(05-31-2012 10:58 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  The solution is simple - just get everyone to sign a GOR for 20 years. The problem there is that a number of ACC schools would rather be in the SEC, so they wouldn't sign such a deal.

In all conferences, the equation is pretty much the same: Those schools that do not see themselves as wanting, or being able, to leave a conference now or in the foreseeable future, are in favor of high exit barriers. Those schools that do see themselves as wanting and being able to leave now or in the foreseeable future want low exit barriers.

Note that to favor high exit barriers, a school need only either not want to leave or not be able to leave. Even if it wants to leave, if it sees itself as unable to leave, it will favor high exit barriers. E.g., my USF would very much like to be invited to join the SEC or even ACC, but since those conferences have no interest in us, we see our fate as tied to the Big East, thus we want high exit barriers to leaving the Big East.

That was the problem with The BEast. All the schools would have been fine, if the conference hadn't started out small, and we'd have just stuck together. But the various schools all had different priorities. So that was doomed from the start, and it's long dead now...

The nBe resembles CUSA far more than it resembles the original Big East...

(05-31-2012 07:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 05:59 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 05:32 PM)EERSFAN Wrote:  I'm so glad all these ACC apologists have come out of the woodwork. The next month is going to be spectacular.

I think you're full of it. Whether that's intentional or if you are merely a message board pawn is up for debate. But in the end I have no worries about Pitt. Either the ACC stays as is and it will be business as usual, or Pitt will be going to the PAC16 with ND, Syracuse and one of BC/Rutgers/UCONN.

All of the schools in the ACC (whether the ACC stays intact or not) are going to be just fine. Several of the schools, like Carolina, could end up in a situation where they could make much more money than by staying in the ACC.
It would be better to give up the dollars to stay with schools that you have much in common with, than to sell out for 30 pieces of sliver.

The thing that I have a problem with in that statement---

just how much in common does FSU and Clemson have with a good bit of the schools in the ACC? The ACC has grown so big that I think the commonality that the conference used to have is just totally gone. The BC move, which forced this years Pitt/Syracuse moves- blew that out of the water.

WVU and FSU have a lot in common. Many of the folks who helped build FSU from nothing into a national football power came to Tallahassee from Morgantown (look it up), and they used WVU as the blueprint for building up FSU's football program. Many of those same people are still at FSU, and most of the ones that aren't are still active on campus. WVU and FSU have a lot more in common than any ACC school does with the Seminoles...

It's the same with Clemson. WVU and Clemson are very similar schools, with similar missions and priorities. There's more in common between the 2 schools than anyone in the ACC...

Whether or not that means anything remains to be seen. But there are many more similarities than differences with those 2 schools. That's not the case with the rest of the ACC...

(06-01-2012 07:45 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's the same with Clemson. WVU and Clemson are very similar schools, with similar missions and priorities. There's more in common between the 2 schools than anyone in the ACC...

Whether or not that means anything remains to be seen. But there are many more similarities than differences with those 2 schools. That's not the case with the rest of the ACC...

FSU and Clemson have the "deep south" football cultures characteristic of the SEC. That is a poor fit with the ACC, which has a mid-atlantic basketball culture.

(06-01-2012 07:34 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 07:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 05:59 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 05:32 PM)EERSFAN Wrote:  I'm so glad all these ACC apologists have come out of the woodwork. The next month is going to be spectacular.

I think you're full of it. Whether that's intentional or if you are merely a message board pawn is up for debate. But in the end I have no worries about Pitt. Either the ACC stays as is and it will be business as usual, or Pitt will be going to the PAC16 with ND, Syracuse and one of BC/Rutgers/UCONN.

All of the schools in the ACC (whether the ACC stays intact or not) are going to be just fine. Several of the schools, like Carolina, could end up in a situation where they could make much more money than by staying in the ACC.
It would be better to give up the dollars to stay with schools that you have much in common with, than to sell out for 30 pieces of sliver.

The thing that I have a problem with in that statement---

just how much in common does FSU and Clemson have with a good bit of the schools in the ACC? The ACC has grown so big that I think the commonality that the conference used to have is just totally gone. The BC move, which forced this years Pitt/Syracuse moves- blew that out of the water.

Not much. The act of giving all rights to ESPN across all sports is to raise the profile and exposure of the majority of the conference, who would otherwise be getting zero, one, maybe two nationally televised football games a year. This was done at the expense of maximizing the dollars in the contract, along with forcing whoever to bid to take Raycom because of their "long history with the ACC (oh, and my son works there)".

Additional exposure does Florida State no good. They were either voted down because there are more BC's, Wakes and NC State's in the league (The FSU-NCSU game fell all the way to Raycom, making me chuckle when NCSU is considered the target for the SEC), weren't asked for their opinion, or in another case of lack of athletic leadership, didn't care enough to pay attention until a red number showed up in the ledger.

(06-01-2012 07:18 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 07:03 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 09:56 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 07:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 05:59 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I think you're full of it. Whether that's intentional or if you are merely a message board pawn is up for debate. But in the end I have no worries about Pitt. Either the ACC stays as is and it will be business as usual, or Pitt will be going to the PAC16 with ND, Syracuse and one of BC/Rutgers/UCONN.

All of the schools in the ACC (whether the ACC stays intact or not) are going to be just fine. Several of the schools, like Carolina, could end up in a situation where they could make much more money than by staying in the ACC.
It would be better to give up the dollars to stay with schools that you have much in common with, than to sell out for 30 pieces of sliver.

I don't expect anything to happen to the ACC in the near future. Longer term, who knows. The only thing I have a strong opinion about is that no ACC school is seriously flirting with the Big12 right now. There has been a lot more smoke (fire?) in the past with B1G and PAC expansion rumors the past few years than we've seen with the chatter about FSU and Clemson going to the Big12. Or maybe it was VT and Miami instead. Perhaps GT is the real done deal with NCSU? I can't keep it all straight anymore when it comes to who the Big12 is supposedly taking from the ACC.

It's always been FSU & Clemson first, but as they say, "Kill the head & the body will die."

VT has been the dominant football program in the ACC. So what head are you cutting?

VT ain't sticking around either.

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 07:18 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 07:03 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 09:56 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 07:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  All of the schools in the ACC (whether the ACC stays intact or not) are going to be just fine. Several of the schools, like Carolina, could end up in a situation where they could make much more money than by staying in the ACC.
It would be better to give up the dollars to stay with schools that you have much in common with, than to sell out for 30 pieces of sliver.

I don't expect anything to happen to the ACC in the near future. Longer term, who knows. The only thing I have a strong opinion about is that no ACC school is seriously flirting with the Big12 right now. There has been a lot more smoke (fire?) in the past with B1G and PAC expansion rumors the past few years than we've seen with the chatter about FSU and Clemson going to the Big12. Or maybe it was VT and Miami instead. Perhaps GT is the real done deal with NCSU? I can't keep it all straight anymore when it comes to who the Big12 is supposedly taking from the ACC.

It's always been FSU & Clemson first, but as they say, "Kill the head & the body will die."

VT has been the dominant football program in the ACC. So what head are you cutting?

VT ain't sticking around either.

So what date has to pass so you will believe that nobody from the ACC is going to the Big 12?

(06-01-2012 10:10 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 07:18 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 07:03 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 09:56 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I don't expect anything to happen to the ACC in the near future. Longer term, who knows. The only thing I have a strong opinion about is that no ACC school is seriously flirting with the Big12 right now. There has been a lot more smoke (fire?) in the past with B1G and PAC expansion rumors the past few years than we've seen with the chatter about FSU and Clemson going to the Big12. Or maybe it was VT and Miami instead. Perhaps GT is the real done deal with NCSU? I can't keep it all straight anymore when it comes to who the Big12 is supposedly taking from the ACC.

It's always been FSU & Clemson first, but as they say, "Kill the head & the body will die."

VT has been the dominant football program in the ACC. So what head are you cutting?

VT ain't sticking around either.

So what date has to pass so you will believe that nobody from the ACC is going to the Big 12?

That's easy- August 15. That's the last day that a team can leave the ACC and play in the new conference for 2013-14.

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

Out of curiosity, how hard do you think they are looking. Publicly, both stated that they would be willing to listen to opportunities should they present themselves. However, it seems like these are empty statements since conferences appear to take the approach that schools must approach the conferences and not the other way around. IMO, neither FSU or Clemson approached the Big12. But I'd be curious to see your take.

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

The thing for UVA is after FSU/Clemson move- the big ACC teams will be unless ESPN props them up- will be scurrying looking around. Maryland, UVA, VT, UNC, Duke, and NCSU. If 1 of those 6 leave- the ACC is in trouble.

(06-01-2012 10:13 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

Out of curiosity, how hard do you think they are looking. Publicly, both stated that they would be willing to listen to opportunities should they present themselves. However, it seems like these are empty statements since conferences appear to take the approach that schools must approach the conferences and not the other way around. IMO, neither FSU or Clemson approached the Big12. But I'd be curious to see your take.

That's the same cat and mouse game that was played last summer. Legally, they have to say that.

If you're not looking to move- you don't even say that you're willing to listen to opportunities.

(06-01-2012 10:15 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 10:13 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

Out of curiosity, how hard do you think they are looking. Publicly, both stated that they would be willing to listen to opportunities should they present themselves. However, it seems like these are empty statements since conferences appear to take the approach that schools must approach the conferences and not the other way around. IMO, neither FSU or Clemson approached the Big12. But I'd be curious to see your take.

That's the same cat and mouse game that was played last summer. Legally, they have to say that.

If you're not looking to move- you don't even say that you're willing to listen to opportunities.

Who knows why they really said it. For all we know, this could be saber rattling to let the ACC know that FSU and Clemson want to see a stronger committment to FB. The only statements that are directly attributed to the players in all of this - Big12 schools and other "potential" invitees - are that the Big12 is happy at 10 and they are not looking to expand.

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

The thing is though...the North Carolina schools are literally bound together by the same Board. I do not think that is the case in Virginia. Yeah there would be a political cost to VT if they decided to go ahead and move but whatever gains they have had in other departments besides sports has all had something to do with the notoriety the school has gained from it's sports.

A threat to the notoriety of Virginia Tech football is no laughing matter should the departure of the other two perceived major football powers of the ACC actually happen. The pressure for Tech to make it's own decision would definitely rise.

It isn't like Virginia has a leash on Tech. It is not the same as the North Carolina situation. It just works best for all if Virginia and Virginia Tech both make a move. Tech has just as much clout in that conversation as Virginia does. Previous political debts be damned.

Then you don't understand Virginia politics very well.

(06-01-2012 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Then you don't understand Virginia politics very well.

Right, and you are so much better versed Mr. Memphis?

(06-01-2012 10:43 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

The thing is though...the North Carolina schools are literally bound together by the same Board. I do not think that is the case in Virginia. Yeah there would be a political cost to VT if they decided to go ahead and move but whatever gains they have had in other departments besides sports has all had something to do with the notoriety the school has gained from it's sports.

A threat to the notoriety of Virginia Tech football is no laughing matter should the departure of the other two perceived major football powers of the ACC actually happen. The pressure for Tech to make it's own decision would definitely rise.

It isn't like Virginia has a leash on Tech. It is not the same as the North Carolina situation. It just works best for all if Virginia and Virginia Tech both make a move. Tech has just as much clout in that conversation as Virginia does. Previous political debts be damned.

Disagree here. As someone else said earlier, Va Tech will not leave UVa in the ACC. If UVa has a new home, then they will be able to. The flagship university is not going to loss a cent so Va Tech can leave.

(06-01-2012 10:49 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Then you don't understand Virginia politics very well.

Right, and you are so much better versed Mr. Memphis?

Yep. Since I lived and worked in Virginia for 16 years, and still have many friends up there, including friends in Virginia/DC law and government, as well as wealthy boosters of both UVA and VA Tech.

[


quote='samandrea' pid='7952850' dateline='1338574268']

(06-01-2012 10:43 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-01-2012 09:05 AM)EERSFAN Wrote:  VT ain't sticking around either.

I believe that FSU and Clemson would be looking around, but VT has legit political baggage with all of the chits it cashed in to get into the ACC in the first place (as discussed here previously). So, unless one believes that UVA is heading to the Big Ten or SEC (which is a much much much much bigger leap), then the likelihood of VT going anywhere is extremely low.

My take is that UVA cannot lose a single *cent* if VT wants to move, which means that UVA would have to move *first* and they don't have the same motivation as the SEC-type football-focused schools.

The thing is though...the North Carolina schools are literally bound together by the same Board. I do not think that is the case in Virginia. Yeah there would be a political cost to VT if they decided to go ahead and move but whatever gains they have had in other departments besides sports has all had something to do with the notoriety the school has gained from it's sports.

A threat to the notoriety of Virginia Tech football is no laughing matter should the departure of the other two perceived major football powers of the ACC actually happen. The pressure for Tech to make it's own decision would definitely rise.

It isn't like Virginia has a leash on Tech. It is not the same as the North Carolina situation. It just works best for all if Virginia and Virginia Tech both make a move. Tech has just as much clout in that conversation as Virginia does. Previous political debts be damned.

Disagree here. As someone else said earlier, Va Tech will not leave UVa in the ACC. If UVa has a new home, then they will be able to. The flagship university is not going to loss a cent so Va Tech can leave.
[/quote]

Hence the reason they are in the ACC....ALL CASH CONFERENCE!