(06-04-2013 11:52 PM)pir84evr Wrote:  Yeah, a name change just isn't going to be in the cards. It's too bad if you don't like the name. If you're hung up on that, I've got nothing for you other than that any college graduate would know that the name to the school is like a cover to a book.

One poster mentioned it earlier, but it's about potential and actual options. When I mention "options" I mean schools available to be added to the conference who aren't hindered by a Grant of Rights, for example.

For the SEC, getting into one of the 3 remaining "Southern" states would do more than most think. Let's be honest, if you're the SEC would you rather break into West Virginia, Virginia, or North Carolina? You probably won't pick West Virginia I'd bet. Virginia would be an option but what team would you take (don't forget the ACC's GOR mentioned above)? Look at what's actually "available." That takes out anyone thinking NC State or UNC (or UVA or Va Tech for that matter).

ECU also has a history of making the most of what we have. This "lack of television market" argument is just crap--
"The ECU Pirates... drive very strong audiences in four of the top 50 media markets located in the university's home state and region. Considered together, these four markets would be the fourth-largest DMA in the country, with the Pirates consistently delivering solid ratings across a region strategically located in one of the fastest-growing states in the United States." ... and that was as of 2010.

We missed out in the 90's and early 2000's on conference expansion and we were not prepared on many fronts. As of 2012, ECU already qualifies on-par academically with Kentucky and Ole Miss. Check out this site or this one and compare yourself (these two sites are where most of the Wikipedia info comes from). Given that ECU is the "3rd best" public university academically in the state of NC is an accomplishment when compared to most other SEC institutions who have many more resources. ECU's endowment, for example, was $130 million (2010), Ole Miss had an endowment of $462 million (2013), and Kentucky's was $915 million (2011).

Academically, no sane ECU student/alum/fan will say we are an academic powerhouse, but we are in the ballpark. My point is that academically, the data show that ECU stands much closer than many are aware of, all while at a fiscal disadvantage. What if ECU got a $20 million payday by the SEC instead of under $1 million as we've been used to or the support that many of the SEC institutions enjoy as a result of being a flagship school in their respective state?

You ever hear how a woman wants you more when you're already taken? "If SHE likes him, there must be something to him, maybe I should take a look..." is what has happened, IMHO, with our recent inclusion into the AAC. The AAC is what it is-- a staging area for now.

We aren't the best thing since sliced bread, but we offer plenty of upsides for anyone who cares to look.

You don't know what you don't know...

Thorough post... I'll go point by point. Considering the name change, 10th nailed it on the head. A directional state school has the connotation of small time and weaker academics. If ECU breaks that mold in your mind, that's fine, but that is the national pulse on the matter. My profession is branding, more specifically re-branding corporations/companies that have a bad taste in people's mouths for whatever reason. You are right... it is just my opinion.

The SEC would pick West Virginia over any non-ACC school in the states of Virginia and North Carolina. You can poll on this question if you like.

I have no doubt that ECU in the SEC would draw huge ratings in the state of North Carolina, as would adding any school in an untouched state. However, the SEC is trying to build a national brand on a national network. ECU simply does not move the dial like UNC. Sorry.

According to U.S. News and World Report university rankings, which is considered the standard among admittedly imperfect rankings, ECU is the #199 ranked national university. The next lowest in any P5 conference is a tie for #165 between WVU and Texas Tech. There is a 34 school gap between ECU and the lowest member of a P5 conference. Those other rankings you linked to are more concentrated and specific toward certain studies, and I do not doubt their validity. However, in the P5's point of view, what matters is overall quality and especially research. Undergrad rankings are important, but they are a small piece of the pie. To give you an idea, Miss. State is #160, Ole Miss is #151, LSU and Arkansas are tied at #134, UK is #125, and USC is #115. Everybody else in the conference is top 100.

You are right... neither of us know what we don't know. I don't know ECU as well as you do, and I'm betting pretty good money you don't know the SEC mentality as well as I do (I am a Kentucky fan living in the Vanderbilt area of Nashville surrounded by UT fans with fanatic Bama fans on my mother's side). As I intimated in my earlier post, the SEC would rather just break away than be forced to take a school that they do not consider a peer. You know what? ECU is not a peer as much Texas is not a peer. They are for different reasons, but in both cases, I would imagine a lot of disagreement would brew among the current membership. Before I could see, say, an ECU and Cincinnati addition to the SEC because they "have" to get to 16, I would guess that all the flagship schools would take such a hard stance about breaking away that Vanderbilt, sensing disassociation from every non-SEC school, would make a hard decision to join the B1G or ACC for their own purposes. Maybe Missouri does the same thing and joins the B1G. The SEC is then back at 12 members. I see that as a more likely scenario than adding two schools that do not fit the profile. This is nothing against any AAC school; it is just the mentality of the SEC core.