(06-08-2012 03:33 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:08 PM)stever20 Wrote:  It''s very interesting...

I actually kind of am starting to back off a smidge the FSU/Clemson to Big 12 reports....

Now, I don't think for a second that Clemson doesn't want to go. I think that's been firmly established....

But, FSU I think the president may just have enough sway to keep it....

The question then becomes, is two-fold...
1- Is Clemson prepared to go alone
2- Is Big 12 prepared to accept just Clemson(or Clemson and Louisville)?

Publically announcing you are going to be open to invitations reinforces that you are considering moving. The people who claim to know are even more certain than before. And it all went pretty much as I predicted that morning before the meeting. Nothing of substance, we're happy in the ACC but looking, with a couple of jabs at the ACC.

I'm still at 75% going to happen.

If FSU doesn't go, I've got no idea about whether Clemson would still go or if the Big 12 would take them. Whether the Big 12 would take them would depend on how much of a revenue bump Clemson and Louisville generated. I'm guessing not enough to go through the trouble.

I still think the 'but we have an open mind' comments are really saying 'but if the SEC is interested things may change'.

sec or b10 like everyone else.
Those 2 further separating from the rest could be real the problem for everyone.

You guys are ignoring how much time and pressure it took to get to 4...and this is ONLY happening now because the money is right. The first step will be 6. Maybe 10-15 years from now at the earliest. You keyboard jockeys act like the Presidents and Commissioners care one ounce about what the fans think... http://nittanylionsden.com/2012-articles...posal.html

(06-08-2012 04:09 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  You guys are ignoring how much time and pressure it took to get to 4...and this is ONLY happening now because the money is right. The first step will be 6. Maybe 10-15 years from now at the earliest. You keyboard jockeys act like the Presidents and Commissioners care one ounce about what the fans think... http://nittanylionsden.com/2012-articles...posal.html

Oh, we know they don't care what the fans "think." They only noticed because the fans started turning the bowl games off in record numbers. That's why the threats to pull back to the "old system" are bluffs.

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

I don't think the ACC will end up on the short end of the stick. Just way too many assumptions and too much paranoia right now.

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

When it became obvious that some numbers were being made up and other numbers ignored to favor the cause.

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

Agree with this to a great extent. But it actually works both ways, in general (but not all) we have those ACC fans trying to protect itself from the lost of prestige and then we have the ACC fans of schools wanting to leave at the first sign of not being "on top" now.

Instead of FSU fans and Clemson fans saying we need to get better and restore the ACC's image they are "we're out of here" at the first sign of weakness (again in general, but certainly not all).

Just the way it goes I guess.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-08-2012 07:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

Agree with this to a great extent. But it actually works both ways, in general (but not all) we have those ACC fans trying to protect itself from the lost of prestige and then we have the ACC fans of schools wanting to leave at the first sign of not being "on top" now.

Instead of FSU fans and Clemson fans saying we need to get better and restore the ACC's image they are "we're out of here" at the first sign of weakness (again in general, but certainly not all).

Just the way it goes I guess.

Neil, you could have said the same thing about Miami, VT, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse in The BEast, prior to their move to the ACC. So it doesn't surprise me at all. It's the nature of the world...

(06-09-2012 06:37 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 07:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

Agree with this to a great extent. But it actually works both ways, in general (but not all) we have those ACC fans trying to protect itself from the lost of prestige and then we have the ACC fans of schools wanting to leave at the first sign of not being "on top" now.

Instead of FSU fans and Clemson fans saying we need to get better and restore the ACC's image they are "we're out of here" at the first sign of weakness (again in general, but certainly not all).

Just the way it goes I guess.

Neil, you could have said the same thing about Miami, VT, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse in The BEast, prior to their move to the ACC. So it doesn't surprise me at all. It's the nature of the world...

I don't think it is exactly the same thing. The BE in 2003-2004 and last season were two very different entities in and of themselves. The big reason for why BC, Miami and VT left were to get away from the hybrid setup that - at the time - was not serious about expanding the conference beyond 8 FB playing members. The fear was the BE was going to let FB die a slow death. Fast forward to when Syracuse and Pitt decided to leave the BE, it was in even worst shape than when the previous 3 schools left. Not only was the BE in an even worst condition from a hybrid standpoint, the FB playing members of the conference had much less common traits than in 2003-2004.

I know many on here will say the ACC does not care about FB either; however, when you compare it to what the BE became the comparisons are like night and day. All of the schools in the ACC play football, and there is a legitimate concern about FB. It may not be to the levels of SEC committment, but I think the conference is putting more emphasis on FB as time goes on. Most on here won't understand it, but there are a number of factors that make the ACC a strong conference, and academics definitely play a role in that. Schools want to associate with peer institutions in all facets of the collegiate world, and athletics are a part of that world.

(06-09-2012 07:45 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 06:37 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 07:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 03:49 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  That must give you have extra incentive to continue your propaganda.

When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

Agree with this to a great extent. But it actually works both ways, in general (but not all) we have those ACC fans trying to protect itself from the lost of prestige and then we have the ACC fans of schools wanting to leave at the first sign of not being "on top" now.

Instead of FSU fans and Clemson fans saying we need to get better and restore the ACC's image they are "we're out of here" at the first sign of weakness (again in general, but certainly not all).

Just the way it goes I guess.

Neil, you could have said the same thing about Miami, VT, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse in The BEast, prior to their move to the ACC. So it doesn't surprise me at all. It's the nature of the world...

I don't think it is exactly the same thing. The BE in 2003-2004 and last season were two very different entities in and of themselves. The big reason for why BC, Miami and VT left were to get away from the hybrid setup that - at the time - was not serious about expanding the conference beyond 8 FB playing members. The fear was the BE was going to let FB die a slow death. Fast forward to when Syracuse and Pitt decided to leave the BE, it was in even worst shape than when the previous 3 schools left. Not only was the BE in an even worst condition from a hybrid standpoint, the FB playing members of the conference had much less common traits than in 2003-2004.

I know many on here will say the ACC does not care about FB either; however, when you compare it to what the BE became the comparisons are like night and day. All of the schools in the ACC play football, and there is a legitimate concern about FB. It may not be to the levels of SEC committment, but I think the conference is putting more emphasis on FB as time goes on. Most on here won't understand it, but there are a number of factors that make the ACC a strong conference, and academics definitely play a role in that. Schools want to associate with peer institutions in all facets of the collegiate world, and athletics are a part of that world.

miko, if you'll remember those schools voted to keep the hybrid intact both times the issue came up for a vote, before those schools left for the ACC...

(06-09-2012 08:17 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 07:45 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 06:37 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 07:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 06:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  When did speculating on realignment in the Conference Realignment forum become propaganda?

Big East fans have dealt with this stuff - and far better than ACC fans have to date - since 2003...

ACC fans complaining about being on the short end of the stick now is hilarious IMO...

Agree with this to a great extent. But it actually works both ways, in general (but not all) we have those ACC fans trying to protect itself from the lost of prestige and then we have the ACC fans of schools wanting to leave at the first sign of not being "on top" now.

Instead of FSU fans and Clemson fans saying we need to get better and restore the ACC's image they are "we're out of here" at the first sign of weakness (again in general, but certainly not all).

Just the way it goes I guess.

Neil, you could have said the same thing about Miami, VT, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse in The BEast, prior to their move to the ACC. So it doesn't surprise me at all. It's the nature of the world...

I don't think it is exactly the same thing. The BE in 2003-2004 and last season were two very different entities in and of themselves. The big reason for why BC, Miami and VT left were to get away from the hybrid setup that - at the time - was not serious about expanding the conference beyond 8 FB playing members. The fear was the BE was going to let FB die a slow death. Fast forward to when Syracuse and Pitt decided to leave the BE, it was in even worst shape than when the previous 3 schools left. Not only was the BE in an even worst condition from a hybrid standpoint, the FB playing members of the conference had much less common traits than in 2003-2004.

I know many on here will say the ACC does not care about FB either; however, when you compare it to what the BE became the comparisons are like night and day. All of the schools in the ACC play football, and there is a legitimate concern about FB. It may not be to the levels of SEC committment, but I think the conference is putting more emphasis on FB as time goes on. Most on here won't understand it, but there are a number of factors that make the ACC a strong conference, and academics definitely play a role in that. Schools want to associate with peer institutions in all facets of the collegiate world, and athletics are a part of that world.

miko, if you'll remember those schools voted to keep the hybrid intact both times the issue came up for a vote, before those schools left for the ACC...

True, but only because there were no other options that would have netted the all sports members the same benefits as keeping the hybrid in place. As we have debated in the past, the BE FB conference that was originally contrived was doomed to fail from the beginning due to not having enough firepower. If PSU and/or ND would have been a FB playing member from the start, then the BE conference would have been strong and would have thrived this entire time. Since this never happened, the original BE was doomed from the start. However, there were differences between the original BE and the NBE (before the replacements). The original BE could have still been a solid conference. Its problem was it would not grow beyond 8 for FB. If UL would have came in as a 9th member, then perhaps the BE FB conf could have been something special. Keep in mind that UL was on top around the same time that Miami and VT were also killing it. Who knows how the course of history could have changed if the BE would have strung together successive wins. The momentum that would have been built up would have changed the complexion of the BE and perhaps no one defects.

Compare the original BE to the NBE, and it is clearly a very different situation. The academic firepower was gutted along with the FB strength. The new schools invited in did not look very much like Pitt, Syracuse or Rutgers at all. They had different goals and objectives as universities, and the cohesiveness that was there in the original BE was shattered. The NBE had little in common with each other, and it clearly showed. Now the NNBE looks even more ridiculous than the NBE. Who among the original schools really wants to be a part of that mess now? I'll bet Rutgers and UCONN fans want nothing to do with it, but none of those fans on here will admit this truth.

good post miko

(06-08-2012 03:28 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I will say something else....

I think the FSU fans are kind of the important x factor now. Very similar to Missouri. If the FSU fans start demanding to go to the Big 12, I think the BOT will be forced to override the president.

I don't think it's very similar at all yet. Missouri fans wanted out. Full Stop. They would have taken a bid to Mars just to get away from the Big XII by the time the fans reached that level of rage.

FSU's fanbase is full of people that want into the SEC. Unless the SEC comes out and says "We will never take you." these people will want the SEC over any other conference, including the ACC and Big XII. Therefore, there's no current consensus. If that changes, it's a Missouri scenario.

(06-09-2012 10:47 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 08:17 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 07:45 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-09-2012 06:37 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-08-2012 07:28 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Agree with this to a great extent. But it actually works both ways, in general (but not all) we have those ACC fans trying to protect itself from the lost of prestige and then we have the ACC fans of schools wanting to leave at the first sign of not being "on top" now.

Instead of FSU fans and Clemson fans saying we need to get better and restore the ACC's image they are "we're out of here" at the first sign of weakness (again in general, but certainly not all).

Just the way it goes I guess.

Neil, you could have said the same thing about Miami, VT, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse in The BEast, prior to their move to the ACC. So it doesn't surprise me at all. It's the nature of the world...

I don't think it is exactly the same thing. The BE in 2003-2004 and last season were two very different entities in and of themselves. The big reason for why BC, Miami and VT left were to get away from the hybrid setup that - at the time - was not serious about expanding the conference beyond 8 FB playing members. The fear was the BE was going to let FB die a slow death. Fast forward to when Syracuse and Pitt decided to leave the BE, it was in even worst shape than when the previous 3 schools left. Not only was the BE in an even worst condition from a hybrid standpoint, the FB playing members of the conference had much less common traits than in 2003-2004.

I know many on here will say the ACC does not care about FB either; however, when you compare it to what the BE became the comparisons are like night and day. All of the schools in the ACC play football, and there is a legitimate concern about FB. It may not be to the levels of SEC committment, but I think the conference is putting more emphasis on FB as time goes on. Most on here won't understand it, but there are a number of factors that make the ACC a strong conference, and academics definitely play a role in that. Schools want to associate with peer institutions in all facets of the collegiate world, and athletics are a part of that world.

miko, if you'll remember those schools voted to keep the hybrid intact both times the issue came up for a vote, before those schools left for the ACC...

True, but only because there were no other options that would have netted the all sports members the same benefits as keeping the hybrid in place. As we have debated in the past, the BE FB conference that was originally contrived was doomed to fail from the beginning due to not having enough firepower. If PSU and/or ND would have been a FB playing member from the start, then the BE conference would have been strong and would have thrived this entire time. Since this never happened, the original BE was doomed from the start. However, there were differences between the original BE and the NBE (before the replacements). The original BE could have still been a solid conference. Its problem was it would not grow beyond 8 for FB. If UL would have came in as a 9th member, then perhaps the BE FB conf could have been something special. Keep in mind that UL was on top around the same time that Miami and VT were also killing it. Who knows how the course of history could have changed if the BE would have strung together successive wins. The momentum that would have been built up would have changed the complexion of the BE and perhaps no one defects.

Compare the original BE to the NBE, and it is clearly a very different situation. The academic firepower was gutted along with the FB strength. The new schools invited in did not look very much like Pitt, Syracuse or Rutgers at all. They had different goals and objectives as universities, and the cohesiveness that was there in the original BE was shattered. The NBE had little in common with each other, and it clearly showed. Now the NNBE looks even more ridiculous than the NBE. Who among the original schools really wants to be a part of that mess now? I'll bet Rutgers and UCONN fans want nothing to do with it, but none of those fans on here will admit this truth.

I listen to folks that continually propose the fact that Penn State isn't a part of the eastern football landscape being the entire reason eastern football failed and laugh. It reminds me of a child bemoaning the loss of his father's approval...

If The BEast had done anything to assist the football schools, it might have been worth it to stick around. But they didn't and it held eastern football back, and ultimately made it unrecognizable. Yet we always heard "We can't leave the non-football schools", and the loudest voices with this refrain are all in the ACC now - or headed there...

Give me a break...

http://www.tampabay.com/sports/colleges/...es/1234359

For anyone dying for reliable mainstream sources. Of course, everyone knows they discussed realignment, but this paper would have you believe nothing was discussed.

Nothing much new here, except that ESPN is actually seriously talking about the subject. Ubben, despite the headline, believes "the Big 12 will expand at some point."

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...-expansion

(06-07-2012 08:23 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-07-2012 08:12 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(06-07-2012 08:07 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-07-2012 08:03 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(06-07-2012 07:56 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Then they are staying at 10. No way FSU and Clemson are that stupid to go to the Big 12 and die a slow death by the hands of Texas.

It's better than die a slow death by making 7-10 million dollars less per year than your in-state rivals. That's what you don't understand. Over 13 years- that's like a 90-130 million dollar difference. A school can not afford that at all.... FSU and Clemson have to do something.

The NET gain in the Big 12 is almost nothing after higher travel costs.

Bunk. Travel costs for FSU will be going up regardless- because of having Syracuse and Pittsburgh in the conference.

And, please don't sight that BS thing assuming that gas is going to double in the next 5 years.

1 trip to either Pittsburgh or Syracuse vs almost every opponent in the Big 12?

really?

We already did this comparison. Check the flights from Tallahassee to the Big 12 and ACC schools. You will find that there is no difference air travel cost. The closest ACC opponent is Ga Tech.

(06-07-2012 09:30 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(06-07-2012 08:32 AM)esayem Wrote:  Most every school is by a major airport, which helps when you are flying your baseball, soccer, swimming etc. teams.

The XII doesn't sponsor men's soccer. The XII sponsors 21 sports, the ACC sponsors 25.

XII - baseball (m), basketball (m,w), cross-country (m,w), equestrian (w), football (m), golf (m,w), gymnastics (w), rowing (w), soccer (w), softball (w), swimming and diving (m,w), tennis (m,w), track and field (m,w), volleyball (w), wrestling (m).

ACC - baseball (m), basketball (m,w), cross-country (m,w), field hockey (w), football (m), golf (m,w), indoor track and field (m,w), lacrosse (m,w), rowing (w), soccer (m,w), softball (w), swimming and diving (m,w), tennis (m,w), track and field (m,w), volleyball (w), wrestling (m)

Bolded are the sports the other doesn't sponsor.

FSU does not have a wrestling,rowing, or lacrosse team.

FSU Men's Sports
Baseball
Basketball
Cross Country
Football
Golf
Swimming & Diving
TennisTrack & Field