(01-22-2021 12:40 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-21-2021 06:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You act like Mark Warner and Virginia Tech "saved" the ACC.

Who acted like Virginia Tech saved the conference?

(01-21-2021 01:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  To be specific about my second guessing of Swafford’s actions...

2) He should have focused on football culture, rather than TV markets, in the first expansion (although Mark Warner saved him from himself & ESPN)

Virginia Tech is the ACC's Baylor. They weren't wanted. The only difference is they're a public school. OK so they're the ACC's Texas Tech then.

(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 12:40 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-21-2021 06:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You act like Mark Warner and Virginia Tech "saved" the ACC.

Who acted like Virginia Tech saved the conference?

(01-21-2021 01:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  To be specific about my second guessing of Swafford’s actions...

2) He should have focused on football culture, rather than TV markets, in the first expansion (although Mark Warner saved him from himself & ESPN)

Virginia Tech is the ACC's Baylor. They weren't wanted. The only difference is they're a public school. OK so they're the ACC's Texas Tech then.

That's bull****. If VT was not wanted they would not be here. The ptb at Duke and UNC wanted them over Syracuse and BC. You don't understand how things worked in the ACC. UVa was the only school against VT, even then it was only about half their ptb because they have the brains to understand that if VT is on the table and not removed from the game, they end up up in the B10 or SEC. Most of those with brains at UVa understood that.

Leave VT hanging and they end up in the SEC with TAMU or the B10 with MD it's that damn simple. VT in their division also helped to fill the football stadiums at Duke, UNC, and UVa. Why say dumb things?

Right, and the Big 12 wanted Texas Tech and Baylor.

(01-22-2021 02:01 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Right, and the Big 12 wanted Texas Tech and Baylor.

Obviously you weren't paying attention to Statefan and you should have been.
It would be more logical to have VT in a division with Wake Forest and NC State, but a guaranteed sellout and a quick away trip goes a long way with fans that are used to being coddled, plus Virginia Tech was unlikely to challenge Duke, Carolina or UVa in basketball or any other sport.

(01-22-2021 02:10 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 02:01 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Right, and the Big 12 wanted Texas Tech and Baylor.

Obviously you weren't paying attention to Statefan and you should have been.
It would be more logical to have VT in a division with Wake Forest and NC State, but a guaranteed sellout and a quick away trip goes a long way with fans that are used to being coddled, plus Virginia Tech was unlikely to challenge Duke, Carolina or UVa in basketball or any other sport.

Correct, and it assuaged some guilt that UNC and Duke had felt for a long, long time.

The original ACC plan was Miami, Syracuse, and Boston College or is that my imagination?

And I know most people here don't understand how basketball works but the NCAA Tournament rewards strength of schedule in addition to wins unlike football where one loss usually means you are out of the playoff and for sure two losses would. Basketball schools would rather strong basketball schools be in a conference than bad schools to build their SOS. Why would Duke and North Carolina want a basketball dead weight like Virginia Tech to kill their RPI over a national power like Syracuse who if they will win will really strengthen their resume and even if they lose won't hurt it that much? "Unlikely to challenge Duke, Carolina in basketball"? Then call MEAC or Big South teams. If you want to say Virginia Tech's a better football school, go ahead. But to say they are wanted because they're a worse basketball school or that Duke and North Carolina wouldn't want extra competition? You're a Carolina fan but your basketball knowledge is Clemson level.

(01-22-2021 02:20 PM)schmolik Wrote:  The original ACC plan was Miami, Syracuse, and Boston College or is that my imagination?

And I know most people here don't understand how basketball works but the NCAA Tournament rewards strength of schedule in addition to wins unlike football where one loss usually means you are out of the playoff and for sure two losses would. Basketball schools would rather strong basketball schools be in a conference than bad schools to build their SOS. Why would Duke and North Carolina want a basketball dead weight like Virginia Tech to kill their RPI over a national power like Syracuse who if they will win will really strengthen their resume and even if they lose won't hurt it that much? "Unlikely to challenge Duke, Carolina in basketball"? Then call MEAC or Big South teams. If you want to say Virginia Tech's a better football school, go ahead. But to say they are wanted because they're a worse basketball school or that Duke and North Carolina wouldn't want extra competition? You're a Carolina fan but your basketball knowledge is Clemson level.

What exactly are you trolling for? Duke and UNC don't need anyone to build their SOS and certainly didn't need that in 2003. Actually you seem to lack imagination. The plans of peons often fall by the wayside when the real decision makers make decisions. Swoff is just the hired help to the Presidents and the real ptb. Some of those ptb had hotel rooms in the Triangle they need to keep full. VT fans spending one or two days in the Triangle is a nice boost. You are silly.

(01-22-2021 02:20 PM)schmolik Wrote:  The original ACC plan was Miami, Syracuse, and Boston College or is that my imagination?

And I know most people here don't understand how basketball works but the NCAA Tournament rewards strength of schedule in addition to wins unlike football where one loss usually means you are out of the playoff and for sure two losses would. Basketball schools would rather strong basketball schools be in a conference than bad schools to build their SOS. Why would Duke and North Carolina want a basketball dead weight like Virginia Tech to kill their RPI over a national power like Syracuse who if they will win will really strengthen their resume and even if they lose won't hurt it that much? "Unlikely to challenge Duke, Carolina in basketball"? Then call MEAC or Big South teams. If you want to say Virginia Tech's a better football school, go ahead. But to say they are wanted because they're a worse basketball school or that Duke and North Carolina wouldn't want extra competition? You're a Carolina fan but your basketball knowledge is Clemson level.

Yep!
Syracuse, Boston College and Miami was the suggestion of the ESPN provided consultant.
It's also when Duke and Carolina started a campaign against expansion and when that started to fail, a Miami only movement.
ESPN's promises of riches swayed the rest of the conference.
BTW the whole story about the Va. Governor is a little suspect when you consider that UVa, Duke and Carolina came out smelling like a rose and got everything they wanted since they were unable to keep expansion from happening.

(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 12:40 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-21-2021 06:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You act like Mark Warner and Virginia Tech "saved" the ACC.

Who acted like Virginia Tech saved the conference?

(01-21-2021 01:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  To be specific about my second guessing of Swafford’s actions...

2) He should have focused on football culture, rather than TV markets, in the first expansion (although Mark Warner saved him from himself & ESPN)

Virginia Tech is the ACC's Baylor. They weren't wanted. The only difference is they're a public school. OK so they're the ACC's Texas Tech then.

Wahoowa said Warner saved Swofford (from making a bad decision). English is not my first language but what Wahoowa said seems completely different from VT saved the ACC.

As for VT being similar to Baylor, you are borderline trolling. Why don’t you go back to the Big Ten board?

(01-22-2021 01:56 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 12:40 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-21-2021 06:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You act like Mark Warner and Virginia Tech "saved" the ACC.

Who acted like Virginia Tech saved the conference?

(01-21-2021 01:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  To be specific about my second guessing of Swafford’s actions...

2) He should have focused on football culture, rather than TV markets, in the first expansion (although Mark Warner saved him from himself & ESPN)

Virginia Tech is the ACC's Baylor. They weren't wanted. The only difference is they're a public school. OK so they're the ACC's Texas Tech then.

That's bull****. If VT was not wanted they would not be here. The ptb at Duke and UNC wanted them over Syracuse and BC. You don't understand how things worked in the ACC. UVa was the only school against VT, even then it was only about half their ptb because they have the brains to understand that if VT is on the table and not removed from the game, they end up up in the B10 or SEC. Most of those with brains at UVa understood that.

Leave VT hanging and they end up in the SEC with TAMU or the B10 with MD it's that damn simple. VT in their division also helped to fill the football stadiums at Duke, UNC, and UVa. Why say dumb things?

UNC and Dook did NOT want the ACC to grow to 12 members. They were the only dissenting votes. Not sure where you get them wanting Va Tech. They were both accepting of adding Miami ONLY back in 98 and 99 at Bobby Bowden's insistence ...but that wouldn't have gotten the ACC an football champ game per the NCAA's ruling.

I agree VT would be in the SEC right now had Va Gov not played hardball with UVa in order to get the Hokies into the ACC. That would have been horrible for everyone in NC....so it worked out.

(01-22-2021 02:39 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 12:40 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-21-2021 06:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You act like Mark Warner and Virginia Tech "saved" the ACC.

Who acted like Virginia Tech saved the conference?

(01-21-2021 01:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  To be specific about my second guessing of Swafford’s actions...

2) He should have focused on football culture, rather than TV markets, in the first expansion (although Mark Warner saved him from himself & ESPN)

Virginia Tech is the ACC's Baylor. They weren't wanted. The only difference is they're a public school. OK so they're the ACC's Texas Tech then.

Wahoowa said Warner saved Swofford (from making a bad decision). English is not my first language but what Wahoowa said seems completely different from VT saved the ACC.

As for VT being similar to Baylor, you are borderline trolling. Why don’t you go back to the Big Ten board?

His telling ACC people (present company extruded) that they "don't know basketball" is pure gold.

His exact quote (a gratuitous insult, btw) was : "And I know most people here don't understand how basketball works..."

He actually typed that on a ACC message board.

I knew that he was a huge jagoff from Jump Street, and said so. I wasn't wrong.

Some old articles about the ACC expansion:

http://dailyorange.com/2011/10/acc-cut-o...d-in-2003/

https://www.wralsportsfan.com/virginia-t.../16733003/

https://www.syracuse.com/sports/2013/06/...e_con.html

(01-22-2021 02:51 PM)YouPeople Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 01:56 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 01:46 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 12:40 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(01-21-2021 06:48 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You act like Mark Warner and Virginia Tech "saved" the ACC.

Who acted like Virginia Tech saved the conference?

(01-21-2021 01:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  To be specific about my second guessing of Swafford’s actions...

2) He should have focused on football culture, rather than TV markets, in the first expansion (although Mark Warner saved him from himself & ESPN)

Virginia Tech is the ACC's Baylor. They weren't wanted. The only difference is they're a public school. OK so they're the ACC's Texas Tech then.

That's bull****. If VT was not wanted they would not be here. The ptb at Duke and UNC wanted them over Syracuse and BC. You don't understand how things worked in the ACC. UVa was the only school against VT, even then it was only about half their ptb because they have the brains to understand that if VT is on the table and not removed from the game, they end up up in the B10 or SEC. Most of those with brains at UVa understood that.

Leave VT hanging and they end up in the SEC with TAMU or the B10 with MD it's that damn simple. VT in their division also helped to fill the football stadiums at Duke, UNC, and UVa. Why say dumb things?

UNC and Dook did NOT want the ACC to grow to 12 members. They were the only dissenting votes. Not sure where you get them wanting Va Tech. They were both accepting of adding Miami ONLY back in 98 and 99 at Bobby Bowden's insistence ...but that wouldn't have gotten the ACC an football champ game per the NCAA's ruling.

I agree VT would be in the SEC right now had Va Gov not played hardball with UVa in order to get the Hokies into the ACC. That would have been horrible for everyone in NC....so it worked out.

There is nothing sillier than reading a Syracuse take on why Syracuse got blackballed in 2003. Only FSU wanted to grow to 12. No one else really wanted that because that meant growing into NY/New England. It becomes a matter of what is least distasteful to those involved. Just because a good faith negotiation had gone on between the ACC office and Syracuse under Swofford meant nothing when it turned out that the ptb at UNC and Duke figured out they could leverage UVa to get VT instead of Syracuse.

It was easy, and as always UNC and Duke had the appearance of clean hands. Mark Warner gets the blame. Anyone dumb enough to think Duke and UNC had not gamed this out is well, just plain dumb. Not only do Duke and UNC get VT instead of Syracuse, Clemson, GT, NC State, and WF get VT and NOT Syracuse. For the cherry on top instead of anyone having to say "we think Jim Boehiem is an *******" and we don't want to go to Syracuse in the winter, NC State's Chancellor makes a motion to revisit ND and it passes - boom expansion over with the just the addition of Miami and VT.

Swofford was kept in the dark by his bosses. That's how it works at the Country Club in the Chesapeake/Tidewater region.

You make it seem like adding Syracuse was a bad thing. You make it seem like expanding to the Northeast was a bad thing. You make it seem like in 2003 adding the national champions was a bad thing. I'm sure cuseroc and TexanMark appreciate hearing that they weren't wanted in the ACC. And as a Northeasterner I'm offended you southerners don't think we're worth anything to your conference. You want to be a "southeastern" conference. News flash: We already have one.

By the way, what in the world does ptb mean?

(01-22-2021 08:00 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You make it seem like adding Syracuse was a bad thing. You make it seem like expanding to the Northeast was a bad thing. You make it seem like in 2003 adding the national champions was a bad thing. I'm sure cuseroc and TexanMark appreciate hearing that they weren't wanted in the ACC. And as a Northeasterner I'm offended you southerners don't think we're worth anything to your conference. You want to be a "southeastern" conference. News flash: We already have one.

By the way, what in the world does ptb mean?

Why are you trying to instigate a fight? Or is it just a bad trolling?

(01-22-2021 08:00 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You make it seem like adding Syracuse was a bad thing. You make it seem like expanding to the Northeast was a bad thing. You make it seem like in 2003 adding the national champions was a bad thing. I'm sure cuseroc and TexanMark appreciate hearing that they weren't wanted in the ACC. And as a Northeasterner I'm offended you southerners don't think we're worth anything to your conference. You want to be a "southeastern" conference. News flash: We already have one.

By the way, what in the world does ptb mean?

powers that be

Maryland alumni and fans by and large didn't approve of expansion north of the Mason-Dixon line. I personally liked watching and competing against a strong BE.

(01-22-2021 03:25 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Some old articles about the ACC expansion:

http://dailyorange.com/2011/10/acc-cut-o...d-in-2003/

https://www.wralsportsfan.com/virginia-t.../16733003/

https://www.syracuse.com/sports/2013/06/...e_con.html

Yes, Swofford originally wanted to invite Miami, BC and Cuse. And yes, Warner got involved.

But John Casteen, then UVa president, was supportive of getting VT from the beginning. As far as I know, UVa board didn’t really bother.

Without Warner’s push, VT won’t get invited? I don’t know the answer to that. What I do know is politicians like to get credits and Warner is a politician.

In the end, the ACC didn’t vote on Syracuse. VT got seven votes. BC got six votes and had to wait for another year.

By the way, I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish here. You are not an ACC fan but trying to disparage an ACC team on the ACC board.

(01-22-2021 09:12 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 08:00 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You make it seem like adding Syracuse was a bad thing. You make it seem like expanding to the Northeast was a bad thing. You make it seem like in 2003 adding the national champions was a bad thing. I'm sure cuseroc and TexanMark appreciate hearing that they weren't wanted in the ACC. And as a Northeasterner I'm offended you southerners don't think we're worth anything to your conference. You want to be a "southeastern" conference. News flash: We already have one.

By the way, what in the world does ptb mean?

powers that be

Maryland alumni and fans by and large didn't approve of expansion north of the Mason-Dixon line. I personally liked watching and competing against a strong BE.

How is Perman and Pines working out? Got to be better than Loh and ole stab in the back.

The only reason Syracuse, Boston College, and VaTech were on the table is to get to 12 for the lucrative CCG. That’s been said, but that’s really it. I’m sure markets came into play during this time and the aforementioned private schools were in new markets. What were the footprint options besides VaTech? ECU, West Virginia? The presidents would have laughed those propositions out of the country club.

It really is amazing the ACC was able to get the most sensible addition, Virginia Tech, in during the market model era. Cheers!

(01-22-2021 07:45 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 03:26 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Kap,

Your frustrations are duly noted and I tend to agree with many of your points here. ACC is a microcosm of realignment's failures and the failures of future realignment. Swofford had little to do with these past moves. It's the networks dictating who goes where. History and tradition is being destroyed for the mighty dollar. BC, Syracuse and Pitt don't belong in the ACC and neither does WVU. Those 4, plus Rutgers, Maryland, PSU, ND, Louisville and Cincinnati belong in a Northeastern centric P6 league. Rivalries were the backbone of college sports. ND should always be independent, but if they were to join a league that's their best fit.

What's Northeast about Louisville and Cincinnati? I felt when the Big East added Louisville and Cincinnati (and DePaul and Marquette) that they "jumped the shark" and got away from their "Northeast" roots (especially since they rejected Temple in the process.

I'm big on geography as well but when it comes to the Northeast they are pretty lacking when it comes to football. As a Penn State fan I'd love to be in the same conference as Pittsburgh and would love to play the last Saturday in November every year again. I also love Penn State playing Ohio State and Michigan too. I absolutely feel Pittsburgh should have been Big Ten #12 instead of damn western crap Nebraska. I would trade Rutgers for Pittsburgh today (I'm sure the ACC would hang up the phone if I called). Hey, you want Nebraska for Pittsburgh? I would love Penn State in a Northeast based conference but I wouldn't give up the Big Ten for it.

You can argue Penn State killed Northeast football when they joined the Big Ten. Then again, Penn State was rejected by the Big East. If they had been accepted, maybe the Northeast football conference of Penn State, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia, and Boston College does materialize.

Louisville and Cincinnati aren't exactly Northeast, but they have some shared history with northeastern schools.

I'm not going to blame PSU.

(01-22-2021 10:53 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 03:26 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Kap,

Your frustrations are duly noted and I tend to agree with many of your points here. ACC is a microcosm of realignment's failures and the failures of future realignment. Swofford had little to do with these past moves. It's the networks dictating who goes where. History and tradition is being destroyed for the mighty dollar. BC, Syracuse and Pitt don't belong in the ACC and neither does WVU. Those 4, plus Rutgers, Maryland, PSU, ND, Louisville and Cincinnati belong in a Northeastern centric P6 league. Rivalries were the backbone of college sports. ND should always be independent, but if they were to join a league that's their best fit.

Nothing is happening until Penn State comes back and ND decides they want to get into a conference.

Until CFB is totally reorganized you will have these mega conferences for TV dollars.

I get that. It's always bout the lord dolla. CFB was so much healthier during the bowl coalition days before the BCS. TV money destroyed the parity at the top.