CardinalJim Wrote:I like the PAC-10 of the East comparison. One good team while the rest of the conference sucks.

My disagreement with the likes of you and Bit on the Pac-10 stands. No comparison at all between the PAC-10 and the ACC. Right now, both Oregon and USC would beat the best team in the ACC soundly, and probably the next two would be close. I'd say, over the three years post expansion, the PAC-10 is probably 3rd out of the six BCS leagues, behind the SEC and Big 12. I'd put them slightly ahead of the BE, ACC and Big Ten, who are probably too close to call at the 4-6 slots.

If you throw out 2005, the BE is 2nd-3rd, but you can't do that

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:From a fiscal standpoint, expansion has been a success.

From a fan's standpoint, it has been a failure. The round robin is gone in basketball. Some football rivals are no longer annual either (GT-FSU). The bowl selection is putrid. Georgia Tech and Boston College have particularly been shafted by Swofford in the last few years. Why the hell is Boston College even a member? Boston is a miserable place, a pro city, way the hell out of the way for a big chunk of the league, and they bring nothing but chilled support in a big media market. I would prefer any of Florida, USC, Vandy, and even UCF to BC. Swofford screwed the pooch royally in those aspects and should be fired unceremoniously.

THAT BEING SAID, the obsession with many of you here over the ACC is comparable only to the obsession many neoconservatives have with Obama. You should grow up and move on. It's not healthy. And remember ... the ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. We want to be the Pac-10 of the east coast.

I dont know if obsession is the correct word. But I will say that there are very strong feelings against the acc on the part of BE fans, and deservedly so. Just take a look on these BE boards at some of the posts from acc fans back around 2003-2005. The doom and gloom theories, the laughing at our league, the criticism it was a real low point. The scoffing from acc fans and cusa fans was pretty bad, but we still defended the BE. You acc fans had your years of laughing at the BE, so why cry now that the shoe is on the other foot? A good solution for you if you cant handle the criticism is to stay on the acc boards.

Btw; Acc fans dont hold back in their criticism of the BE even today. I have perused some acc boards and there are always folks taking shots at the BE. In fact if you go to any acc board right now, you are bound to find some folks taking shots at the BE. I know that you know this, so I dont know why you choose to make it sound as if it is unique to BE fans.

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:THAT BEING SAID, the obsession with many of you here over the ACC is comparable only to the obsession many neoconservatives have with Obama. You should grow up and move on. It's not healthy. And remember ... the ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. We want to be the Pac-10 of the east coast.

I find it amazing that you complain about us being obsessed and needing to "grow up and move on". Nobody is making ACC fans read our posts. Heck, it's unhealthy to get personally upset about what we say. I mean, if Big East fans ripping the ACC this badly makes you or any other ACC fan this upset THAT is unhealthy. Whether ACC fans like it or not, we're going to laugh at the ACC's plight. That's because YOU and others were laughing at the Big East's plight. You have to admit it swagger, you were one of the biggest offenders of that. Weren't you openly rooting for teams to beat Big East teams a few years ago? And weren't you trashing Big East academics and talking about how we don't deserve a BCS bid? Wouldn't that qualify as "being obsessed"?

Didn't you start or post threads like these:

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=231805

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=58096

How does that make you any less "obsessed" then us?

As for the ACC, do you REALLY think that Swofford expanded to 12 teams in order to become the Pac-10 east? Of course not, he was copying the SEC. And the fans of other conferences who feel the need to come over and lecture us on what we should and should not do are hypocrites themselves.

Good points Cuseroc and Claw.

However, I'd like to think that BE fans would be above C-USA/ACC fans in that regard

cuseroc Wrote:

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:From a fiscal standpoint, expansion has been a success.

From a fan's standpoint, it has been a failure. The round robin is gone in basketball. Some football rivals are no longer annual either (GT-FSU). The bowl selection is putrid. Georgia Tech and Boston College have particularly been shafted by Swofford in the last few years. Why the hell is Boston College even a member? Boston is a miserable place, a pro city, way the hell out of the way for a big chunk of the league, and they bring nothing but chilled support in a big media market. I would prefer any of Florida, USC, Vandy, and even UCF to BC. Swofford screwed the pooch royally in those aspects and should be fired unceremoniously.

THAT BEING SAID, the obsession with many of you here over the ACC is comparable only to the obsession many neoconservatives have with Obama. You should grow up and move on. It's not healthy. And remember ... the ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. We want to be the Pac-10 of the east coast.

I dont know if obsession is the correct word. But I will say that there are very strong feelings against the acc on the part of BE fans, and deservedly so. Just take a look on these BE boards at some of the posts from acc fans back around 2003-2005. The doom and gloom theories, the laughing at our league, the criticism it was a real low point. The scoffing from acc fans and cusa fans was pretty bad, but we still defended the BE. You acc fans had your years of laughing at the BE, so why cry now that the shoe is on the other foot? A good solution for you if you cant handle the criticism is to stay on the acc boards.

Btw; Acc fans dont hold back in their criticism of the BE even today. I have perused some acc boards and there are always folks taking shots at the BE. In fact if you go to any acc board right now, you are bound to find some folks taking shots at the BE. I know that you know this, so I dont know why you choose to make it sound as if it is unique to BE fans.

The problem is, the truth hurts. All of these ACC fans, and MWC fans and even some C-USA fans, were calling for the Big East's demise. They were gloating like crazy and high-fiving each other and just having a grand ol' time. And then the Big East exploded. And we threw it back in their face. Suddenly we were acting like babies because we were doing to them what they did to us for 3 years. From 2003 until West Virginia's Sugar Bowl win all you hear were people telling us the Big East sucks, USF, UC, Rutgers and UConn would never amount to anything, WVU and Louisville were the only real teams and they were flashes in the pan, and wait until the Big East played REAL teams. Then WVU beat Georgia. Louisville beat Wake. WVU beat GT. USF beat Auburn. Cincinnati beat Oregon State. Rutgers became a Top 10 team. UC, UConn and USF broke the Top 25, with UConn and UC moving into the Top 15 and USF up to #2. We got a new monster deal and a ton of exposure. Suddenly the same people went on a pre-emptive strike. Now they had to come over and lecture us on "being classy" and "being humble". Oh please Big East, stop picking on the Mountain West Conference! Stop picking on the Atlantic Coast Conference! Why do you keep picking on us, you're being mean! Ummm, weren't you being "mean" to? Heck, at least the Big East isn't on the ACC boards talking about them losing their BCS bid and the destruction of their conferences at a critical time in its history. Heck, the same people throwing hissy fits and lectures are the same ones who were giddy because they thought the conference was going to die. And if that isn't sick and unhealthy and obsessive nothing is.

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:Good points Cuseroc and Claw.

However, I'd like to think that BE fans would be above C-USA/ACC fans in that regard

I think we are. We're not over on the ACC or MWC boards talking about the demise of their conference. We're on OUR board talking about other things. Whether it's negative towards the ACC is a moot point. It is no different then any other board. If you go to the Ohio State board you will hear them talking crap about the SEC. I'm sure if you go to a LSU board you'll hear them talking smack about Michigan and the Big Ten. Heck, if you got an ACC or Georgia Tech board you will hear them talking trash about Georgia and the SEC. You will hear ACC fans talking about how weak and overrated the Big East is (or the Big Ten or Big 12). We're no different then any other conference. The difference is, ACC fans and MWC fans and even some C-USA fans have had their eyes on us since 2003 because they wanted us to fail. We didn't fail and now they're throwing a hissy fit. The sooner they "grow up" and "move on" and realize that our discussions are no different then any other conference's discussions the "healthier" they'll be.

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:From a fiscal standpoint, expansion has been a success.

From a fan's standpoint, it has been a failure. The round robin is gone in basketball. Some football rivals are no longer annual either (GT-FSU). The bowl selection is putrid. Georgia Tech and Boston College have particularly been shafted by Swofford in the last few years. Why the hell is Boston College even a member? Boston is a miserable place, a pro city, way the hell out of the way for a big chunk of the league, and they bring nothing but chilled support in a big media market. I would prefer any of Florida, USC, Vandy, and even UCF to BC. Swofford screwed the pooch royally in those aspects and should be fired unceremoniously.

THAT BEING SAID, the obsession with many of you here over the ACC is comparable only to the obsession many neoconservatives have with Obama. You should grow up and move on. It's not healthy. And remember ... the ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. We want to be the Pac-10 of the east coast.

Have to agree with you about Swofford, as I've said before the man is the Blofeld of conference commissioners. The only reason they went with BC was for future expansion into the NE. He's trying to rule the east. The ACC has an image problem, thus your contention that they are not trying to be the SEC(right now they would be SEC Lite).

No, the Pac is a perfect comparison for what the ACC wants to be, but if they're not there already, how do they get there? The Pac only needed 10 teams to be what they are, how many does the ACC bloody need? They've got 12 already, how about 14, or 16? If you can't get there with what you've got, maybe the ACC should try a different model. Ernst Stavro Blofeld has already stated he won't rule out further expansion, and it will be a bust, just like this current flop. And let's not rule out Bball envy on the part of the ACC. So the mission of Spectre will continue ... destroy the BE at all costs.

I have to agree ACC fans made their beds..

If the ACC football games are being replace in the south, what does that say about the ACC appeal in the area outside of the ACC? If the product on the field doesnt improve, then what? People perception of the ACC is not what it was back then either. When your winning the NC game, you on top, when you havent smelled a NC game in years, you not preceived as a powerhouse either. The facts are most see what the ACC did as a failure. National exposure was what they were looking for most and that hasnt happen yet. The ACC championship game, FL ST VS MIAMI, hasnt happen yet either. Until this happen, ACC expansion has been consider by most a failure. The championship game has been a snooze feast, at best. You dont have any look any further than the number of people who show up for that game. It looks worst than some of the CUSA match ups(sorry for that, but that is the truth). Fl ST was the only thing the ACC had for marketing in that conference before the raid and now they have nothing. VT, FL ST, and Miami has got to pick it up and quick. The longer you stay away from the NC game, the more people forget about you. Perception is what people see and witness.Right now, the Big East is perceived as a better football conference than the ACC. The Big East has position itself for consideration for the NC game, but hasnt made it yet. The ACC hasnt done that in years now. The ACC has got to do the same Until that happens, it is what it is.

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:

CardinalJim Wrote:I like the PAC-10 of the East comparison. One good team while the rest of the conference sucks.

My disagreement with the likes of you and Bit on the Pac-10 stands. No comparison at all between the PAC-10 and the ACC. Right now, both Oregon and USC would beat the best team in the ACC soundly, and probably the next two would be close. I'd say, over the three years post expansion, the ACC is probably 3rd out of the six BCS leagues, behind the SEC and Big 12. I'd put them slightly ahead of the BE, ACC and Big Ten, who are probably too close to call at the 4-6 slots.

If you throw out 2005, the BE is 2nd-3rd, but you can't do that

Quite frankly it's amazing to see an ACC or Big East fan criticize the Pac 10.

Exactly! People who think that the ACC was expanding to match the Pac-10 model are crazy. The ACC had their sites set on being another SEC. That's why they added a championship game and they wanted an SEC-style television contract. And they are, for the most part, a southern conference so they compete head-to-head against the SEC in many parts. And the SEC was getting stronger and the ACC was getting weaker. So they tried to copy the SEC. If they wanted to be the Pac-10 they wouldn't have added a championship game. They would have just scooped up Miami and stayed at 10. No, they wanted to be a juggernaut and they knew that the SEC had the south locked up so they wanted to be a force in the South AND the Northeast and figured, if they can't beat the SEC head-to-head they can surround them. That failed miserably. They got a great T.V. contract but the SEC is still the big dog in the South and the Big East is still the big dog in the Northeast. And with the Big East locking down all of these Northeast television deals with MSG and SNY and other Northeast and Midwest regional areas (places that the ACC thoguht they could get) then the ACC is back to square one in that regard. Swofford wanted the South and Northeast, that's why he wanted Syracuse. Syracuse was the key in this, they knew if they could get New York they could get the Northeast. The Big East kept Syracuse and, with the rest of the Big East, we kept the Northeast. Not only that, thanks to the ACC's raid, the Big East now has a presence in the Midwest (Big Ten territory) and a presence in the south (SEC territory), and we're having no problem co-existing with the Big Ten and SEC and we're blossoming because of it. Funny how things work out huh?

cat... I would change that just a bit.. the ACC wants to be the SEC with academics added on.

The ACC needs to pray for one of two things, 1) a non-bcs school to make the top 12(other than Boise ST or Fresno ST) or 2) Notre Dame makes it into the top 12. That is the only thing, that gives them a real chance to win the Orange Bowl. Winning the Orange Bowl first will help tremendously. I would say #1 has a better chance than the 2nd one.

I must say that it is good to see Cusa fans sticking up for the BE for once, and not coming to the defense of the Acc.

Btw; Cats Claw, nice find on the georgia tech fan with his past posts showing him to be as guilty as anyone for showing obsessive behavior.

CatsClaw Wrote:Exactly! People who think that the ACC was expanding to match the Pac-10 model are crazy. The ACC had their sites set on being another SEC. That's why they added a championship game and they wanted an SEC-style television contract. And they are, for the most part, a southern conference so they compete head-to-head against the SEC in many parts. And the SEC was getting stronger and the ACC was getting weaker. So they tried to copy the SEC. If they wanted to be the Pac-10 they wouldn't have added a championship game. They would have just scooped up Miami and stayed at 10. No, they wanted to be a juggernaut and they knew that the SEC had the south locked up so they wanted to be a force in the South AND the Northeast and figured, if they can't beat the SEC head-to-head they can surround them. That failed miserably. They got a great T.V. contract but the SEC is still the big dog in the South and the Big East is still the big dog in the Northeast. And with the Big East locking down all of these Northeast television deals with MSG and SNY and other Northeast and Midwest regional areas (places that the ACC thoguht they could get) then the ACC is back to square one in that regard. Swofford wanted the South and Northeast, that's why he wanted Syracuse. Syracuse was the key in this, they knew if they could get New York they could get the Northeast. The Big East kept Syracuse and, with the rest of the Big East, we kept the Northeast. Not only that, thanks to the ACC's raid, the Big East now has a presence in the Midwest (Big Ten territory) and a presence in the south (SEC territory), and we're having no problem co-existing with the Big Ten and SEC and we're blossoming because of it. Funny how things work out huh?

Exactly, just so

MichaelSavage Wrote:

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:

CardinalJim Wrote:I like the PAC-10 of the East comparison. One good team while the rest of the conference sucks.

My disagreement with the likes of you and Bit on the Pac-10 stands. No comparison at all between the PAC-10 and the ACC. Right now, both Oregon and USC would beat the best team in the ACC soundly, and probably the next two would be close. I'd say, over the three years post expansion, the PAC 10 is probably 3rd out of the six BCS leagues, behind the SEC and Big 12. I'd put them slightly ahead of the BE, ACC and Big Ten, who are probably too close to call at the 4-6 slots.

If you throw out 2005, the BE is 2nd-3rd, but you can't do that

Quite frankly it's amazing to see an ACC or Big East fan criticize the Pac 10.

Now that you quoted my post, I see that I screwed up. I meant to say that the PAC-10 is probably third, whereas my original post brain-farted the ACC as being 3rd.

It's been fixed above.

CatsClaw Wrote:Exactly! People who think that the ACC was expanding to match the Pac-10 model are crazy. The ACC had their sites set on being another SEC. That's why they added a championship game and they wanted an SEC-style television contract. And they are, for the most part, a southern conference so they compete head-to-head against the SEC in many parts. And the SEC was getting stronger and the ACC was getting weaker. So they tried to copy the SEC. If they wanted to be the Pac-10 they wouldn't have added a championship game. They would have just scooped up Miami and stayed at 10. No, they wanted to be a juggernaut and they knew that the SEC had the south locked up so they wanted to be a force in the South AND the Northeast and figured, if they can't beat the SEC head-to-head they can surround them. That failed miserably. They got a great T.V. contract but the SEC is still the big dog in the South...

I do not believe the Championship Game has any real baring on the difference between the two models the ACC struggled with as they expanded.

As I see it, the struggle was more of a cultural one for the conference. The SEC is a true southern conference with very little regard for academics and its focus almost exclusively on football and the fans are beer-and-bbq. The Pac-10 is a 'wine-and-cheese' conference with a heavy emphasis on academics and excellence throughout all of its sports and a more sprawling geographical outreach.

The original concept of ACC expansion was to make it the Pac-10 of the Atlantic Coast. They didn't want to be like the SEC because no matter how good they were they were never going to truly control the states of Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina where the two leagues overlap simply because the bulk of their fans are more like the wine-and-cheese crowd of the Pac-10 then true southern fans. And look at the original targets - Miami, BC, and SU - again, mostly "wine-and-cheese" type fans.

However, some presidents within the ACC actually preferred the SEC model (FSU, Clemson, and GT) and therefore when Virginia, UNC, and Duke threw up roadblocks to expansion, they helped VT (another SEC type school) get in to the league. They even stopped at 11 to try and look at other possible entries such as Florida and Georgia, though both rebuffed the ACC rather quickly.

And yes, Notre Dame was the most notable #12 target, but the Irish were more a leftover of the Pac-10 on steroids original vision who they were in talks with prior to the plans even switching.

Ultimately what the ACC got was a hybrid of the two visions, SEC-lite with a northern satellite in Boston. It's still too soon to say if the compromise is a success or a failure, but the early returns have not been good on the field and if that continues, the early success in terms of revenue will likely drop.

Quote:...and the Big East is still the big dog in the Northeast. And with the Big East locking down all of these Northeast television deals with MSG and SNY and other Northeast and Midwest regional areas (places that the ACC thought they could get) then the ACC is back to square one in that regard. Swofford wanted the South and Northeast, that's why he wanted Syracuse. Syracuse was the key in this, they knew if they could get New York they could get the Northeast. The Big East kept Syracuse and, with the rest of the Big East, we kept the Northeast. Not only that, thanks to the ACC's raid, the Big East now has a presence in the Midwest (Big Ten territory) and a presence in the south (SEC territory), and we're having no problem co-existing with the Big Ten and SEC and we're blossoming because of it. Funny how things work out huh?

Well, the ACC hasn't been totally blocked out of the Northeast. Thanks to BC they have a similar deal with NESN as the Big East has with SNY, and they also have some programming on MASN as well, just like the Big East.

However, I do agree with your last statement. I especially think that the adding of South Florida has done more for the Big East keeping a similar presence in Florida as the Big East had with the Hurricanes than the addition of Miami to the ACC has had in narrowing the gap between the ACC and the SEC in terms of fan support in that state. Also the addition of Cincinnati has opened up new recruiting territory in the state of Ohio that will benefit the league in the long run.

Cheers,
Neil

CatsClaw Wrote:even some C-USA fans have had their eyes on us since 2003 because they wanted us to fail.

MEMPHIS fans want the Big East to SUCCEED (as an all-sports conference which includes UofM).

the ACC wil be fine. The florida schools won't be down forever and other schools are recommiting to football North Carolina,GaTech,and Wake Forest. The Big East and its fans need to focus on the Big East Conference. Ya'll need to figure out how to stablize your conference,figure out what team or teams ya'll are gonna expand with and stop other schools from using ya'll as a breeding ground for coaches.

hawghiggs Wrote:the ACC wil be fine. The florida schools won't be down forever and other schools are recommiting to football North Carolina,GaTech,and Wake Forest. The Big East and its fans need to focus on the Big East Conference. Ya'll need to figure out how to stablize your conference,figure out what team or teams ya'll are gonna expand with and stop other schools from using ya'll as a breeding ground for coaches.

The BE will be just fine as well. Speaking of focusing on your own conference, maybe you should take some of your own advice. This thread doent concern you at all.