Even though it was followed by a few years of relative tranquility, I tend to view this move as the "opening salvo" in the realignment battles we've seen unfold ever since, and are embroiled in right now.

On June 30, 2003, Miami and VT accepted invitations to join the ACC, effective for the 2004-2005 academic year.

Here's a link to an article published that day:

http://www.espn.com/ncaa/news/2003/0630/1574726.html

It was an answer to the SEC and Big XII “super conferences” from the preceding decade. The Big Ten tried as well with Notre Dame, but failed until the Big XII was vulnerable.

Here's an article describing the "football power" the ACC was adding in Miami and VT. Some things panned out, others not so much.

https://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/...757095.php

I never know how to grade Miami on realignment. Was it a failure or were they just dragged down by scandals? Or maybe it was just a lack of support from the University?

0 ACC Titles
0 NY6 Wins
1 NY6 Appearance
- Nevin Shapiro Scandal
- Adidas Scandal "University-7"
- Power Struggles: Mark Richt would rather quit than fire his son
- No On-Campus Stadium
- New Commitment from President to support Athletics: UHealth money used to hire Cristobal

20 years already? Either I'm getting old or I started following college sports at a younger age than I remember.

Remember it like yesterday. I didn't miss them too much since we always lost to them. BC is the one the following year or two years that really stuck with me like a mortal wound, and Cuse' Pitt' was like what UO UW leaving the PAC would be today, the final death blow.

In June 2003, Miami had just completed a 3-year stretch finishing #2, #1, & #2, which included one of the longest winning streaks in college football history. They had won 5 national championships in the last 20 years. Miami was the biggest name in the sport.

(06-30-2023 09:28 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  In June 2003, Miami had just completed a 3-year stretch finishing #2, #1, & #2, which included one of the longest winning streaks in college football history. They had won 5 national championships in the last 20 years. Miami was the biggest name in the sport.

Yes.

And if anyone had told me then that over the next 20 seasons, Miami would never even play for a national title, I simply wouldn't have believed it.

Their program joined the ACC and ... died.

(06-30-2023 07:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Even though it was followed by a few years of relative tranquility, I tend to view this move as the "opening salvo" in the realignment battles we've seen unfold ever since, and are embroiled in right now.

On June 30, 2003, Miami and VT accepted invitations to join the ACC, effective for the 2004-2005 academic year.

Here's a link to an article published that day:

http://www.espn.com/ncaa/news/2003/0630/1574726.html

And just like OU and UT's move all these years later, this screwed my team's conference situation all up.

Boo!

(06-30-2023 09:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes.

And if anyone had told me then that over the next 20 seasons, Miami would never even play for a national title, I simply wouldn't have believed it.

Their program joined the ACC and ... died.

ACC was happenstance. Miami would never be able to sustain itself without a massive growing alumni base and donor base. Only recently got AAU with the B1G wanting more Fla options. The money dried up. The exposure was never the issue. There is no reason to believe they couldn't have been what Clemson is now, except they no longer have the massive fan support they once had. I think UCF and earlier, USF, have eaten into their market share and alumni base.

I think VaTech is a program that sort of lost its way after Beamer left. That's an example where the university slightly deprioritized athletics after all the scandals with the Vicks over the years, and they just never landed a big time coach. That's another program that can rise again, but didn't, for whatever reason.

(06-30-2023 09:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-30-2023 09:28 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  In June 2003, Miami had just completed a 3-year stretch finishing #2, #1, & #2, which included one of the longest winning streaks in college football history. They had won 5 national championships in the last 20 years. Miami was the biggest name in the sport.

Yes.

And if anyone had told me then that over the next 20 seasons, Miami would never even play for a national title, I simply wouldn't have believed it.

Their program joined the ACC and ... died.

It's remarkable. I don't think there's a person on Earth who predicted then that Miami would have 1 10-win season (10-3) in the last 19 years.

(06-30-2023 07:40 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I never know how to grade Miami on realignment. Was it a failure or were they just dragged down by scandals? Or maybe it was just a lack of support from the University?

0 ACC Titles
0 NY6 Wins
1 NY6 Appearance
- Nevin Shapiro Scandal
- Adidas Scandal "University-7"
- Power Struggles: Mark Richt would rather quit than fire his son
- No On-Campus Stadium
- New Commitment from President to support Athletics: UHealth money used to hire Cristobal

Not that a UCF fan would be aware of anything to do with basketball, but Miami has been to four Sweet 16's, an Elite Eight and the Final Four in the past 11 seasons

The women's basketball program has made it to the second round of the NCAA Tournament seven times since 2011, including the Sweet 16 in March.

The football program has been in the crapper for many of the reasons you mentioned, but the biggest factor — as it usually is when traditional FBS powers struggle — has been weak/indifferent leadership that leads to poor coaching hires and inadequate infrastructure.

Maybe it gets fixed with Cristobal; we shall see

Butch Davis built a powerhouse at Miami. His 2000 team was probably the best in the country, Washington complaints aside they should have played Oklahoma for the national title, and IMO likely would have beat them.

And the 2001 and 2002 teams that did play for the title were IMO basically his construction.

Had Davis stayed at Miami, not taken the Browns job in 2001, Miami may have had a Carroll or Saban type run during the rest of the 2000s.

(06-30-2023 07:40 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  New Commitment from President to support Athletics: UHealth money used to hire Cristobal

What's this we saw last week about UCF begging the Orange County Tourist board for $176M to "speed up athletic facility projects" (i.e., keep up/stay ahead of USF)?

(06-30-2023 09:36 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(06-30-2023 09:30 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes.

And if anyone had told me then that over the next 20 seasons, Miami would never even play for a national title, I simply wouldn't have believed it.

Their program joined the ACC and ... died.

ACC was happenstance. Miami would never be able to sustain itself without a massive growing alumni base and donor base. Only recently got AAU with the B1G wanting more Fla options. The money dried up. The exposure was never the issue. There is no reason to believe they couldn't have been what Clemson is now, except they no longer have the massive fan support they once had. I think UCF and earlier, USF, have eaten into their market share and alumni base.

I think VaTech is a program that sort of lost its way after Beamer left. That's an example where the university slightly deprioritized athletics after all the scandals with the Vicks over the years, and they just never landed a big time coach. That's another program that can rise again, but didn't, for whatever reason.

Growing Alumni Base?

Its a small private school with 12k undergraduate enrollment.

Miami's fan base is largely t-shirt fan who bought into the Cultural impact of 80s Miami teams. The Canes represent the city. The Canes represent black culture and breaking barriers. The Canes are iconic. The few who are Miami alumni have very fat wallets and are power brokers. However, the core of Miami isn't a growing alumni base.

NIL is great for Miami. They will become dominant again. If the future of college football is about paying players, Miami has been ahead of the curve in that category for awhile.

Pretty crazy how every team that left for the ACC became a shell of their former selves.

While Uconn has won 4 National Championships since.

I guess great for the administration but terrible for the fans.

(06-30-2023 10:36 AM)ccbfan Wrote:  Pretty crazy how every team that left for the ACC became a shell of their former selves.

While Uconn has won 4 National Championships since.

I guess great for the administration but terrible for the fans.

Virginia Tech has 4 ACC titles and only 3 Big East titles. Definitively better in the ACC than the Big East.

(06-30-2023 10:36 AM)ccbfan Wrote:  Pretty crazy how every team that left for the ACC became a shell of their former selves.

While Uconn has won 4 National Championships since.

I guess great for the administration but terrible for the fans.

It's harder to win in a better conference. Of course it is. But those teams also get to play against a different set of schools (that their fans may or may not prefer - I imagine in most cases they do).

(06-30-2023 10:40 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(06-30-2023 10:36 AM)ccbfan Wrote:  Pretty crazy how every team that left for the ACC became a shell of their former selves.

While Uconn has won 4 National Championships since.

I guess great for the administration but terrible for the fans.

Virginia Tech has 4 ACC titles and only 3 Big East titles. Definitively better in the ACC than the Big East.

4 in 20 years of ACC

vs

3 in 13 years of BE and a National Championship game.

Still put their success in the BE higher but close. They're the only ones that didn't crater like the others.

On paper, this was a move that should have made the ACC the most formidable of the BCS leagues. Unfortunately, the key players all hit slumps. Had Florida St, Miami, VT, and Clemson lived up to their potential from 2004-2011 realignment from that point forward might have looked a lot different.