bitcruncher Wrote:

MichaelSavage Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:Read my lips ... They made a bad move. There may have been some financial gain at first. But long term, this was a bad move. It's not as bad for them and Miami as it was for BC, since they are southern regional teams. But it was still a bad move. They aren't traditional ACC rivals.

Well, other than just opinion...please provide any evidence that they made a bad move. And college football isn't static, so don't assume that last year's down year in the ACC is permanent.

The evidence is that other than Virginia, BC, and Miami, they have no real rivals in the ACC. Sure they can form some, but they will find it harder to recruit in the ACC.

Now if you're wanting numbers and statistics, those will come in time. I'm certain of that. The ACC isn't a football conference and never will be.

By the way, esayem. Not even Butch Davis can help North Carolina. They're a hopeless cause in football.

In the current Big East their only true rival would be West Virginia. So they've already got more rivalries now in the ACC. NC State & Maryland are potential big rivalries for VT. And why would their recruiting suffer by being the ACC? Virginia is still hotbed for recruiting and the Hokies still sign great classes. You're really not making any sense.

People Champion Wrote:The ACC will do fine and recover from last year. Stuff changes from year to year. They had the upperhand in 2004 and 2005.

Agree that things change and that the sport is cyclical. Even a wuss like Mikey T. knows that.

The ACC definitely had the upperhand in 2004. In 2005 they were given very generous pre-season help that allowed them to maintain high rankings throughout the season, but by the end of that season they were clearly the #5 conference and the media began having doubts they were stronger than the BE, especially considering all of that talent the league had that year and the best they could finish was as the 5th ranked conference overall.

Quote:The BE had had the upperhand last year. 4 of the BE's win came from two teams, WVU(GT,Maryland) UL(Wake,UM) and 2 of the ACC losts came from UNC(USF,RU).

Of course, the BIG one of those was Louisville's biotch slapping of Miami.

And of course, when the ACC champion barely beats the two dregs of the league for 2 of the ACC wins, that doesn't help either.

But, as you say, things could change this year.

UConn @ Virginia is probably a loss for the Huskies

Louisville @ NC State is a game the Cards need to take seriously to win

Pitt @ Virginia two evenly matched teams, one on the rise, the other on the way down but at home

Maryland @ Rutgers - the pressure will be on Rutgers to prove that last year wasnt' a fluke

North Carolina @ USF - I'd be shocked if the Bulls don't win this one, but they might be looking ahead to the West Virginia game the following week.

WVU @ Maryland - Eers, handily in this one.

Quote:Randy Shannon have been doing great on the recruiting trail since he got hired. He turned his first recruiting class into a top 15 class when it was projected to be below average class for UM.

Miami had back to back Top 10 classes in 2003 and 2004 - it didn't result in a Top 25 finish last year. Recruiting is only a part of the puzzle. He has to coach them to a Top 25 ranking as well.

Quote:I expect UM to be a top 25 team this year, winning 9 or 10 games this year will help them acheived that goal.

Assuming regular season wins (not including a possible bowl win) if they get 10 wins, they will be Top 10, if they get 9, they will be Top 20. Miami's season will be dictated early by how they do against Oklahoma and A&M. If they lose both, they won't be Top 25. If they win both, they likely will be Top 15. If they split, then the @FSU and @VT games will tell the tale.

Quote:Jimbo Fisher is projected to be a HC in a few years, reviving FSU's offense could land him a coaching offense quicker. They will probably end up in the top 25 as well.

Agree. All three coaching changes will help FSU. I don't see FSU losing more than 3 games, so they will definitely be Top 20. If they only lose 2, then they could even be Top 10.

However, if FSU returns to glory, look for some of those coaches that helped bring them back to be offered HC jobs elsewhere the following year, particularly Fisher.

Quote:On a sidenote, USF will have to win the BE in the few years, before the top recuits will start taking them serious. Coming in third or fourth in the BE and going minor bowls is not enough. The Big 3 have spoiled Florida Sports Fans and Media. I think USF have tough fight to accomplish that feat, first they have to find diamonds in the rough after the Big 3 finish recruiting then battle BE's top 3 and at the same time stave off Cincy and Pitt.

And West Virginia and Louisville have such great access to recruiting hotbeds? C'mon. There are three teams in the Big East that reside in recruiting hotbeds - Rutgers, Pitt, and Cincinnati - and none of those are exclusive to them (despite Schiano's claim of a supposed wall around NJ ).

It's coaching PLUS recruits, with the emphasis on coaching first.

Leavitt is a great coach. He'll get the Bulls there sooner than later.

Cheers,
Neil

People Champion Wrote:That was one of those ND type deal which start affecting UM financially during the 1995-1999 seasons, which was the probation period.

The fact that the Big East had unequal payouts to such a disportionment was BECAUSE of Miami.

They wouldn't join if they weren't compensated for their extra travel expenses. The deal, however, was only for 5 years. To keep it going beyond that, MIAMI proposed the BCA Bowl winner be given more money than the rest.

It was the Big East's fault that Miami went on probation shortly thereafter???

Quote:That is the main reason UM made that switch to have a steady flow of cash every year.

Shalala jumped because she thought she could have her cake and eat it too. Get ACC $$$ (mostly to help her women's teams) and get three teams located in the northeast (BC, SU, and Maryland) to help keep the monied alum from New York happy and to keep sending in those dollars.

But the ACC quickly showed her that she wasn't going to be the ACC's equivalent to ND. Do you think the divisional set-ups where Maryland and BC are in the OTHER division, an accident?

Quote:I know alot of poster from the Old BE are upset with UM about the move, however, UM did give the Commish a list of concerns about the conference, which was not addressed.

Shalala's 'list' of concerns was that she wanted a 12-team all-sports league and a championship game. How was Mikey T suppose to address that when he's working for the BB presidents as well?

His counter-proposal to her back in 2002 was have the league expand to 16 (10 team football league). The additions he suggested were Louisville and USF (to address another of her concerns, traveling expenses) and SHE turned him down because she didn't want any part of USF at that point in time. She didn't counter-propose any other team either.

Quote:Even the last minute effort to keep UM, the deal called for UM to recieve more money by taking from other schools, which UM rejected.

Hah! So one of the reasons Shalala chose the ACC was because she didn't want to take money from the other BE schools?

Please.

I don't hold anything against her for jumping. It certainly LOOKED like the better deal at that time. I just think that had she'd been able to go into a time machine and saw the Big East perform the way it performed in 2006, she'd have had an even tougher time making the decision to jump.

Quote:I think both the ACC and BE still have alot of work to do. Based on alot of threads, I read on here some of the concerns that UM gave to the BE Commish are the same concerns and gripes the BE football programs and fans have.

Again, MT couldn't address Miami's concerns anymore than MT can address the football schools concerns of the BE today.

Those concerns need to be addressed by the presidents of the football schools growing sacks the size of onions and splitting.


Neil

People Champion Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:ACC expansion was about increased prestige/exposure for football while keeping the payouts at least equal or slightly better. Many thought that expansion would not accomplish the latter but that it would definitely accomplish the former.

Instead, what has happened so far is that the money has basically been there, but the prestige/exposure hasn't come close to being realized - which if this continues, will mean the money won't be there the next time the contracts are negotiated.

That league NEEDS both FSU and Miami to be good. Just as the old ACC needed FSU to be good and the old BE needed Miami to be good.

The new Big East doesn't NEED any one team to be good. So, in this regard, the Big East is better than the old Big East as the result of expansion as well.

The success of VT and BC in the ACC has increased the awareness that the old Big East may indeed have been a better conference than the old ACC. But interestingly enough, the reverse doesn't seem to be true. The fall of Miami is more attributed to the Hurricanes themselves than it has been to the level of competition being significantly better from the old Big East.

It's perception and not necessarily accurate, but it's about time the Big East won a perception battle in football with the ACC.

I think it's a perception that just might continue.

Only National Championships will increase the ACC's profile, while simply winning BCS Bowls increases the Big East's profile. Can you imagine what it will be like if Big East teams start being given the opportunity to play for, and win, NCs?


Neil

WVU and UL is carrying the BE right now. There is a reason why there game have been a big draw the past two years. Just Look at this year,
WVU-UL
WVU-RU
UL-RU
were the BE's highest rated games this year. Rutgers added the Cinderalla and underdog angle to their matchups against UL and WVU.
Don't not be fool into thinking that if WVU and UL have seasons like UM and FSU did last year, and Cuse/UConn competes for the BE Title like Wake/GT did last year, that the criticism will not began again for the BE. Many people and media outlets expects WVU and UL to be the top two teams in the BE every year.

And like nearly every good Miami fan, RU is some kind of fluke. I'm not like some of the morons on the Rivals boards going look at us. But at the same time, a Rutgers rising into the elite is something that is very integral to the success of the conference. If we can capture some of the Philly/South Jersey market and turn New York/North Jersey into a college football area with Rutgers as the anchor team that makes the Big East a much more stable and far richer conference.

MichaelSavage Wrote:In the current Big East their only true rival would be West Virginia. So they've already got more rivalries now in the ACC. NC State & Maryland are potential big rivalries for VT. And why would their recruiting suffer by being the ACC? Virginia is still hotbed for recruiting and the Hokies still sign great classes. You're really not making any sense.

Virginia Tech had been playing the BEast teams ever since the football schools began play. That was more rivalry than VT had with most ACC schools.

The only saving grace for VT's ACC rivalry construction is the fact that Virginia, BC, and Miami are already rivals, and the other teams have a southern connection to build upon.

Being in the ACC has been great. I love it. I can't imagine any Hokie fan not saying it was the right move. Football's as good as ever, and now we're recruiting 4 star basketball players and can look forward to basketball season too. In football, we're on the tube in our own region for every conference game. Now I can easily drive to away games at 7 different schools.

mr jolly Wrote:Being in the ACC has been great. I love it. I can't imagine any Hokie fan not saying it was the right move. Football's as good as ever, and now we're recruiting 4 star basketball players and can look forward to basketball season too. In football, we're on the tube in our own region for every conference game. Now I can easily drive to away games at 7 different schools.

So basically you're saying it's better to be in the ACC because it's easier to win games in football and basketball?

TopCoog Wrote:The ACC is a much more substantial league in almost every way, the guys here on the Big East board know that.

That post didn't even make any sense, but it's par for the course with you.

CatsClaw Wrote:

mr jolly Wrote:Being in the ACC has been great. I love it. I can't imagine any Hokie fan not saying it was the right move. Football's as good as ever, and now we're recruiting 4 star basketball players and can look forward to basketball season too. In football, we're on the tube in our own region for every conference game. Now I can easily drive to away games at 7 different schools.

So basically you're saying it's better to be in the ACC because it's easier to win games in football and basketball?

Maybe it's just me. But I didn't think that is what he said at all.

I take he means that he prefers the ACC for football because most of the opponents are within driving distance and that he prefers ACC bb because they are now recruiting their region better.

It's not as though VT is getting national basketball recruits, but they are getting better ones from their region - Maryland and Virginia.

The Hokies were lost in Big East basketball. They are right at home in the ACC for both sports.

Of all the teams that were involved in ACC expansion, they were the least desireable, but geographically and culturally, they made the most sense.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:

mr jolly Wrote:Being in the ACC has been great. I love it. I can't imagine any Hokie fan not saying it was the right move. Football's as good as ever, and now we're recruiting 4 star basketball players and can look forward to basketball season too. In football, we're on the tube in our own region for every conference game. Now I can easily drive to away games at 7 different schools.

So basically you're saying it's better to be in the ACC because it's easier to win games in football and basketball?

Maybe it's just me. But I didn't think that is what he said at all.

I take he means that he prefers the ACC for football because most of the opponents are within driving distance and that he prefers ACC bb because they are now recruiting their region better.

It's not as though VT is getting national basketball recruits, but they are getting better ones from their region - Maryland and Virginia.

The Hokies were lost in Big East basketball. They are right at home in the ACC for both sports.

Of all the teams that were involved in ACC expansion, they were the least desireable, but geographically and culturally, they made the most sense.

Cheers,
Neil

Yeah, I've never really understood the bile toward VT during the whole expansion mess...particularly whenever it comes from Louisville, UC or USF fans.

MichaelSavage Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:

mr jolly Wrote:Being in the ACC has been great. I love it. I can't imagine any Hokie fan not saying it was the right move. Football's as good as ever, and now we're recruiting 4 star basketball players and can look forward to basketball season too. In football, we're on the tube in our own region for every conference game. Now I can easily drive to away games at 7 different schools.

So basically you're saying it's better to be in the ACC because it's easier to win games in football and basketball?

Maybe it's just me. But I didn't think that is what he said at all.

I take he means that he prefers the ACC for football because most of the opponents are within driving distance and that he prefers ACC bb because they are now recruiting their region better.

It's not as though VT is getting national basketball recruits, but they are getting better ones from their region - Maryland and Virginia.

The Hokies were lost in Big East basketball. They are right at home in the ACC for both sports.

Of all the teams that were involved in ACC expansion, they were the least desireable, but geographically and culturally, they made the most sense.

Cheers,
Neil

Yeah, I've never really understood the bile toward VT during the whole expansion mess...particularly whenever it comes from Louisville, UC or USF fans.

From our end, I really haven't seen any hate towards Virginia Tech from Louisville fans. The VT hate seems to be bitcruncher and then a scattering of occasional posts.

I hated VT when they were in the BEast. They were a rival. That's how you're supposed to feel about them.

But it will take VT a while to build rivalries. Right now the former BEast teams are new ACC members, and are viewed as outsiders or interlopers.

We were more than lost in Big East basketball. We spent 9 years in the Big East Football conference before we were even allowed to play Big East basketball. I don't have to explain what that does to our recruiting when all of the rest of the talent around us was being gobbled up by ACC teams. This year we finished 3rd in the ACC and landed four 4 star recruits because we can suddenly recruit in our region with ACC basketball to sell. No, its not national, but it's great to be competitive and include basketball in my life again.

Our football recruiting hasn't changed too much. We built our program by keeping the top high school talent in state and that's still the cornerstone of our philosophy. Out of state recruiting is seeing some shift from eastern recruits to more southern recruits, but the talent level has stayed consistent. We've never signed a lot of 5 star players and we still don't. But we get real solid 3's and sprinkling of 4's too.

I also sense that the attitude is (slowly) becoming more accepting within the ACC about our being there. Any knocks about our ability to compete have disappeared as we've had wins over everybody in the league in basketball. Our football was never in question, although they did pick us to finish 6th in the first season when we won it. In hindsight I think we've brought as much to the table as any of the other expansion teams and are quietly fitting very naturally into the ACC.

I have yet to hear any USF fan post negatively about VTech. As a matter of fact most were very happy Greenberg our basketball coach went to the Hokies.

Quote:We were more than lost in Big East basketball. We spent 9 years in the Big East Football conference before we were even allowed to play Big East basketball. I don't have to explain what that does to our recruiting when all of the rest of the talent around us was being gobbled up by ACC teams. This year we finished 3rd in the ACC and landed four 4 star recruits because we can suddenly recruit in our region with ACC basketball to sell. No, its not national, but it's great to be competitive and include basketball in my life again.

-- No offense friend, but I think you are giving credit to the wrong source. Seth Greenburg is responsible for making Va Tech hoops respectable not being the ACC. Va Tech bball didn't fail for because it was in the Big East. It failed because of who your coach was while you were in the Big East. Miami did fine in basketball for a long stretch while they were in the Big East, so that makes your "regional" argument a little less strong

Also, over the last two to three yrs a lot of really good kids from the state maryland committed to play in the Big East. That would also seem to put a hole or two in you regionalism argument

Jackson

MichaelSavage Wrote:

omnicarrier Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:

mr jolly Wrote:Being in the ACC has been great. I love it. I can't imagine any Hokie fan not saying it was the right move. Football's as good as ever, and now we're recruiting 4 star basketball players and can look forward to basketball season too. In football, we're on the tube in our own region for every conference game. Now I can easily drive to away games at 7 different schools.

So basically you're saying it's better to be in the ACC because it's easier to win games in football and basketball?

Maybe it's just me. But I didn't think that is what he said at all.

I take he means that he prefers the ACC for football because most of the opponents are within driving distance and that he prefers ACC bb because they are now recruiting their region better.

It's not as though VT is getting national basketball recruits, but they are getting better ones from their region - Maryland and Virginia.

The Hokies were lost in Big East basketball. They are right at home in the ACC for both sports.

Of all the teams that were involved in ACC expansion, they were the least desireable, but geographically and culturally, they made the most sense.

Cheers,
Neil

Yeah, I've never really understood the bile toward VT during the whole expansion mess...particularly whenever it comes from Louisville, UC or USF fans.

Uh, what are you talking about especially from the UofL, UC or USF fans in regards to VPI-(That is your official name ). That only problem most UofL fans have/had with VPI is not with the school or team but Marcus Vick and his actions in the Gator Bowl.

My feeling on your school is that you made the right choice and that you are in the league you belong in. As for Miami they made the right choice as well. IMHO only BC made a blunder by leaving their Northeastern Roots.

Jackson1011 Wrote:

Quote:We were more than lost in Big East basketball. We spent 9 years in the Big East Football conference before we were even allowed to play Big East basketball. I don't have to explain what that does to our recruiting when all of the rest of the talent around us was being gobbled up by ACC teams. This year we finished 3rd in the ACC and landed four 4 star recruits because we can suddenly recruit in our region with ACC basketball to sell. No, its not national, but it's great to be competitive and include basketball in my life again.

-- No offense friend, but I think you are giving credit to the wrong source. Seth Greenburg is responsible for making Va Tech hoops respectable not being the ACC. Va Tech bball didn't fail for because it was in the Big East. It failed because of who your coach was while you were in the Big East. Miami did fine in basketball for a long stretch while they were in the Big East, so that makes your "regional" argument a little less strong

Also, over the last two to three yrs a lot of really good kids from the state maryland committed to play in the Big East. That would also seem to put a hole or two in you regionalism argument

Jackson

Everyone else in the Big East had a huge head start in basketball on us so its tough to blame it all on the coaches who were basically recruiting without any real league identity for so long. Seth did come in and turn it around and get us into the Big East tourney in our final year and he did well in the ACC with those same recruits. But if you believe that we would have landed the class we did this year without being in the ACC Seth himself would tell you you're wrong. We haven't had any 4 star signees until this year that I can ever remember and now we have 4 in one class. We are also recruiting MD very strongly now (not before) and had 3 of our recruits playing this year in the Capital classic (Hudson, Delaney, and Gilchrist), all 4 star. Gilchrist is defecting, but we still have 2 other 4's in Allen and Thompson. We don't land these at Virginia Tech without being an ACC team.

mr jolly Wrote:We were more than lost in Big East basketball. We spent 9 years in the Big East Football conference before we were even allowed to play Big East basketball. I don't have to explain what that does to our recruiting when all of the rest of the talent around us was being gobbled up by ACC teams. This year we finished 3rd in the ACC and landed four 4 star recruits because we can suddenly recruit in our region with ACC basketball to sell. No, its not national, but it's great to be competitive and include basketball in my life again.

I never did like the fact that Temple and Virginia Tech were not originally accepted as full BEast members. That seemed to me to be very short sighted and stupid, which is why this hybrid still survives today.