Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
Big 12 and Pac 12 AREN'T at 14 teams, which disrupts rivalries and conference cohesion. That makes them both winners.
04-23-2013 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AndreWhere Offline
Banned

Posts: 6,189
Joined: Dec 2009
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: DunwoodY
Post: #22
RE: Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
(04-23-2013 02:52 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 02:18 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 02:10 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

Nope. Until you can show me that USM A) lost AQ status b) lost bowl tie-ins and c) lost $$$ in annual television contract the answer is UConn, UC and USF.

Tend to agree with that -- UConn lost more b/c they were in the Big East longer (with its basketball program), and now finds itself separated from Georgetown, Syracuse, (soon-to-be) Louisville, St. John's, etc...

Not sure there are many ECU alums/fans on the planet who will honestly have sympathy for USF. So much for that "TV market" argument.

UC, with its basketball brand, lost a lot as well, and just as they were starting to make a (brand) name for itself on the gridiron, this stuff happens.

I don't think anybody but ESPN likes USF. Even their own dimwitted students realize they should be a basketball-only, Southland Conference school.
04-23-2013 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AndreWhere Offline
Banned

Posts: 6,189
Joined: Dec 2009
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: DunwoodY
Post: #23
RE: Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
(04-23-2013 02:18 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 02:10 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 11:41 AM)AndreWhere Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 11:36 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Berry Tramel - OKC

Blah, blah, blah... if you can make such a list and omit USM, then YOU'RE a loser.

USM was probably the biggest loser of the whole lot IMO.

Nope. Until you can show me that USM A) lost AQ status b) lost bowl tie-ins and c) lost $$$ in annual television contract the answer is UConn, UC and USF.

Go back 9 years to 2004. USM, Cincy, Louisville, and most of the "AAC" were all together in CUSA.So was TCU. And USM was in the top tier of that conference. Now, we're stuck with D*pshit Tech and a bunch of SBC schools. Oh, and we've also dropped a tier in the USNWR rankings. If I had it to do over, I personally would go to Auburn. USM since 2000 is right up their with Chernobyl and New Coke. We could have hired Marion Berry to be our AD, or Bozo the Clown, and the end result would be identical. It doesn't matter... I'd rather not be worst off. But I feel we are.
(This post was last modified: 04-23-2013 04:19 PM by AndreWhere.)
04-23-2013 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #24
RE: Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
(04-23-2013 01:15 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Dollars to donuts that the B1G sent "feelers" to certain ACC schools to see if they'd be interested in investigating the idea. However, such feelers will likely never be made public.

For sure. If you were looking into luring ACC schools to the Big Ten, even if your list was limited to AAU member schools, there is absolutely no way that your first and only call would be to Maryland.
04-23-2013 04:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PhiladelphiaVT Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 134
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 4
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
(04-23-2013 03:16 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 12:48 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Here's an item deserving discussion...
I am not sure if the B1G or the SEC even actually contacted any ACC teams, or offered invites, but if they did they must not be as powerful as we all assumed. Seems like a lot of folks on this board assumed the two could just snap their fingers and ACC schools would jump. Only Maryland did though and for lots of reasons... none of which seemed to involve conference stability. 05-stirthepot

I touched on this in another thread last week, but it seems the BIG/SEC/VA & NC Schools were in a standoff. The NC/VA Board of Regents/government would only allow moves if all four schools involved found equally soft landing spots. The BIG was not going to take Va. Tech or NC State under any circumstances, the SEC was not going to take just Va. Tech or NC State, and no other landing spot was going to be considered a soft enough for the state legislatures.

I still contend that the SEC would have done well to take all four schools plus add Florida State and Clemson, which puts them at 20 schools and locks up the South for the SEC until... well... ever. At that point, the BIG can help themselves to Duke and Ga. Tech, but it would hardly be a Southern invasion. The ACC could still be a viable conference by adding Connecticut and Cincinnati unless the BIG came in for a death kill. A lot of what if's, but I didn't see much of a disadvantage to taking the NC and VA schools, even it it just stopped at 18 schools.

Has it ever occurred to SEC/B1G fans that the reason the SEC/B1G didn't "take" UNC/NCSU/UVA/VT was because the North Carolina/Virginia schools actually PREFER membership in the ACC over membership in the SEC or the B1G--and that politics had nothing to do with their decision to sign the ACC's GOR? Just a thought....
04-23-2013 05:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #26
RE: Expansion Winners / Losers per Berry Tramel (Link)
(04-23-2013 05:22 PM)PhiladelphiaVT Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 03:16 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  
(04-23-2013 12:48 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Here's an item deserving discussion...
I am not sure if the B1G or the SEC even actually contacted any ACC teams, or offered invites, but if they did they must not be as powerful as we all assumed. Seems like a lot of folks on this board assumed the two could just snap their fingers and ACC schools would jump. Only Maryland did though and for lots of reasons... none of which seemed to involve conference stability. 05-stirthepot

I touched on this in another thread last week, but it seems the BIG/SEC/VA & NC Schools were in a standoff. The NC/VA Board of Regents/government would only allow moves if all four schools involved found equally soft landing spots. The BIG was not going to take Va. Tech or NC State under any circumstances, the SEC was not going to take just Va. Tech or NC State, and no other landing spot was going to be considered a soft enough for the state legislatures.

I still contend that the SEC would have done well to take all four schools plus add Florida State and Clemson, which puts them at 20 schools and locks up the South for the SEC until... well... ever. At that point, the BIG can help themselves to Duke and Ga. Tech, but it would hardly be a Southern invasion. The ACC could still be a viable conference by adding Connecticut and Cincinnati unless the BIG came in for a death kill. A lot of what if's, but I didn't see much of a disadvantage to taking the NC and VA schools, even it it just stopped at 18 schools.

Has it ever occurred to SEC/B1G fans that the reason the SEC/B1G didn't "take" UNC/NCSU/UVA/VT was because the North Carolina/Virginia schools actually PREFER membership in the ACC over membership in the SEC or the B1G--and that politics had nothing to do with their decision to sign the ACC's GOR? Just a thought....
Absolutely. Everyone got all caught up in rumors and twitter comments and it snowballed. So the ACC lost one school. They now have Louisville and have added new schools. Looks pretty solid and fun to me. It also looks like maybe the B1G, the Big XII, and the SEC all got the secret middle finger, or maybe nothing happened at all. I think it is good for CFB.
(This post was last modified: 04-23-2013 10:04 PM by USAFMEDIC.)
04-23-2013 09:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.