(07-24-2021 05:53 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Financially we are not going to catch the SEC or B1G unless one implodes therefore why not stay 3rd in the P5 and block the PAC from gaining ground? Regardless of ND add three schools to gain tv market and block the PAC. The ACC did this once to keep Louisville from going to the Big 12 and to get the long term GOR, if Louisville would’ve went to the Big 12 there were ACC schools that were going to the Big 12 also and the ACC would be the ones getting poached right now.

(07-24-2021 09:52 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 05:53 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Financially we are not going to catch the SEC or B1G unless one implodes therefore why not stay 3rd in the P5 and block the PAC from gaining ground? Regardless of ND add three schools to gain tv market and block the PAC. The ACC did this once to keep Louisville from going to the Big 12 and to get the long term GOR, if Louisville would’ve went to the Big 12 there were ACC schools that were going to the Big 12 also and the ACC would be the ones getting poached right now.

Nah .... for two reasons ....

First - it's a different situation now. When we were invited, it was to replace Maryland. We're not replacing anyone now. The secondary effect of blocking the next best school going to the Big XII was nice, but not the reason for the add.

Second - the schools available wouldn't grow revenues enough to maintain the per school payouts as they are. Which is the measuring stick to rank the revenues of the power conferences.


With the Big XII losing it's two heavy weights, the ACC will already move into 3rd in the P4, as the PAC still struggles with their network.

The ACC needs to continue to "court" Notre Dame. They are the only big fish that makes expansion profitable.

(07-24-2021 05:53 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Financially we are not going to catch the SEC or B1G unless one implodes therefore why not stay 3rd in the P5 and block the PAC from gaining ground? Regardless of ND add three schools to gain tv market and block the PAC. The ACC did this once to keep Louisville from going to the Big 12 and to get the long term GOR, if Louisville would’ve went to the Big 12 there were ACC schools that were going to the Big 12 also and the ACC would be the ones getting poached right now.

(07-25-2021 02:45 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 05:53 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Financially we are not going to catch the SEC or B1G unless one implodes therefore why not stay 3rd in the P5 and block the PAC from gaining ground? Regardless of ND add three schools to gain tv market and block the PAC. The ACC did this once to keep Louisville from going to the Big 12 and to get the long term GOR, if Louisville would’ve went to the Big 12 there were ACC schools that were going to the Big 12 also and the ACC would be the ones getting poached right now.

Wait, I must have been on mushrooms when the B12 was pursuing Louisville. That's not the way I recall it.

The ACC took Louisville because Maryland left for the B1G.

(07-25-2021 04:26 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  Has anyone discussed adding UConn, Navy and Army. Would increase fan base in metro New York City and metro DC regions. (a large chunk of Connecticut is in the metro NYC market)

(07-25-2021 04:16 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 04:15 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 04:12 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 04:05 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 02:45 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Wait, I must have been on mushrooms when the B12 was pursuing Louisville. That's not the way I recall it.

The ACC took Louisville because Maryland left for the B1G.

Actually they took Louisville instead of UCONN because The ACC didn’t feel like the Huskies had any other conference pursuing them.

This is from the Hartford paper on November 28, 2012:

“In fact, the ACC reportedly feared that Louisville would join another conference if it were not added. UConn — and Cincinnati, another candidate — will be available if the ACC expands again, conference officials reportedly believed. UConn now sits and waits again, and there is no telling when the next team makes a move from a conference, once again setting off a chain reaction, but most people feel that conference realignment is not finished.”

https://www.courant.com/business/hc-xpm-2012-11-28-hc-uconn-acc-1129-20121128-story.html

For the love of God, that's not F U C K I N G true. That is just an opinion from UConn boosters. UConn was not WANTED by most of the ACC - not wanted by all the football schools and BC.

Please provide evidence of your opinion and try to refrain from the vulgar language.

Read the damn article Jim - the article you posted but failed to read.

The following in the article is from Holden Thorp. Holden is a good boy, but he was not running a damn thing at UNC. He was put in as a patsy, but’s that’s a long story.



"What we felt it was that the ACC needed most was to add the most exciting sports programs that we could," said North Carolina Chancellor Holden Thorp, chairman of the ACC Council of Presidents.
Thorp admitted that athletics was the priority.
"That is the way to ensure that the success of the ACC in sports was successful enough to allow us to keep our group together," said Thorp, who is resigning in June amid an NCAA investigation into his school's athletic program. "We talked about that extensively. … We feel very good about the addition of Louisville in every respect, but our logic was that we wanted to make the ACC as exciting a sports conference as we possibly could and we felt that Louisville unambiguously did that for us the best."

This is Swofford’s comment:
"Geographically, this allows the ACC to extend our footprint into a vibrant region that is collegiately driven while maintaining our strong roots up and down the Atlantic coast," ACC commissioner John Swofford said.

All other comments are UConn opines and thoughts other than comments attributed to another school that had not a damn thing to do with the discussion over UConn. What Louisville people had to say about UConn did not count for ****.

Next I guess I will hear from Louisville and Syracuse posters about what actually constitutes Lexington Bar B Que and the exact difference between the Bar B Que Center in Lexington and Stamey's in Greensboro. Then you will tell us how old Stamey's chopping block is. Damn.

(07-25-2021 04:26 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  Has anyone discussed adding UConn, Navy and Army. Would increase fan base in metro New York City and metro DC regions. (a large chunk of Connecticut is in the metro NYC market)

(07-25-2021 05:20 PM)nole Wrote:  Is the object to lose more money?

There aren't 3 teams to add that will close the revenue gap

(07-25-2021 09:35 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I would be in favor of adding Kansas and one other team (to be determined). This would keep the blue blood basketball school out of the B1G and PAC12. This would be part of a larger push in basketball to get a worldwide audience for ACC basketball via internet streaming. This may work well but it will take time to execute the strategy. The upside of doing this is that it may far exceed the SEC and B1G in income eventually (there is no audience for college football outside the US) but basketball is the number 2 sport in the world. The downside is probably a couple million less per school in the ACC (if Kansas and the other team fall flat on their faces) but the upside is big $$$, really big so worth the gamble.

(07-25-2021 09:41 PM)nole Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 09:35 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I would be in favor of adding Kansas and one other team (to be determined). This would keep the blue blood basketball school out of the B1G and PAC12. This would be part of a larger push in basketball to get a worldwide audience for ACC basketball via internet streaming. This may work well but it will take time to execute the strategy. The upside of doing this is that it may far exceed the SEC and B1G in income eventually (there is no audience for college football outside the US) but basketball is the number 2 sport in the world. The downside is probably a couple million less per school in the ACC (if Kansas and the other team fall flat on their faces) but the upside is big $$$, really big so worth the gamble.

This whole thing is about $. Why would you want something that is less money?


And it seems the ACC regularly downplays money like this suggestion does, but if I said....unequal revenue sharing.....the same folks would say "that's not fair...money matters now".

I don't get it. The ACC has a MONEY issue...not a basketball one.

(07-25-2021 09:46 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 09:41 PM)nole Wrote:  

(07-25-2021 09:35 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  I would be in favor of adding Kansas and one other team (to be determined). This would keep the blue blood basketball school out of the B1G and PAC12. This would be part of a larger push in basketball to get a worldwide audience for ACC basketball via internet streaming. This may work well but it will take time to execute the strategy. The upside of doing this is that it may far exceed the SEC and B1G in income eventually (there is no audience for college football outside the US) but basketball is the number 2 sport in the world. The downside is probably a couple million less per school in the ACC (if Kansas and the other team fall flat on their faces) but the upside is big $$$, really big so worth the gamble.

This whole thing is about $. Why would you want something that is less money?


And it seems the ACC regularly downplays money like this suggestion does, but if I said....unequal revenue sharing.....the same folks would say "that's not fair...money matters now".

I don't get it. The ACC has a MONEY issue...not a basketball one.

I would accept Kansas ONLY IF ESPN PAID US LIKE A MUG TO TAKE KANSAS.

Which could happen. We will do what ESPN wants us to do, and maybe they would want to poach Kansas from Fox.

But we shouldn't take Kansas for what their value is. It's sub par.