(03-18-2014 01:18 AM)john01992 Wrote:  remember in the 1980s the ACC was not considered a power conference.

You are right. It was absolutely not a power conference, at least not for football.

I think the answer to this question lies in the timing. The idea for an eastern basketball conference was a good one, but was undermined from the beginning by including schools for whom football was important. At the time, that didn't seem so big a problem because football conferences weren't critical. The list of independents then was impressive, and there wasn't anybody throwing big money at schools to televise their games.

If the Big East stayed only with schools that didn't have FBS football (the split between FBS and FCS had just occurred), there might have been a chance for an all sports conference to form that would have dominated the ACC. That is, if the eastern schools could have learned to get along better and if Penn State learned to be a little more humble. Which is to say, what I am about to say had little chance of happening.

Put these schools together in 1979: Penn State, Pitt, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, Syracuse, Boston College, Rutgers and Virginia Tech. That's a league that would have been stronger than the ACC in football, and at least its equal in basketball.

UConn would probably have stayed FCS in football, and a mainstay in the Big East basketball conference. Miami would not have been considered for the new football conference back then - they weren't that good yet, or even sure to continue playing football back then, and in those days geography mattered more than it does today. I think Maryland would have made a great addition to the new conference, but I think the Terps' self image was more as a southern school. Their success in both football and bball in the 70's would have kept them in the ACC camp.

Eventually, GT, FSU and Miami would have joined the ACC, bringing them up to competitive parity with the new northern league. And without the tension between basketball schools and football schools the Big East had to contend with, I think that league would have been stable and successful. So much so, that I think any future B1G expansion would have been with the prairie schools from the Big 8, like Missouri, Kansas Nebraska and Oklahoma. That would have left Texas on an island, and opened the door for the SEC to expand into Texas and Oklahoma. The Big 12 would never have come into existence.

But, as I said, this would never have happened. Damn you, JoePa.

(03-18-2014 09:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  Put these schools together in 1979: Penn State, Pitt, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, Syracuse, Boston College, Rutgers and Virginia Tech. That's a league that would have been stronger than the ACC in football, and at least its equal in basketball.

In 1979, Louisville, Cincinnati, and Virginia Tech sucked at football. Ironically Rutgers was pretty good at that time. West Virginia was not very strong at that time either.

Looking at it today, it sounds good. But at the time, no it would not have helped. And as of 1979, I am not sure you could make the case it would be it's equal in basketball either.

(03-18-2014 08:52 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I doubt it would have made much difference. If the BE never went after football schools it's would have simply lost its major football schools back in the early 90's. That's why football was added--to prevent the football schools from seeking a better home.

It wasn't done to prevent them from seeking a "better home". If they wanted to leave for a better home, they were free to do that at any time.

It was done to prevent the non-Big East football independents from forming an all sports conference. Had they done so, it would have created scheduling problems for Syracuse and BC, which would have made football independence no longer viable for the.

The key date here is the early '80's, not the early '90's. It was in the early '80's that Joe Pa was trying to put together the all sports conference and it's when the Big East added Pitt to prevent that.

Had the Big East not added Pitt, Joe Pa would likely have had the critical mass he needed to form the all sports conference, leaving Syracuse and BC no choice but to then leave the Big East and join them - unless Pitt pursued another option (whatever that might have been).

The initiative for the addition of Pitt to the Big East was from the football schools themselves, who wanted to stay in the Big East. The rest of the Big East was not trying to prevent them from doing anything. The issue was whether the non-football schools would cooperate with their plan or refuse to the addition of Pitt. They agreed to Pitt, but balked at the idea of adding Penn State.

Had an Eastern all sports conference been formed, Penn state would have most left for the Big Ten eventually any way. But it would have laid the foundation for an ongoing all sports conference and would have accomplished a clean break between football interests and basketball interests. As a result, the hybrid would never have been formed and evolution in the East would have proceeded in a much cleaner fashion.

(03-18-2014 10:11 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 08:52 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I doubt it would have made much difference. If the BE never went after football schools it's would have simply lost its major football schools back in the early 90's. That's why football was added--to prevent the football schools from seeking a better home.

It wasn't done to prevent them from seeking a "better home". If they wanted to leave for a better home, they were free to do that at any time.

It was done to prevent the non-Big East football independents from forming an all sports conference. Had they done so, it would have created scheduling problems for Syracuse and BC, which would have made football independence no longer viable for the.

The key date here is the early '80's, not the early '90's. It was in the early '80's that Joe Pa was trying to put together the all sports conference and it's when the Big East added Pitt to prevent that.

Had the Big East not added Pitt, Joe Pa would likely have had the critical mass he needed to form the all sports conference, leaving Syracuse and BC no choice but to then leave the Big East and join them - unless Pitt pursued another option (whatever that might have been).

The initiative for the addition of Pitt to the Big East was from the football schools themselves, who wanted to stay in the Big East. The rest of the Big East was not trying to prevent them from doing anything. The issue was whether the non-football schools would cooperate with their plan or refuse to the addition of Pitt. They agreed to Pitt, but balked at the idea of adding Penn State.

Had an Eastern all sports conference been formed, Penn state would have most left for the Big Ten eventually any way. But it would have laid the foundation for an ongoing all sports conference and would have accomplished a clean break between football interests and basketball interests. As a result, the hybrid would never have been formed and evolution in the East would have proceeded in a much cleaner fashion.

I'm not that sure Penn State would have eventually left for the Big Ten. Fact is, they weren't exactly welcomed with open arms when they did join, and even then the money lure wasn't nearly as great. Happy Valley wasn't easy to get to by air in those days. If they could have been in what would essentially have been a bus league, the choice to leave would have been much harder.

Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

(03-18-2014 09:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:18 AM)john01992 Wrote:  remember in the 1980s the ACC was not considered a power conference.

Put these schools together in 1979: Penn State, Pitt, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, Syracuse, Boston College, Rutgers and Virginia Tech. That's a league that would have been stronger than the ACC in football, and at least its equal in basketball.

As much as anything, the impetus for a basketball super conference in the Northeast was instigated by the dominance of the ACC on the East Coast in a region that had once been dominated by the Northeast independents. The other factor was changes in NCAA rules in the 1970's.

Gavitt did what he could to bring together the best basketball programs at the time, failing only to get Rutgers, who turned down an invitation.

In 1979, when the BE was formed, the ACC included recent national champ NC State (1974), former national champ (1957) and recent Final Four program (1972, 1977) North Carolina, and recent Final Four program Duke (1978). The ACC also included Wake forest who had been to the Final Four in the '60's and a powerful Maryland program. By 1981 when Joe Pa was pursuing his all sports dream, Virginia had also become a Final Four program.

A Northeast all sports conference wouldn't have been anywhere close to that in basketball. Louisville was just coming off a national championship and a string of Final Fours and Rutgers and Syracuse had been to recent Final Fours. Cincinnati was a former 2-time national champion with a string of Final Fours in the '60's, but you'd have to go back more than 2 decades to find any significant success on the national level with the rest of the group you mentioned. There is no way that group was the equal of the ACC back then. It would have been worth the effort to challenge the ACC, but other than Louisville and Syracuse, none of them achieved basketball success in the '80's to justify the claim that they would have been the equal of the ACC.

Another key factor to consider is that basketball played a far more important role in the 80s and 90s in terms of TV revenue as the ramifications of the Supreme Court decisions freeing conferences to pursue their on TV football deals were still in the early stages. Basketball money used to be a really big deal. The ACC during the mid 80s and early to mid 90s was the place to be to make the most money and I believe held the title of richest conference due to their basketball TV money and exposure.

I don't think the Raycom conference was ever a serious threat, although it was a cool idea. The ACC and SEC would have snuffed it out should talks have ever gotten serious.

What would have been ideal was if Jo Pa had formed an FBS league after the Big East rejection of Penn State and allowed Pitt, Cuse, and BC football only membership. Unrealistic to expect considering how petty northeastern universities can be when it comes to conference affilations, but ideal. The A10 was always designed to be a football first league so I think a hybrid would have been way more successful in the A10 as opposed to the basketball centric Big East, especially when the finances turned in favor of football over basketball.

A10 circa 1982
Penn St
Rutgers
WVU
Temple
Va Tech
ECU
*BC, Cuse, Pitt (Football Only)
*St Joe's, URI, Umass, St. Bony, GW, Duquense (Olympic Sports)

When it came time for Miami to make it conference decisions, whenever that would be, this conference would have been in the running for Miami and likely would have won considering the ACC and its basketball driven nature.

Its impossible to know if Penn State would have left for the Big 10 had they had a stable and successful eastern home. I think ultimately they would have as conferences began devouring each other to get to that magic number of 12 for a championship game but I doubt it would have been in the early 90's. The Big 10 resisted a conference basketball tournament forever (showing they are willing to sacrifice money) and Penn State would not have been an independent. I don't see an early 90's Big 10 successfully wanting to raid a healthy sucessful conference, nor am I sure if they would have been able to financially as this FBS A10 w/ Penn State might have been able to recruit Maryland.

The past is prologue, but I believe had simple pettiness been put aside by those in charge of the northeastern conference landscape, they would be in a much cleaner and healthier state.

Essentially what you are looking at would be this:
Big East
UConn
Providence
St Johns
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Holy Cross
Duquesne

Paterno League
Penn State
Pitt
Syracuse
Boston College
West Virginia
Temple
Rutgers
Maryland/Louisville/Cincinnati
Maybe Army and Navy

Remember Miami had no basketball program at that time.

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

all i am saying that for getting FOOTBALL indys like miami & fsu the ACC was not as appealing in the early 80s as some are saying.

(03-18-2014 01:26 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

all i am saying that for getting FOOTBALL indys like miami & fsu the ACC was not as appealing in the early 80s as some are saying.

I'm not sure you can leap to that conclusion. FSU agreed to join the ACC in 1990 (a few months after that CU-GT split MNC you mentioned). Miami was interested in the ACC at that time but there wasn't enough support in the ACC for them.

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

I think you are exaggerating the financial impact of basketball at that time. Raycom was paying the ACC peanuts for televising its games, and the NCAA payouts were a small fraction of what they are today. I suspect that Michigan took in more money at the gate for six football games than UNC was getting from basketball.

(03-18-2014 01:57 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

I think you are exaggerating the financial impact of basketball at that time. Raycom was paying the ACC peanuts for televising its games, and the NCAA payouts were a small fraction of what they are today. I suspect that Michigan took in more money at the gate for six football games than UNC was getting from basketball.

it wasn't in the same stratosphere as today's tv revenue, but the acc used to be the king of conference payouts until the football explosion of the mid 90s

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

This.

The ACC was an elite basketball conference, but a second tier football conference.

(03-18-2014 01:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:26 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

all i am saying that for getting FOOTBALL indys like miami & fsu the ACC was not as appealing in the early 80s as some are saying.

I'm not sure you can leap to that conclusion. FSU agreed to join the ACC in 1990 (a few months after that CU-GT split MNC you mentioned). Miami was interested in the ACC at that time but there wasn't enough support in the ACC for them.

exactly. 1990 was the year the ACC truly "emerged"

and FYI miami chose the BE OVER the acc.

i am a Colorado guy and I have researched this topic extensively because of the split NC.

from 1959-1990 the power conferences that i named plus the indys combined to get around 230-240 of the 248 major bowl slots. the rest went to either the WAC or the acc. I forget what the actual numbers were because i did this over a year ago. But it is safe to say you could count the total number or orange, rose, cotton, & sugar bowl bids the ACC got on only two hands.

(03-18-2014 02:03 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:57 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 10:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  Define power conference in the 80's.

Basketball we were easily one of the elites.

Football had Clemson and Maryland leading with UNC, GT, and UVA playing at a high level here and there. Ultimately, in 1987 we got an auto-bid to the Citrus Bowl, which was a New Year's Day bowl that annually featured top 25 teams.

the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

I think you are exaggerating the financial impact of basketball at that time. Raycom was paying the ACC peanuts for televising its games, and the NCAA payouts were a small fraction of what they are today. I suspect that Michigan took in more money at the gate for six football games than UNC was getting from basketball.

it wasn't in the same stratosphere as today's tv revenue, but the acc used to be the king of conference payouts until the football explosion of the mid 90s

i am not the type to say "link or it didn't happen" but this is a very bold claim to make without evidence to back it up.

(03-18-2014 08:48 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  There was talk way back then about a conference of all the major independents and it very well may have been

PSU
Pitt
WVU
SU
RU
Temple
South Carolina
FSU
Miami
ND
BC
VT

Gave ya some **** last week but I gotta run w/ this as well w/ an exception of ND. I doubt ND would've given up their Indy status.

(03-18-2014 02:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:26 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:15 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:44 PM)john01992 Wrote:  the power conferences of that era: pac, big 8, swc, big 10, sec, & indys
secondary conferences: wac & acc

all you need to do is look no further than the amount of major bowl bids the acc received in the 60s, 70s, & 80s to understand it.

remember in 1990 gtech was passed over for CU to get a share of the NC based on this very issue.

In football yes, but football on basketball were on more equal terms then they were today so power conference determination was not solely dependent on football. The ACC was the financial powerhouse thanks to its basketball until the football money completely took over in the late 90s.

all i am saying that for getting FOOTBALL indys like miami & fsu the ACC was not as appealing in the early 80s as some are saying.

I'm not sure you can leap to that conclusion. FSU agreed to join the ACC in 1990 (a few months after that CU-GT split MNC you mentioned). Miami was interested in the ACC at that time but there wasn't enough support in the ACC for them.

exactly. 1990 was the year the ACC truly "emerged"

and FYI miami chose the BE OVER the acc.

No, Miami was interested in the ACC but didn't have the votes within the ACC to get an invitation in 1990. See http://articles.dailypress.com/1990-09-2...s-big-east

The ACC didn't "emerge" in 1990. It was what it had been for 20 years -- tops in basketball but not close to the top conferences in football. The reason FSU joined in 1990, and not earlier, is that in 1990 the walls were closing in on the top indys not named Notre Dame. (ND announced its own TV deal in February 1990. That started the collapse of the CFA TV-rights cartel and led to each conference selling its own TV rights, which incentivized conferences to seize marketable indys while there were still some on the table. Thus the ACC considered Syracuse and Miami, as well as FSU, in 1990.)

(03-18-2014 08:39 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 07:45 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 07:29 PM)Wedge Wrote:  1) Cuse, BC, and Pitt decide to stay in BE and carry on as football indies, or

2) Cuse, BC, and Pitt join with others (probably including Miami, WVU, VT) and start either an all-sports conference or a FB-only conference (IIRC, those were still permitted at the time), or

3) Long shot possibility: Syracuse gets an invitation to the ACC and joins around the same time FSU did.

#3 You do realize that the ACC called Syracuse before they called FSU, right? That "long shot" is pretty much exactly what happened, only Syracuse declined.

Syracuse didn't really decline. According to Gene Corrigan, they asked to be publicly pursued. The ACC didn't want to do that.

But the first vote for expansion was a tie between FSU and Syracuse. There is a very good chance the ACC would have went to ten team immediately with Syracuse and FSU.

You're right. I was equating demanding special treatment with declining. My theory is that 90% of the time a conference wouldn't inquire like that unless a subsequent invite was virtually a sure thing, and asking for special treatment like SU did is very close to the logical equivalent of rejecting the offer as the terms were presented. Perhaps I'm reading between the lines too much, but I think that I'm in the right ball park.