(03-15-2014 01:36 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Georgetown. Navy as a football only. Take that Maryland and Jim Delany.

This only happens when/if: a) Notre Dame agrees to three more football games; b) Penn State then says no to the 16th spot; and c) we decide we need 16 basketball members rather than 15.

If Navy football is a condition of Notre Dame playing three more games a year, then we could call Georgetown first (give them a week or two), then St. Johns, Nova, Richmond and Davidson. First one to say yes gets the last slot in the ACC.

Or we stay at 15 for basketball, which is clunky for the Tournament but as good as any number between 11-16 the rest of the year.

Going 18+ in basketball is horrible. Some teams wouldn't play each other at all every year, much less home and away. And the Tournament would be even clunkier than it is now.

I live in the DC area, and agree that a Navy/Georgetown combo would probably far more than make up for Maryland's departure in this area. 4/5 of the schools that get the most coverage in the local media would be ACC. Those four would be playing each other, while the 5th team is sitting on a bus somewhere in Michigan. I expect reviving Syracuse/Georgetown as an in-conference counterpart to UNC/Duke would also make a lot of money.

If Georgetown doesn't bite, St. Johns and Nova would be valuable for their cities/markets and history with the ex Big East teams, Richmond and Davidson bring elite academics and some great basketball history with ACC teams. Any of those four would be fine with me if we somehow had to have 16 members for basketball and Georgetown wasn't interested.

No reason to do anything at all until Notre Dame steps up for three more football games, though.

(03-16-2014 12:54 AM)opossum Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 01:36 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Georgetown. Navy as a football only. Take that Maryland and Jim Delany.

This only happens when/if: a) Notre Dame agrees to three more football games; b) Penn State then says no to the 16th spot; and c) we decide we need 16 basketball members rather than 15.

If Navy football is a condition of Notre Dame playing three more games a year, then we could call Georgetown first (give them a week or two), then St. Johns, Nova, Richmond and Davidson. First one to say yes gets the last slot in the ACC.

Or we stay at 15 for basketball, which is clunky for the Tournament but as good as any number between 11-16 the rest of the year.

Going 18+ in basketball is horrible. Some teams wouldn't play each other at all every year, much less home and away. And the Tournament would be even clunkier than it is now.

I live in the DC area, and agree that a Navy/Georgetown combo would probably far more than make up for Maryland's departure in this area. 4/5 of the schools that get the most coverage in the local media would be ACC. Those four would be playing each other, while the 5th team is sitting on a bus somewhere in Michigan. I expect reviving Syracuse/Georgetown as an in-conference counterpart to UNC/Duke would also make a lot of money.

If Georgetown doesn't bite, St. Johns and Nova would be valuable for their cities/markets and history with the ex Big East teams, Richmond and Davidson bring elite academics and some great basketball history with ACC teams. Any of those four would be fine with me if we somehow had to have 16 members for basketball and Georgetown wasn't interested.

No reason to do anything at all until Notre Dame steps up for three more football games, though.

If that is the condition, then I think that all further ACC expansion talk may be dead forever.

(03-16-2014 08:09 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 12:54 AM)opossum Wrote:  ...No reason to do anything at all until Notre Dame steps up for three more football games, though.

If that is the condition, then I think that all further ACC expansion talk may be dead forever.

INCONCEIVABLE?

(03-15-2014 01:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Not like I would like to see it happen, but I doubt ND will ever join in football. Getting the Basketball tournament to 16 teams, offer either Georgetown, George Washington (DC area), St. Joe's, or Nova (Philly area) for the 16th team. Thoughts?

If it was up to me, I would offer an invite to one of Georgetown, Villanova, and Connecticut as a non-football member (with an understanding that they will *never* be a football member).

Notre Dame will up it's annual games played in the ACC if the following happens, the divisions are done away with, the right Notre Dame partner is added, and the league football title race has to include at least once OOC rival in the mix.

This means the ACC has to make room for ND to include some two team combination of Navy, USC, Stanford in the league football standings to get to the ACCCG. It also defacto means allowing FSU, GT, Clemson, and Louisville to count Florida, Georgia, SC, and Kentucky, and perhaps allowing Pitt to count Penn State. However before folks get too worried about the DC area, remember that UVA and VT cover it very well - 40% of the DC metro is in Northern VA.

What the ACC lost with Maryland was Baltimore, not DC. If you fix the ACC divisions issue you can add Navy for football and one other team for non-football sports but here's the issues -
1. Do UVa and VT WANT Georgetown in the ACC and in their area?
2. Does Syracuse want St. John's in the NYC area?
3. Does Pitt want Villanova in the Philly area?
4. Does the ACC feel comfortable harming the New Big East?
5. What will ESPN add money for?

I'm not sure there are 12 votes to hurt the New Big East. It will take ND at least 5-6 years before they are psychologically ready to up their league games. They can't buck their fan base and it's foolish for the ACC to make them choose. I can't see how anything happens until the B-5 pulls out of the current structure or gain NCAA autonomy.

(03-15-2014 01:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Not like I would like to see it happen, but I doubt ND will ever join in football. Getting the Basketball tournament to 16 teams, offer either Georgetown, George Washington (DC area), St. Joe's, or Nova (Philly area) for the 16th team. Thoughts?

GWU and St. Joe's? Shirley, you can't be serious.

(03-15-2014 02:00 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  If I was going to add a basketball only, I wouldn't add just one. I'd take Georgetown, Villanova and St. John's. That would finish off the Big East. Allow the ACC to take over Madison Square Garden. Enhance the basketball product and make the ACC Network must see tv in Philly, DC and NYC.

Yup.

(03-15-2014 02:04 PM)mj4life Wrote:  I might have been in favor of a BBall only add in the past but with the coming dividing line between the power conference schools & the rest of D1 make that less likely & probably doesn't make sense anymore.

I don't see it as an issue. The basketball-onlies would be getting the same basketball cut as the rest of the conference. They would have a similar amount of non-football money to use to implement the changes made by power conference legislation.

(03-15-2014 02:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  What would be the motivation for adding somebody for basketball?

There is ZERO reason to go to 16 members. There's nothing special about 16 that can't also work with 15. Anyone talking about 4 pods of 4 teams is talking out their a**. With 18 conference games there'd be NO rotating partners. You'd only have home/away meetings with the same 3 teams EVERY year. To fix that you'd have to expand the conference schedule, and if you're going to expand the conference schedule, you don't need a 16th team in order to do that. There's nothing a 16-team ACCT does significantly better than a 15-team tournament. And while a school like Gtown would be a good addition, it wouldn't be an exceptional one like UK or KU and make a huge tv impact.

(03-15-2014 10:19 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Also, any team we add will have to add more money! We will not add a team that does not add value.

If the right team(s) was added, the ACC could secure states/metro areas that it doesn't have a strong foothold in and increase the potential value (and likelihood) of an ACC network. If adding Gtown, Nova and SJU was enough to get an ACC network started and for the ACC to receive the within-footprint rates for the ENTIRE eastern seaboard, I'd think they'd likely pay for themselves. That wouldn't include the bump in tv revenue by adding quality programs in large basketball-centric markets and likely securing a more lucrative ACCT tv contract and more appealing host site than Greensboruh.

With that said, there are legitimate reasons that have prevented the ACC from offering invites to potential "money-adding schools" and that may continue to prevent them from receiving invites in the future.

(03-16-2014 08:31 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Notre Dame will up it's annual games played in the ACC if the following happens, the divisions are done away with, the right Notre Dame partner is added, and the league football title race has to include at least once OOC rival in the mix.

This means the ACC has to make room for ND to include some two team combination of Navy, USC, Stanford in the league football standings to get to the ACCCG. It also defacto means allowing FSU, GT, Clemson, and Louisville to count Florida, Georgia, SC, and Kentucky, and perhaps allowing Pitt to count Penn State. However before folks get too worried about the DC area, remember that UVA and VT cover it very well - 40% of the DC metro is in Northern VA.

What the ACC lost with Maryland was Baltimore, not DC. If you fix the ACC divisions issue you can add Navy for football and one other team for non-football sports but here's the issues -
1. Do UVa and VT WANT Georgetown in the ACC and in their area?
2. Does Syracuse want St. John's in the NYC area?
3. Does Pitt want Villanova in the Philly area?
4. Does the ACC feel comfortable harming the New Big East?
5. What will ESPN add money for?

I'm not sure there are 12 votes to hurt the New Big East. It will take ND at least 5-6 years before they are psychologically ready to up their league games. They can't buck their fan base and it's foolish for the ACC to make them choose. I can't see how anything happens until the B-5 pulls out of the current structure or gain NCAA autonomy.

What. The. F***? All of it. But if nothing else, the bold part especially.

(03-17-2014 02:52 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 01:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Not like I would like to see it happen, but I doubt ND will ever join in football. Getting the Basketball tournament to 16 teams, offer either Georgetown, George Washington (DC area), St. Joe's, or Nova (Philly area) for the 16th team. Thoughts?

GWU and St. Joe's? Shirley, you can't be serious.

(03-15-2014 02:00 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  If I was going to add a basketball only, I wouldn't add just one. I'd take Georgetown, Villanova and St. John's. That would finish off the Big East. Allow the ACC to take over Madison Square Garden. Enhance the basketball product and make the ACC Network must see tv in Philly, DC and NYC.

Yup.

(03-15-2014 02:04 PM)mj4life Wrote:  I might have been in favor of a BBall only add in the past but with the coming dividing line between the power conference schools & the rest of D1 make that less likely & probably doesn't make sense anymore.

I don't see it as an issue. The basketball-onlies would be getting the same basketball cut as the rest of the conference. They would have a similar amount of non-football money to use to implement the changes made by power conference legislation.

(03-15-2014 02:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  What would be the motivation for adding somebody for basketball?

There is ZERO reason to go to 16 members. There's nothing special about 16 that can't also work with 15. Anyone talking about 4 pods of 4 teams is talking out their a**. With 18 conference games there'd be NO rotating partners. You'd only have home/away meetings with the same 3 teams EVERY year. To fix that you'd have to expand the conference schedule, and if you're going to expand the conference schedule, you don't need a 16th team in order to do that. There's nothing a 16-team ACCT does significantly better than a 15-team tournament. And while a school like Gtown would be a good addition, it wouldn't be an exceptional one like UK or KU and make a huge tv impact.

(03-15-2014 10:19 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Also, any team we add will have to add more money! We will not add a team that does not add value.

If the right team(s) was added, the ACC could secure states/metro areas that it doesn't have a strong foothold in and increase the potential value (and likelihood) of an ACC network. If adding Gtown, Nova and SJU was enough to get an ACC network started and for the ACC to receive the within-footprint rates for the ENTIRE eastern seaboard, I'd think they'd likely pay for themselves. That wouldn't include the bump in tv revenue by adding quality programs in large basketball-centric markets and likely securing a more lucrative ACCT tv contract and more appealing host site than Greensboruh.

With that said, there are legitimate reasons that have prevented the ACC from offering invites to potential "money-adding schools" and that may continue to prevent them from receiving invites in the future.

(03-16-2014 08:31 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Notre Dame will up it's annual games played in the ACC if the following happens, the divisions are done away with, the right Notre Dame partner is added, and the league football title race has to include at least once OOC rival in the mix.

This means the ACC has to make room for ND to include some two team combination of Navy, USC, Stanford in the league football standings to get to the ACCCG. It also defacto means allowing FSU, GT, Clemson, and Louisville to count Florida, Georgia, SC, and Kentucky, and perhaps allowing Pitt to count Penn State. However before folks get too worried about the DC area, remember that UVA and VT cover it very well - 40% of the DC metro is in Northern VA.

What the ACC lost with Maryland was Baltimore, not DC. If you fix the ACC divisions issue you can add Navy for football and one other team for non-football sports but here's the issues -
1. Do UVa and VT WANT Georgetown in the ACC and in their area?
2. Does Syracuse want St. John's in the NYC area?
3. Does Pitt want Villanova in the Philly area?
4. Does the ACC feel comfortable harming the New Big East?
5. What will ESPN add money for?

I'm not sure there are 12 votes to hurt the New Big East. It will take ND at least 5-6 years before they are psychologically ready to up their league games. They can't buck their fan base and it's foolish for the ACC to make them choose. I can't see how anything happens until the B-5 pulls out of the current structure or gain NCAA autonomy.

What. The. F***? All of it. But if nothing else, the bold part especially.

I am not sure about that either. As an ND fan, I don't want to see that happen, ever.

(03-17-2014 07:07 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 02:52 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 01:09 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Not like I would like to see it happen, but I doubt ND will ever join in football. Getting the Basketball tournament to 16 teams, offer either Georgetown, George Washington (DC area), St. Joe's, or Nova (Philly area) for the 16th team. Thoughts?

GWU and St. Joe's? Shirley, you can't be serious.

(03-15-2014 02:00 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  If I was going to add a basketball only, I wouldn't add just one. I'd take Georgetown, Villanova and St. John's. That would finish off the Big East. Allow the ACC to take over Madison Square Garden. Enhance the basketball product and make the ACC Network must see tv in Philly, DC and NYC.

Yup.

(03-15-2014 02:04 PM)mj4life Wrote:  I might have been in favor of a BBall only add in the past but with the coming dividing line between the power conference schools & the rest of D1 make that less likely & probably doesn't make sense anymore.

I don't see it as an issue. The basketball-onlies would be getting the same basketball cut as the rest of the conference. They would have a similar amount of non-football money to use to implement the changes made by power conference legislation.

(03-15-2014 02:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  What would be the motivation for adding somebody for basketball?

There is ZERO reason to go to 16 members. There's nothing special about 16 that can't also work with 15. Anyone talking about 4 pods of 4 teams is talking out their a**. With 18 conference games there'd be NO rotating partners. You'd only have home/away meetings with the same 3 teams EVERY year. To fix that you'd have to expand the conference schedule, and if you're going to expand the conference schedule, you don't need a 16th team in order to do that. There's nothing a 16-team ACCT does significantly better than a 15-team tournament. And while a school like Gtown would be a good addition, it wouldn't be an exceptional one like UK or KU and make a huge tv impact.

(03-15-2014 10:19 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Also, any team we add will have to add more money! We will not add a team that does not add value.

If the right team(s) was added, the ACC could secure states/metro areas that it doesn't have a strong foothold in and increase the potential value (and likelihood) of an ACC network. If adding Gtown, Nova and SJU was enough to get an ACC network started and for the ACC to receive the within-footprint rates for the ENTIRE eastern seaboard, I'd think they'd likely pay for themselves. That wouldn't include the bump in tv revenue by adding quality programs in large basketball-centric markets and likely securing a more lucrative ACCT tv contract and more appealing host site than Greensboruh.

With that said, there are legitimate reasons that have prevented the ACC from offering invites to potential "money-adding schools" and that may continue to prevent them from receiving invites in the future.

(03-16-2014 08:31 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Notre Dame will up it's annual games played in the ACC if the following happens, the divisions are done away with, the right Notre Dame partner is added, and the league football title race has to include at least once OOC rival in the mix.

This means the ACC has to make room for ND to include some two team combination of Navy, USC, Stanford in the league football standings to get to the ACCCG. It also defacto means allowing FSU, GT, Clemson, and Louisville to count Florida, Georgia, SC, and Kentucky, and perhaps allowing Pitt to count Penn State. However before folks get too worried about the DC area, remember that UVA and VT cover it very well - 40% of the DC metro is in Northern VA.

What the ACC lost with Maryland was Baltimore, not DC. If you fix the ACC divisions issue you can add Navy for football and one other team for non-football sports but here's the issues -
1. Do UVa and VT WANT Georgetown in the ACC and in their area?
2. Does Syracuse want St. John's in the NYC area?
3. Does Pitt want Villanova in the Philly area?
4. Does the ACC feel comfortable harming the New Big East?
5. What will ESPN add money for?

I'm not sure there are 12 votes to hurt the New Big East. It will take ND at least 5-6 years before they are psychologically ready to up their league games. They can't buck their fan base and it's foolish for the ACC to make them choose. I can't see how anything happens until the B-5 pulls out of the current structure or gain NCAA autonomy.

What. The. F***? All of it. But if nothing else, the bold part especially.

I am not sure about that either. As an ND fan, I don't want to see that happen, ever.

You may not want to see it and Marge may not understand it but one of the byproducts of the non divisional schedule is that the ACC can undertake a schedule that allows for 9 conference games or 8 conference games and an approved non-conference game. In order to determine who plays for the ACC Championship.

There are many ways to do it but the issue is pitting the two top teams against each other so that the winner makes the playoff. You are kidding yourself if you don't think Clemson's game with SC, and FSU's game with Florida don't enter into the ACC's ability to place a team in the playoff, so to minimize risk, the ACC will find a way to address that.

If it results in FSU, Clemson, GT, UK, and Pitt playing just 8 other ACC teams, and the rest playing 9 - so what? The point is no longer about the ACC championship - it's about making the playoff.

When it comes to ND, the ACC doesn't lose anything if they allow ND to participate if they play 8 or even as few as 7 games as long as they have to also count the results of USC and Stanford.

The Orange Bowl is now secondary to putting a team in the playoff.

I don't necessarily like this, but until the ACC champion is guaranteed a spot in the playoff, the ACC will do WHATEVER IT TAKES to ensure that an ACC team makes the playoff no matter what we the fans think or want.

If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,
Neil

(03-17-2014 12:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,
Neil

Why is it a non-starter? It's not like the ACC needs UConn, and UConn absolutely needs the ACC. Anyway, why are either of those schools better than either Nova or Georgetown? What's the advantage of adding an all sports member if the additional sport is going to drag the conference down?

That said, like you, I'm fine staying pat at 15 unless we can talk either State or Tejas into moving.

(03-17-2014 12:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,

Neil

Texas, Florida and Penn State would make it worthwhile to go to 18. A basketball only would just be plain stupid.

(03-17-2014 12:32 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,
Neil

Why is it a non-starter? It's not like the ACC needs UConn, and UConn absolutely needs the ACC. Anyway, why are either of those schools better than either Nova or Georgetown? What's the advantage of adding an all sports member if the additional sport is going to drag the conference down?

That said, like you, I'm fine staying pat at 15 unless we can talk either State or Tejas into moving.

Lots of schools need the ACC or another power conference. So I'm not sure what you are trying to say by attaching that to UConn for all sports but football.

It's a non-starter for both sides, imho. For the ACC, if they want to add a school for everything but football then choose either Georgetown or Nova for the DC or Philly markets. Saves on being pestered year after year to let UConn football in the league as well. And both the Hoyas and the Wildcats play lacrosse in hotbeds of lacrosse.

For UConn, the state pumped a lot of $$$ into elevating them to FBS. Why would they want to join the ACC for $5 million a year when they could make that in the AAC and not have to worry about scheduling a full slate of football games as an indy?

Cheers,
Neil

(03-17-2014 12:57 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:32 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,
Neil

Why is it a non-starter? It's not like the ACC needs UConn, and UConn absolutely needs the ACC. Anyway, why are either of those schools better than either Nova or Georgetown? What's the advantage of adding an all sports member if the additional sport is going to drag the conference down?

That said, like you, I'm fine staying pat at 15 unless we can talk either State or Tejas into moving.

Lots of schools need the ACC or another power conference. So I'm not sure what you are trying to say by attaching that to UConn for all sports but football.

It's a non-starter for both sides, imho. For the ACC, if they want to add a school for everything but football then choose either Georgetown or Nova for the DC or Philly markets. Saves on being pestered year after year to let UConn football in the league as well. And both the Hoyas and the Wildcats play lacrosse in hotbeds of lacrosse.

For UConn, the state pumped a lot of $$$ into elevating them to FBS. Why would they want to join the ACC for $5 million a year when they could make that in the AAC and not have to worry about scheduling a full slate of football games as an indy?

Cheers,
Neil

1. Need relates to bargaining power. If the ACC and UConn were to negotiate, the ACC would have a ton of bargaining power, whereas UConn would have next to none. Therefore, the ACC would be in a position to dictate the terms.
2. UConn makes $2 million/yr in the AAC in TV money. $5 million ACC TV dollars, higher tourney payouts, better opponents, and MAC/Ind football payouts ($1 million/yr?) are way in excess of anything that they make in the AAC. And, if they were to play FB in the MAC, they wouldn't have to worry about scheduling a full slate there, either. Sure, it wouldn't be glorious, but right now they're playing the likes of Tulsa and ECU, so there isn't a ton of room to fall.

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

UC basketball and football is better than the average ACC basketball and football. Other than somehow landing Penn State or getting Notre Dame to join in football, I'm not sure there's a better school when you consider eastern-based possibilities like WVU, UConn, UMD and Rutgers (and god-forbid, USF/UCF ). I think a conference network only adds to their potential value (which would be "good", not "excellent" like PSU/ND or the out-there notion of landing Texas).

---------------------

To the NC State "Insider": There's nothing to "understand". It's a stupid suggestion and isn't based in any sane or logical reality. Why would ACC schools agree to play some of the best ACC football programs LESS OFTEN? How weak would the ACC look if it had to include OOC games as ACC games to "boost" its playoff chances? It's an utterly ridiculous "proposition".

(03-17-2014 01:28 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:20 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If the ACC gets the rule changed for football championship games, better to take Cincy or UConn as #15 then to take a BE Catholic school, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

UC basketball and football is better than the average ACC basketball and football. Other than somehow landing Penn State or getting Notre Dame to join in football, I'm not sure there's a better school when you consider eastern-based possibilities like WVU, UConn, UMD and Rutgers (and god-forbid, USF/UCF ). I think a conference network only adds to their potential value (which would be "good", not "excellent" like PSU/ND or the out-there notion of landing Texas).

---------------------

To the NC State "Insider": There's nothing to "understand". It's a stupid suggestion and isn't based in any sane or logical reality. Why would ACC schools agree to play some of the best ACC football programs LESS OFTEN? How weak would the ACC look if it had to include OOC games as ACC games to "boost" its playoff chances? It's an utterly ridiculous "proposition".

Nobody watches and/or is willing to pay to watch UC sports (on TV). They would just be another mouth to feed network or not.

Any new addition would have to bring significantly more to the table than they take from it to make it worthwhile to expand. There is no non-football school that does that, so this is a non-starter from the get-go.

(03-17-2014 01:25 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:57 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:32 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:17 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I have no problem with UConn everything but football, but I don't ever want to be in a football conference with them again. As for UC, they field competitive teams, but that's pretty much it. I don't think UC brings anything else to any ACC team not named "Louisville." I don't see the logic in adding them, barring a complete meltdown.

Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,
Neil

Why is it a non-starter? It's not like the ACC needs UConn, and UConn absolutely needs the ACC. Anyway, why are either of those schools better than either Nova or Georgetown? What's the advantage of adding an all sports member if the additional sport is going to drag the conference down?

That said, like you, I'm fine staying pat at 15 unless we can talk either State or Tejas into moving.

Lots of schools need the ACC or another power conference. So I'm not sure what you are trying to say by attaching that to UConn for all sports but football.

It's a non-starter for both sides, imho. For the ACC, if they want to add a school for everything but football then choose either Georgetown or Nova for the DC or Philly markets. Saves on being pestered year after year to let UConn football in the league as well. And both the Hoyas and the Wildcats play lacrosse in hotbeds of lacrosse.

For UConn, the state pumped a lot of $$$ into elevating them to FBS. Why would they want to join the ACC for $5 million a year when they could make that in the AAC and not have to worry about scheduling a full slate of football games as an indy?

Cheers,
Neil

1. Need relates to bargaining power. If the ACC and UConn were to negotiate, the ACC would have a ton of bargaining power, whereas UConn would have next to none. Therefore, the ACC would be in a position to dictate the terms.
2. UConn makes $2 million/yr in the AAC in TV money. $5 million ACC TV dollars, higher tourney payouts, better opponents, and MAC/Ind football payouts ($1 million/yr?) are way in excess of anything that they make in the AAC. And, if they were to play FB in the MAC, they wouldn't have to worry about scheduling a full slate there, either. Sure, it wouldn't be glorious, but right now they're playing the likes of Tulsa and ECU, so there isn't a ton of room to fall.

I don't like that comment about ECU. They are the best division one football program in the state, with ASU running a close second.

(03-17-2014 03:55 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 01:25 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:57 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:32 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Well, the only adds that are slam dunks involve teams not likely to join - Texas, PSU, and Florida.

And I see the suggestion of adding UConn for everything but football as a non-starter. Either they get in for all sports (including football) or they don't get in at all.

I certainly am fine keeping the ACC as is. My response was more to this idea of adding a Georgetown, Nova, or St. John's over an all-sports candidate like UC or UConn.

Cheers,
Neil

Why is it a non-starter? It's not like the ACC needs UConn, and UConn absolutely needs the ACC. Anyway, why are either of those schools better than either Nova or Georgetown? What's the advantage of adding an all sports member if the additional sport is going to drag the conference down?

That said, like you, I'm fine staying pat at 15 unless we can talk either State or Tejas into moving.

Lots of schools need the ACC or another power conference. So I'm not sure what you are trying to say by attaching that to UConn for all sports but football.

It's a non-starter for both sides, imho. For the ACC, if they want to add a school for everything but football then choose either Georgetown or Nova for the DC or Philly markets. Saves on being pestered year after year to let UConn football in the league as well. And both the Hoyas and the Wildcats play lacrosse in hotbeds of lacrosse.

For UConn, the state pumped a lot of $$$ into elevating them to FBS. Why would they want to join the ACC for $5 million a year when they could make that in the AAC and not have to worry about scheduling a full slate of football games as an indy?

Cheers,
Neil

1. Need relates to bargaining power. If the ACC and UConn were to negotiate, the ACC would have a ton of bargaining power, whereas UConn would have next to none. Therefore, the ACC would be in a position to dictate the terms.
2. UConn makes $2 million/yr in the AAC in TV money. $5 million ACC TV dollars, higher tourney payouts, better opponents, and MAC/Ind football payouts ($1 million/yr?) are way in excess of anything that they make in the AAC. And, if they were to play FB in the MAC, they wouldn't have to worry about scheduling a full slate there, either. Sure, it wouldn't be glorious, but right now they're playing the likes of Tulsa and ECU, so there isn't a ton of room to fall.

I don't like that comment about ECU. They are the best division one football program in the state, with ASU running a close second.

But that's like the 4'3" dude lording it over the four 4'2" guys in the room. Yeah he's taller, but he's still a midget.