canespundit.com/wp-content/upload...nlife2.jpg

Tennessee in a bad year:
http://smokeys-trail.com/HallFame/stadium-night.jpg

That's the beauty of the fact that there is nothing else to do in Knoxville but go to the game.

3. That logic applies to any school that wants membership to the ACC. Where is the evidence that Memphis would actually hit those high numbers? How many people are going to go to Memphis v. WF/BC/Duke football game at Memphis? Unless the city of Memphis either really, really loves/hates Duke/WF/BC, then I can assure you that you aren't going to hit 40-60k fans. More importantly, who in Fla wants to see FSU v. Memphis at FSU? Even if Memphis does discover a Brian Kelly, like UC did, I don't think Memphis has enough of a name to excite FSU fans. It would be like the OB this year against Northern Illinois.

4. If you think being in the ACC means that you are going to start out-recruiting SEC teams, then I think you are mistaken. Catdaddy will tell you all about it lol However, even if it was all abou tmoney, why would dumping money into Memphis be any better than dumping money into some other school? Furthermore, wouldn't the loss of money hurt the existing ACC schools? Why would they take that loss?

I don't think the current membership of ACC teams will stick around.
Here's why:
The B1G conference will generate too much income with their cable TV network for the ACC to compete. If they offer any of the following schools they will leave:
- Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh

The SEC is developing a network so their income will also increase. I think if they offer any of the following schools, these schools will leave too:
- Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami

I do not think the Big XII is as big a threat in that they will earn more money than the ACC but not enough to justify the buyout of $50 million.

I think the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools will stay together as they are the core of the ACC.

(12-09-2012 10:54 AM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I don't think the current membership of ACC teams will stick around.
Here's why:
The B1G conference will generate too much income with their cable TV network for the ACC to compete. If they offer any of the following schools they will leave:
- Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh

The SEC is developing a network so their income will also increase. I think if they offer any of the following schools, these schools will leave too:
- Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami

I do not think the Big XII is as big a threat in that they will earn more money than the ACC but not enough to justify the buyout of $50 million.

I think the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools will stay together as they are the core of the ACC.

However, you forgot to add:
The B1G will never offer Syracuse or Pittsburgh
The SEC will never offer Clemson, FSU, GT or Miami

So if you are correct about VA and NC schools, then the only flight risk is BC. Somehow, that's ok with me.

Memphis basketball couldn't win anything in Conference USA left until UC and UofL left, and with Pastner I don't see the program getting to an elite level. I'm sick of Memphis fans touting their basketball success as if it compensates for the dismal football. Don't take this the wrong way, because I do want Memphis to be successful but it is just annoying to see it filling up thread after thread on the Big East Board and now here too.

(12-09-2012 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 10:54 AM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I don't think the current membership of ACC teams will stick around.
Here's why:
The B1G conference will generate too much income with their cable TV network for the ACC to compete. If they offer any of the following schools they will leave:
- Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh

The SEC is developing a network so their income will also increase. I think if they offer any of the following schools, these schools will leave too:
- Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami

I do not think the Big XII is as big a threat in that they will earn more money than the ACC but not enough to justify the buyout of $50 million.

I think the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools will stay together as they are the core of the ACC.

However, you forgot to add:
The B1G will never offer Syracuse or Pittsburgh
The SEC will never offer Clemson, FSU, GT or Miami

So if you are correct about VA and NC schools, then the only flight risk is BC. Somehow, that's ok with me.

How do you figure? I can see schools like Iowa not being too enthused to play Syracuse, but I can see schools like Iowa being WAY less enthused about playing BC. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of having BC in my conference. But, unlike Iowa fans, BC is only a state away from my school and has a long history with my school. If the B1G added RU and UMD to make PSU happy, then I think Pitt and SU are possibilities. Joe Pa is dead and Pitt and PSU are starting to play each other again. Also, G*d knows that RU will want SU, so they don't feel like they are on an island. I have also yet to hear a reason (that makes sense) why the SEC wouldn't eventually want FSU. I can see not wanting to elevate Clemson or GT, but FSU is already elite, and I don't think that's going to change. I agree about Miami though. They are a great school with awesome potential (see Miami from 1980-2001), but I don't see the SEC getting too excited about a private school with good academics.

(12-09-2012 02:18 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 10:54 AM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I don't think the current membership of ACC teams will stick around.
Here's why:
The B1G conference will generate too much income with their cable TV network for the ACC to compete. If they offer any of the following schools they will leave:
- Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh

The SEC is developing a network so their income will also increase. I think if they offer any of the following schools, these schools will leave too:
- Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami

I do not think the Big XII is as big a threat in that they will earn more money than the ACC but not enough to justify the buyout of $50 million.

I think the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools will stay together as they are the core of the ACC.

However, you forgot to add:
The B1G will never offer Syracuse or Pittsburgh
The SEC will never offer Clemson, FSU, GT or Miami

So if you are correct about VA and NC schools, then the only flight risk is BC. Somehow, that's ok with me.

How do you figure? I can see schools like Iowa not being too enthused to play Syracuse, but I can see schools like Iowa being WAY less enthused about playing BC. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of having BC in my conference. But, unlike Iowa fans, BC is only a state away from my school and has a long history with my school. If the B1G added RU and UMD to make PSU happy, then I think Pitt and SU are possibilities. Joe Pa is dead and Pitt and PSU are starting to play each other again. Also, G*d knows that RU will want SU, so they don't feel like they are on an island. I have also yet to hear a reason (that makes sense) why the SEC wouldn't eventually want FSU. I can see not wanting to elevate Clemson or GT, but FSU is already elite, and I don't think that's going to change. I agree about Miami though. They are a great school with awesome potential (see Miami from 1980-2001), but I don't see the SEC getting too excited about a private school with good academics.

let me help you out, the SEC already owns the state of F lorida,Georgia & South Carolina, so adding FSU,Clemson or G.Tech add nothing. second & this is more important, Georgia,South Carolina & Florida all hate their rivals & will do everything in their power to keep any advantage they have over them. If Auburn wasn't already in the SEC them Bama would freeze them out to. the competition between these schools is a whole lot deeper than maybe some of our northern members understand

(12-09-2012 02:57 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 02:18 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 10:54 AM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I don't think the current membership of ACC teams will stick around.
Here's why:
The B1G conference will generate too much income with their cable TV network for the ACC to compete. If they offer any of the following schools they will leave:
- Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh

The SEC is developing a network so their income will also increase. I think if they offer any of the following schools, these schools will leave too:
- Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami

I do not think the Big XII is as big a threat in that they will earn more money than the ACC but not enough to justify the buyout of $50 million.

I think the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools will stay together as they are the core of the ACC.

However, you forgot to add:
The B1G will never offer Syracuse or Pittsburgh
The SEC will never offer Clemson, FSU, GT or Miami

So if you are correct about VA and NC schools, then the only flight risk is BC. Somehow, that's ok with me.

How do you figure? I can see schools like Iowa not being too enthused to play Syracuse, but I can see schools like Iowa being WAY less enthused about playing BC. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of having BC in my conference. But, unlike Iowa fans, BC is only a state away from my school and has a long history with my school. If the B1G added RU and UMD to make PSU happy, then I think Pitt and SU are possibilities. Joe Pa is dead and Pitt and PSU are starting to play each other again. Also, G*d knows that RU will want SU, so they don't feel like they are on an island. I have also yet to hear a reason (that makes sense) why the SEC wouldn't eventually want FSU. I can see not wanting to elevate Clemson or GT, but FSU is already elite, and I don't think that's going to change. I agree about Miami though. They are a great school with awesome potential (see Miami from 1980-2001), but I don't see the SEC getting too excited about a private school with good academics.

let me help you out, the SEC already owns the state of F lorida,Georgia & South Carolina, so adding FSU,Clemson or G.Tech add nothing. second & this is more important, Georgia,South Carolina & Florida all hate their rivals & will do everything in their power to keep any advantage they have over them. If Auburn wasn't already in the SEC them Bama would freeze them out to. the competition between these schools is a whole lot deeper than maybe some of our northern members understand

What do you mean they "own Florida?" I can assure you that they don't. My buddy has a house there, and he is not "the SEC." The SEC might have a presence there, but so what? If FSU brings more fan interest than the other schools who want to be in the SEC, and the SEC wants to add a school, then if the SEC wants to maximize revenues, they will add FSU. I only see two reasons why they wouldn't. The first reason is if they think adding a school in another state will increase the value of the conference as a whole because it will elevate the level of play conference-wide, because good players from that state will play for teams in the conference. However, the SEC doesn't have any problems recruiting in any neighboring states, so that point is a mute point. And, the second reason is that if the SEC believes that some other school has more upside than FSU, then they might bet that conference affiliation will cause that school to realize their potential. So, they might add that school. But, I don't see any two schools in the area that have the upside to surpass FSU. Yes, I understand that the SEC might gamble that any unaffiliated sports fans likely to allign with FSU are also likely to align with UF and low ball FSU's relevant growth potential, but even if they do that, what two schools are a better choice? FSU brings a proven product (in both football, which is the big bread winner, and basketball, which is great programming for a TV network) and a solid (passionate) fan base that watches TV. The large and pasisonate fan base will help the SEC demand high carriage charges, and the large fan base that watches TV and FSU's proven product on the firld/court will be great for ratings, which will improve revenues from comemrcials. Throw in the fact that adding FSU will help the SEC's already good football reputation, and SEC recruiting might even improve (a little), which only helps FSU's cause. If the SEC decides to spend the cost of expanding (i.e. dilluting the relationship between schools), the I don't see why FSU is off the list. I have yet to hear a valid reason that is well grounded in logic.

Also, "hate rivals" are a good thing. Think of how much money SU v. UCONN/GU and Duke v. UNC/UMD has made over the years. PSU even threatened to leave the B1G, because they lacked hated rivals. What you said doesn't make sense.

(12-09-2012 03:15 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 02:57 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 02:18 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 02:03 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 10:54 AM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I don't think the current membership of ACC teams will stick around.
Here's why:
The B1G conference will generate too much income with their cable TV network for the ACC to compete. If they offer any of the following schools they will leave:
- Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh

The SEC is developing a network so their income will also increase. I think if they offer any of the following schools, these schools will leave too:
- Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami

I do not think the Big XII is as big a threat in that they will earn more money than the ACC but not enough to justify the buyout of $50 million.

I think the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools will stay together as they are the core of the ACC.

However, you forgot to add:
The B1G will never offer Syracuse or Pittsburgh
The SEC will never offer Clemson, FSU, GT or Miami

So if you are correct about VA and NC schools, then the only flight risk is BC. Somehow, that's ok with me.

How do you figure? I can see schools like Iowa not being too enthused to play Syracuse, but I can see schools like Iowa being WAY less enthused about playing BC. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of having BC in my conference. But, unlike Iowa fans, BC is only a state away from my school and has a long history with my school. If the B1G added RU and UMD to make PSU happy, then I think Pitt and SU are possibilities. Joe Pa is dead and Pitt and PSU are starting to play each other again. Also, G*d knows that RU will want SU, so they don't feel like they are on an island. I have also yet to hear a reason (that makes sense) why the SEC wouldn't eventually want FSU. I can see not wanting to elevate Clemson or GT, but FSU is already elite, and I don't think that's going to change. I agree about Miami though. They are a great school with awesome potential (see Miami from 1980-2001), but I don't see the SEC getting too excited about a private school with good academics.

let me help you out, the SEC already owns the state of F lorida,Georgia & South Carolina, so adding FSU,Clemson or G.Tech add nothing. second & this is more important, Georgia,South Carolina & Florida all hate their rivals & will do everything in their power to keep any advantage they have over them. If Auburn wasn't already in the SEC them Bama would freeze them out to. the competition between these schools is a whole lot deeper than maybe some of our northern members understand

What do you mean they "own Florida?" I can assure you that they don't. My buddy has a house there, and he is not "the SEC." The SEC might have a presence there, but so what? If FSU brings more fan interest than the other schools who want to be in the SEC, and the SEC wants to add a school, then if the SEC wants to maximize revenues, they will add FSU. I only see two reasons why they wouldn't. The first reason is if they think adding a school in another state will increase the value of the conference as a whole because it will elevate the level of play conference-wide, because good players from that state will play for teams in the conference. However, the SEC doesn't have any problems recruiting in any neighboring states, so that point is a mute point. And, the second reason is that if the SEC believes that some other school has more upside than FSU, then they might bet that conference affiliation will cause that school to realize their potential. So, they might add that school. But, I don't see any two schools in the area that have the upside to surpass FSU. Yes, I understand that the SEC might gamble that any unaffiliated sports fans likely to allign with FSU are also likely to align with UF and low ball FSU's relevant growth potential, but even if they do that, what two schools are a better choice? FSU brings a proven product (in both football, which is the big bread winner, and basketball, which is great programming for a TV network) and a solid (passionate) fan base that watches TV. The large and pasisonate fan base will help the SEC demand high carriage charges, and the large fan base that watches TV and FSU's proven product on the firld/court will be great for ratings, which will improve revenues from comemrcials. Throw in the fact that adding FSU will help the SEC's already good football reputation, and SEC recruiting might even improve (a little), which only helps FSU's cause. If the SEC decides to spend the cost of expanding (i.e. dilluting the relationship between schools), the I don't see why FSU is off the list. I have yet to hear a valid reason that is well grounded in logic.

Also, "hate rivals" are a good thing. Think of how much money SU v. UCONN/GU and Duke v. UNC/UMD has made over the years. PSU even threatened to leave the B1G, because they lacked hated rivals. What you said doesn't make sense.

they own the state of florida in the sense that their network will have guranteed coverage state wide, same as GA & SC. The reasoning is not valid from your point of view, so theirs nothing i can say that's going to change your mind.

(12-09-2012 03:36 PM)mj4life Wrote:  they own the state of florida in the sense that their network will have guranteed coverage state wide, same as GA & SC. The reasoning is not valid from your point of view, so theirs nothing i can say that's going to change your mind.

They already have coverage all over any state that they want. There is nothing stopping them from stringing together a sh*tload of public access channels state-wide for any/every state. However, their problem is that they can't do it in every state at a profit. That's a product of supply and demand. And, since people all over the US of A spend the same money, the money spent in Fla is just as good as the money spent in NC. If adding FSU would increase the demand (both long term and short term) more than the other schools, and if that is enough to convince the SEC to add a school, then, barring indirect factors, the SEC will add FSU. Yes, adding a school in Virginia would mean that they might be able to collect carriage charges from more markets, but adding a popular school in Florida would mean that they could collect higher carriage charges from existing markets. At the end of the day, popularity being equal, it's a "100 * $1.00 = $100.00 v. $100.00 = 50 * $2.00" type situation. So, ultimately this is a popularity contest, and I fail to see why FSU shouldn't be included.

Actually, all other factors being equal, adding a nearby school is better, because travel is cheaper and easier, and rivalries are more likely to form.

*Indirect factors might be improvements in recruiting from adding a school that is outside the conference's current geographic footprint, or improved coverage, because sports writers in a greater area will cover the happenings of the conference. However, these factors are of minimal concern for the SEC.

SEC has the "Gentleman's Agreement" to not add schools in states they already have membership. It's the reason why despire Mike Slive suggesting they Add Louisville, we were shot down. They already had UK. It's also the same reason FSU isn't already there. They would have been a better choice than both Mizzou and A&M and yet were passed over due to the gentleman's agreement.

(12-09-2012 04:17 PM)krux Wrote:  SEC has the "Gentleman's Agreement" to not add schools in states they already have membership. It's the reason why despire Mike Slive suggesting they Add Louisville, we were shot down. They already had UK. It's also the same reason FSU isn't already there. They would have been a better choice than both Mizzou and A&M and yet were passed over due to the gentleman's agreement.

Kentucky,Georgia,South Carolina & Florida will block any of the above named schools from getting offered membership. like i said it's more deeper than just how much you improve the bottom line

(12-09-2012 04:17 PM)krux Wrote:  SEC has the "Gentleman's Agreement" to not add schools in states they already have membership. It's the reason why despire Mike Slive suggesting they Add Louisville, we were shot down. They already had UK. It's also the same reason FSU isn't already there. They would have been a better choice than both Mizzou and A&M and yet were passed over due to the gentleman's agreement.

I've heard about the supposed "gentleman's agreement," but I haven't seen any actual proof (in fact, the SEC invited FSU in '91), and I have a very hard time believing that the SEC wouldn't let a team like Texas join if Texas asked to join. All I have found are articles by writers that cite each other, and none of them give a credible reason as to why the SEC has a supposed blanket "gentleman's agreement." I can see how adding UL would hurt UK's recruiting, but FSU's recruiting is elite in football, and the SEC isn't as good in basketball as the ACC, so FSU's addition might actually help UF basketball. Using a food metaphor, FSU is already at the table eating about as much as they can possibly eat. UL is good, but UL recruiting isn't elite. So, if UL was elevated to the SEC, then their recruiting would improve and, using my metaphor, they would be eating more, which would mean that all the existing schools would have to eat less. That's why, as noted in an earlier post, I can see arguments against Clemson and Georgia Tech (although, I can also see arguments for them). However, like I said, FSU is a different story.

It could play out a number of different ways.

I saw one scenario called the Big Atlantic Conference and it looked like this:

BC
WAKE
DUKE
NC
VIRGINIA
CINNCI
UCONN
USF
MEMPHIS
TEMPLE
UCF
LOUISVILLE
VILLA
ND
GTOWN
ST. JOHN'S

VT and NC STATE to SEC
GT, MIAMI, FL.ST. to BIG 12

So the Big 12 would be at 13?

NO, they pick up others as well and either go 14 or 16.