(04-24-2014 03:40 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  This looks like something being put out by the ACC PR office as opposed to a legitimate market analysis.

As someone who is quite familiar with them, this is not a market analysis. Or at least, not a real one. If I tried to pass this off as a market analysis for one of my firm's clients, I'd be out looking for a new job before lunch.

Is it strange that I'm shocked to see Penn State ranking higher in USNWR than both Wisconsin and Illinois?

(04-25-2014 02:20 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is it strange that I'm shocked to see Penn State ranking higher in USNWR than both Wisconsin and Illinois?

Strange that they are ranked higher, or strange that you are shocked?

Such rankings are always subjective, and it would be surprising - stunning, in fact - if everybody agreed with them.

(04-25-2014 02:30 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:20 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is it strange that I'm shocked to see Penn State ranking higher in USNWR than both Wisconsin and Illinois?

Strange that they are ranked higher, or strange that you are shocked?

Such rankings are always subjective, and it would be surprising - stunning, in fact - if everybody agreed with them.

The order is definitely different if you're talking about research universities.

ARWU has those three as

Wisconsin #19 worldwide (highest-ranked among Big Ten schools)
Illinois #25
Penn State #54

(04-25-2014 02:54 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Wisconsin #19 worldwide (highest-ranked among Big Ten schools)

No doubt Research brings a lot of cheddar into Wisconsin.

(04-25-2014 02:56 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 10:45 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:58 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  I stopped going hmmmmmmmm about claims of revenue by conferences and their media partners a long time ago. A forensic accountant wouldn't be able to get past the deliberate misrepresentations and obfuscations. Bottom line is, if you are in a P5 conference, your media revenues aren't going to be different enough from other P5 leagues to make a competitive difference. And if you aren't in a P5 conference you're not even in the ballpark. the rest of the details is just straining at gnats.

And I think that is the entire point of the whole thing.

Agreed. The piece screams "The ACC remains in a power conference and guess what, we are positioned nicely no matter what the media says."

If nothing else, it tends to paint a rather gloomy portrait for the Big 12. But considering the timing of the original document, neither of these two points is surprising at all.

Cheers,
Neil

At the time the report was done, the ACC was trying to keep schools out of the Big 12 especially, but also the Big Ten and SEC. They seemed to have worked OT on the report to make those conferences seem less than they are.

The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

(04-26-2014 05:38 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:56 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 10:45 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:58 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  I stopped going hmmmmmmmm about claims of revenue by conferences and their media partners a long time ago. A forensic accountant wouldn't be able to get past the deliberate misrepresentations and obfuscations. Bottom line is, if you are in a P5 conference, your media revenues aren't going to be different enough from other P5 leagues to make a competitive difference. And if you aren't in a P5 conference you're not even in the ballpark. the rest of the details is just straining at gnats.

And I think that is the entire point of the whole thing.

Agreed. The piece screams "The ACC remains in a power conference and guess what, we are positioned nicely no matter what the media says."

If nothing else, it tends to paint a rather gloomy portrait for the Big 12. But considering the timing of the original document, neither of these two points is surprising at all.

Cheers,
Neil

At the time the report was done, the ACC was trying to keep schools out of the Big 12 especially, but also the Big Ten and SEC. They seemed to have worked OT on the report to make those conferences seem less than they are.

The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

The Big 12 most certainly was a major threat to the ACC. You don't have leaders at your premiere institution openly talking about seeing what the Big 12 had to offer as FSU's leaders did--and then claim there was no threat. The amount of attention the ACC paid in the report to attempt to discredit the Big 12 wasn't done for no reason.

This was a puff piece done to dissuade members from wanting to go elsewhere, not because they "didn't have numbers"--after all the report is filled with numbers-they just aren't very accurate.

As for basketball, the ACC has improved its position--this year it was the #5 conference.

(04-26-2014 05:38 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:56 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 10:45 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:58 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  I stopped going hmmmmmmmm about claims of revenue by conferences and their media partners a long time ago. A forensic accountant wouldn't be able to get past the deliberate misrepresentations and obfuscations. Bottom line is, if you are in a P5 conference, your media revenues aren't going to be different enough from other P5 leagues to make a competitive difference. And if you aren't in a P5 conference you're not even in the ballpark. the rest of the details is just straining at gnats.

And I think that is the entire point of the whole thing.

Agreed. The piece screams "The ACC remains in a power conference and guess what, we are positioned nicely no matter what the media says."

If nothing else, it tends to paint a rather gloomy portrait for the Big 12. But considering the timing of the original document, neither of these two points is surprising at all.

Cheers,
Neil

At the time the report was done, the ACC was trying to keep schools out of the Big 12 especially, but also the Big Ten and SEC. They seemed to have worked OT on the report to make those conferences seem less than they are.

The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

You hope.

(04-25-2014 02:30 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:20 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is it strange that I'm shocked to see Penn State ranking higher in USNWR than both Wisconsin and Illinois?

Strange that they are ranked higher, or strange that you are shocked?

Such rankings are always subjective, and it would be surprising - stunning, in fact - if everybody agreed with them.

The metrics used by USN&WR are a joke. 1. They ask the opinion of a few high school counselors in each state - that gets you about 20% of the total. 2. They ask the opinions of the other universities - that gets you about 20%. 3. The look at SAT scores which are easy to game as some schools have been caught having accepted students retake the SAT just to gin up the score. 4. They look at the percentage accepted - easy to gin up if you try. Some schools have hired phone banks and comp applications fees to gin up the total number of applications and the smaller you are, the lower the percentage of acceptance.

(04-26-2014 12:18 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 05:38 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:56 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 10:45 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 09:58 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  And I think that is the entire point of the whole thing.

Agreed. The piece screams "The ACC remains in a power conference and guess what, we are positioned nicely no matter what the media says."

If nothing else, it tends to paint a rather gloomy portrait for the Big 12. But considering the timing of the original document, neither of these two points is surprising at all.

Cheers,
Neil

At the time the report was done, the ACC was trying to keep schools out of the Big 12 especially, but also the Big Ten and SEC. They seemed to have worked OT on the report to make those conferences seem less than they are.

The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

The Big 12 most certainly was a major threat to the ACC. You don't have leaders at your premiere institution openly talking about seeing what the Big 12 had to offer as FSU's leaders did--and then claim there was no threat. The amount of attention the ACC paid in the report to attempt to discredit the Big 12 wasn't done for no reason.

This was a puff piece done to dissuade members from wanting to go elsewhere, not because they "didn't have numbers"--after all the report is filled with numbers-they just aren't very accurate.

As for basketball, the ACC has improved its position--this year it was the #5 conference.

Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

(04-26-2014 07:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 12:18 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 05:38 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:56 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-24-2014 10:45 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Agreed. The piece screams "The ACC remains in a power conference and guess what, we are positioned nicely no matter what the media says."

If nothing else, it tends to paint a rather gloomy portrait for the Big 12. But considering the timing of the original document, neither of these two points is surprising at all.

Cheers,
Neil

At the time the report was done, the ACC was trying to keep schools out of the Big 12 especially, but also the Big Ten and SEC. They seemed to have worked OT on the report to make those conferences seem less than they are.

The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

The Big 12 most certainly was a major threat to the ACC. You don't have leaders at your premiere institution openly talking about seeing what the Big 12 had to offer as FSU's leaders did--and then claim there was no threat. The amount of attention the ACC paid in the report to attempt to discredit the Big 12 wasn't done for no reason.

This was a puff piece done to dissuade members from wanting to go elsewhere, not because they "didn't have numbers"--after all the report is filled with numbers-they just aren't very accurate.

As for basketball, the ACC has improved its position--this year it was the #5 conference.

Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

(04-26-2014 11:32 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 07:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 12:18 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 05:38 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(04-25-2014 02:56 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  At the time the report was done, the ACC was trying to keep schools out of the Big 12 especially, but also the Big Ten and SEC. They seemed to have worked OT on the report to make those conferences seem less than they are.

The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

The Big 12 most certainly was a major threat to the ACC. You don't have leaders at your premiere institution openly talking about seeing what the Big 12 had to offer as FSU's leaders did--and then claim there was no threat. The amount of attention the ACC paid in the report to attempt to discredit the Big 12 wasn't done for no reason.

This was a puff piece done to dissuade members from wanting to go elsewhere, not because they "didn't have numbers"--after all the report is filled with numbers-they just aren't very accurate.

As for basketball, the ACC has improved its position--this year it was the #5 conference.

Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

(04-27-2014 06:57 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:32 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 07:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 12:18 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 05:38 AM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  The B12 was never a threat to the ACC... Never.

As to the 'Amateurish' nature of the Analysis-presentation, as some would have it, this has already been covered... it is nothing more than an internal PP presentation given to Ads, etc.. Of course it's puff & there is a reason why = There are no hard numbers b/c that hasn't been worked out b/w the conference and Espn yet, and this goes for Network info, future marketing and reach.. all of it. Espn is focused on getting the Sec up and running, then they'll turn to the ACC. And then all these plans to pull the ACC apart will wither and die on the vine.

As to the assertion that the ACC has been one of the best basketball conferences in the country... this is self-evident to anyone who follows the sport.

Reach further desperate graspers...

The Big 12 most certainly was a major threat to the ACC. You don't have leaders at your premiere institution openly talking about seeing what the Big 12 had to offer as FSU's leaders did--and then claim there was no threat. The amount of attention the ACC paid in the report to attempt to discredit the Big 12 wasn't done for no reason.

This was a puff piece done to dissuade members from wanting to go elsewhere, not because they "didn't have numbers"--after all the report is filled with numbers-they just aren't very accurate.

As for basketball, the ACC has improved its position--this year it was the #5 conference.

Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

Look, we have actual people from FSU on record discussing moving to other conferences such as the Big 12. What you are saying is just your wish for what was true about the situation, but there isn't anything to base it on. Virtually every major sports outlet discussed that FSU and Clemson were indeed very interested in switching conferences, and FSU officials mentioned the Big 12 by name as a conference of interest. The ACC took numerous actions to try and shore up their conference--to try and pretend now all of that was imaginary is just not being honest about the situation.

As for basketball the Big 12 always has numerous NCAA teams besides just Kansas. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor are nearly always quality programs. OU, and Texas have had their years. Up until the last couple of seasons WVU has done very well--going to 5 straight NCAA,s including sweet 16's, elite 8 and final four appearances and winning an NIT tournament in the past decade. If you go back and see how many teams were in the dance, I'm not seeing an advantage for the ACC over the years. Again, just this past year we saw the Big 12 was #1 according to the experts, and the ACC was #5 with everyone except Louisville on board. The ACC isn't expected to be number one next year either--they are better than before, but not above the other P5 conferences and certainly not the Big 12 who many predict will be number one again next season.

(04-27-2014 08:36 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 06:57 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:32 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 07:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 12:18 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  The Big 12 most certainly was a major threat to the ACC. You don't have leaders at your premiere institution openly talking about seeing what the Big 12 had to offer as FSU's leaders did--and then claim there was no threat. The amount of attention the ACC paid in the report to attempt to discredit the Big 12 wasn't done for no reason.

This was a puff piece done to dissuade members from wanting to go elsewhere, not because they "didn't have numbers"--after all the report is filled with numbers-they just aren't very accurate.

As for basketball, the ACC has improved its position--this year it was the #5 conference.

Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

Look, we have actual people from FSU on record discussing moving to other conferences such as the Big 12. What you are saying is just your wish for what was true about the situation, but there isn't anything to base it on. Virtually every major sports outlet discussed that FSU and Clemson were indeed very interested in switching conferences, and FSU officials mentioned the Big 12 by name as a conference of interest. The ACC took numerous actions to try and shore up their conference--to try and pretend now all of that was imaginary is just not being honest about the situation.

As for basketball the Big 12 always has numerous NCAA teams besides just Kansas. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor are nearly always quality programs. OU, and Texas have had their years. Up until the last couple of seasons WVU has done very well--going to 5 straight NCAA,s including sweet 16's, elite 8 and final four appearances and winning an NIT tournament in the past decade. If you go back and see how many teams were in the dance, I'm not seeing an advantage for the ACC over the years. Again, just this past year we saw the Big 12 was #1 according to the experts, and the ACC was #5 with everyone except Louisville on board. The ACC isn't expected to be number one next year either--they are better than before, but not above the other P5 conferences and certainly not the Big 12 who many predict will be number one again next season.

Multiple media outlets were reporting UNC and UVA going to the Big 10. Some had UNC penciled into the SEC. You can't trust most of the realignment news. It was a bunch of rumors fueling the fires. FSU made it too convenient when they said no. President had to come out with press release to so his support for the ACC. You don't think that presser had motives behind it. Of course it did. So FSU jerks the ACC chain and then all of a sudden, some of their requests start getting heard.....Louisville gets invited to the ACC instead of UCONN...The league starts changing the way they reward performance monetarily....and so forth

I'm shaking my head of the basketball thing. You're too caught up in RPI's and not enough in championships and Final Fours. Yes the Big 12 has had some decent seasons recently, but to say they are on par historically with the ACC is ludicrous. Since 2008, the Big 12 has won 1 national title (Kansas - 2008). The current ACC members have won 3 (UNC - 2009, Duke 2010, Louisville 2013). Also, since 2008, the Big 12 has been to 3 Final Fours (Kansas 2008, 2012 West Va 2010) The current ACC members have been to 6 ( UNC 2008, 2009 Duke 2010, Louisville 2012, 2013 Syracuse 2013) Not to mention UVA was a #1 seed this past tournament and they may be just as good this coming year. Pitt is still good. Notre Dame will be back. FSU will be good. The bottom of the league continues to improve so I don't see how the leagues are on par with each other.

(04-27-2014 02:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 08:36 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 06:57 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:32 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 07:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

Look, we have actual people from FSU on record discussing moving to other conferences such as the Big 12. What you are saying is just your wish for what was true about the situation, but there isn't anything to base it on. Virtually every major sports outlet discussed that FSU and Clemson were indeed very interested in switching conferences, and FSU officials mentioned the Big 12 by name as a conference of interest. The ACC took numerous actions to try and shore up their conference--to try and pretend now all of that was imaginary is just not being honest about the situation.

As for basketball the Big 12 always has numerous NCAA teams besides just Kansas. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor are nearly always quality programs. OU, and Texas have had their years. Up until the last couple of seasons WVU has done very well--going to 5 straight NCAA,s including sweet 16's, elite 8 and final four appearances and winning an NIT tournament in the past decade. If you go back and see how many teams were in the dance, I'm not seeing an advantage for the ACC over the years. Again, just this past year we saw the Big 12 was #1 according to the experts, and the ACC was #5 with everyone except Louisville on board. The ACC isn't expected to be number one next year either--they are better than before, but not above the other P5 conferences and certainly not the Big 12 who many predict will be number one again next season.

Multiple media outlets were reporting UNC and UVA going to the Big 10. Some had UNC penciled into the SEC. You can't trust most of the realignment news. It was a bunch of rumors fueling the fires. FSU made it too convenient when they said no. President had to come out with press release to so his support for the ACC. You don't think that presser had motives behind it. Of course it did. So FSU jerks the ACC chain and then all of a sudden, some of their requests start getting heard.....Louisville gets invited to the ACC instead of UCONN...The league starts changing the way they reward performance monetarily....and so forth

I'm shaking my head of the basketball thing. You're too caught up in RPI's and not enough in championships and Final Fours. Yes the Big 12 has had some decent seasons recently, but to say they are on par historically with the ACC is ludicrous. Since 2008, the Big 12 has won 1 national title (Kansas - 2008). The current ACC members have won 3 (UNC - 2009, Duke 2010, Louisville 2013). Also, since 2008, the Big 12 has been to 3 Final Fours (Kansas 2008, 2012 West Va 2010) The current ACC members have been to 6 ( UNC 2008, 2009 Duke 2010, Louisville 2012, 2013 Syracuse 2013) Not to mention UVA was a #1 seed this past tournament and they may be just as good this coming year. Pitt is still good. Notre Dame will be back. FSU will be good. The bottom of the league continues to improve so I don't see how the leagues are on par with each other.

And yet in that same time frame (roughly since you edited out 2006 & 7 when the Gators were on a run) the SEC has 6 final four appearances and 3 championships to the ACC's 2. In 2013 Louisville was a member of the Big East (AAC), so I don't think you need to borrow their accolades just yet. The fact is that the ACC bombed in this year's tournament and although highly touted and highly rated to begin each year has been slipping from its past productivity.

Now that said I still view the ACC as a preeminent basketball conference, just not as the preeminent basketball conference. And I am not arguing that the SEC is as deep as the ACC in hoops, I am just saying that the metrics you are using to wage your claim are dubious.

(04-24-2014 03:18 PM)ken d Wrote:  If the ACC is so good at recruiting great players, why does it still suck at football? They get good players on the front end, they put lots of players in the NFL, yet they still rank dead last in the P5 when it comes to on field performance in between the coming and the going. That's not something I'd tout.

Ok. Well why don't you be so kind as to remind the board in which conference the Current BCS National Champion resides, and which conference has won the last 3 BCS bowls it has sent a team to play in. It would be a big help.

(04-27-2014 07:03 PM)btstimpy Wrote:  Ok. Well why don't you be so kind as to remind the board in which conference the Current BCS National Champion resides, and which conference has won the last 3 BCS bowls it has sent a team to play in. It would be a big help.

And with that, the ACC finishes 5-13 in BCS bowl appearances.

(04-27-2014 02:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 08:36 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 06:57 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:32 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 07:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Ummmm no.

Big 12 posed no threat. FSU never really considered the Big 12 and only used the situation to further their own needs. FSU came out and said something because the rumors were getting out of control.

As for basketball, the Big 12 doesn't hold a candle to the ACC and everyone knows that. Conference RPI's fluctuate every year, but we're talking about long term sustained greatness. It's not the same.

Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

Look, we have actual people from FSU on record discussing moving to other conferences such as the Big 12. What you are saying is just your wish for what was true about the situation, but there isn't anything to base it on. Virtually every major sports outlet discussed that FSU and Clemson were indeed very interested in switching conferences, and FSU officials mentioned the Big 12 by name as a conference of interest. The ACC took numerous actions to try and shore up their conference--to try and pretend now all of that was imaginary is just not being honest about the situation.

As for basketball the Big 12 always has numerous NCAA teams besides just Kansas. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor are nearly always quality programs. OU, and Texas have had their years. Up until the last couple of seasons WVU has done very well--going to 5 straight NCAA,s including sweet 16's, elite 8 and final four appearances and winning an NIT tournament in the past decade. If you go back and see how many teams were in the dance, I'm not seeing an advantage for the ACC over the years. Again, just this past year we saw the Big 12 was #1 according to the experts, and the ACC was #5 with everyone except Louisville on board. The ACC isn't expected to be number one next year either--they are better than before, but not above the other P5 conferences and certainly not the Big 12 who many predict will be number one again next season.

Multiple media outlets were reporting UNC and UVA going to the Big 10. Some had UNC penciled into the SEC. You can't trust most of the realignment news. It was a bunch of rumors fueling the fires. FSU made it too convenient when they said no. President had to come out with press release to so his support for the ACC. You don't think that presser had motives behind it. Of course it did. So FSU jerks the ACC chain and then all of a sudden, some of their requests start getting heard.....Louisville gets invited to the ACC instead of UCONN...The league starts changing the way they reward performance monetarily....and so forth

I'm not talking about any rumors. I'm talking about quotes from actual officials. There were several direct quotes from FSU officials showing they were strongly considering the Big 12. There were emails intercepted from UNC showing they were having informal talks with the SEC and were considering conference change after Maryland said they were leaving. These are things that happened, not some made up subterfuge. Your story is just a made up wish on your part because you don't want to accept ACC schools strongly considered switching to leagues like the Big 12, which they most certainly did.

I'm shaking my head of the basketball thing. You're too caught up in RPI's and not enough in championships and Final Fours. Yes the Big 12 has had some decent seasons recently, but to say they are on par historically with the ACC is ludicrous. Since 2008, the Big 12 has won 1 national title (Kansas - 2008). The current ACC members have won 3 (UNC - 2009, Duke 2010, Louisville 2013). Also, since 2008, the Big 12 has been to 3 Final Fours (Kansas 2008, 2012 West Va 2010) The current ACC members have been to 6 ( UNC 2008, 2009 Duke 2010, Louisville 2012, 2013 Syracuse 2013) Not to mention UVA was a #1 seed this past tournament and they may be just as good this coming year. Pitt is still good. Notre Dame will be back. FSU will be good. The bottom of the league continues to improve so I don't see how the leagues are on par with each other.

I'm shaking my head at you on basketball. No one is saying the ACC hasn't had or doesn't have good basketball. It's not better than the Big 12 or the other P5 leagues though. It essentially had two very good teams and now has four.

(04-27-2014 05:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 02:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 08:36 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 06:57 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:32 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  Ummmm yes.

Officials from FSU publicly stated they wanted to hear what the Big 12 had to say. Most if not all sports media wrote about the situation for both FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 extensively. There was serious interest. To claim otherwise is delusional revisionist history. Just because it didn't come to pass doesn't mean there was never interest--or more importantly--that the ACC wasn't concerned-very concerned about it.

The Big 12 was the number one RPI league this year and ESPN has already written that it may also be next season. A recent article showed the Big 12 will have the highest per school NCAA payouts for the next six year cycle. The ACC on the other hand with all BE but UL in the fold came in #5. There are a couple of good teams in the ACC that usually get a free ride with NCAA tournament games in the state of NC each year, but to claim the league itself is something great compared to the Big 12 conference, which also has great bb programs, just isn't remotely so. The ACC brought itself up to par with the other four conferences in the P5, it hasn't surpassed any of them.

Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

Look, we have actual people from FSU on record discussing moving to other conferences such as the Big 12. What you are saying is just your wish for what was true about the situation, but there isn't anything to base it on. Virtually every major sports outlet discussed that FSU and Clemson were indeed very interested in switching conferences, and FSU officials mentioned the Big 12 by name as a conference of interest. The ACC took numerous actions to try and shore up their conference--to try and pretend now all of that was imaginary is just not being honest about the situation.

As for basketball the Big 12 always has numerous NCAA teams besides just Kansas. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor are nearly always quality programs. OU, and Texas have had their years. Up until the last couple of seasons WVU has done very well--going to 5 straight NCAA,s including sweet 16's, elite 8 and final four appearances and winning an NIT tournament in the past decade. If you go back and see how many teams were in the dance, I'm not seeing an advantage for the ACC over the years. Again, just this past year we saw the Big 12 was #1 according to the experts, and the ACC was #5 with everyone except Louisville on board. The ACC isn't expected to be number one next year either--they are better than before, but not above the other P5 conferences and certainly not the Big 12 who many predict will be number one again next season.

Multiple media outlets were reporting UNC and UVA going to the Big 10. Some had UNC penciled into the SEC. You can't trust most of the realignment news. It was a bunch of rumors fueling the fires. FSU made it too convenient when they said no. President had to come out with press release to so his support for the ACC. You don't think that presser had motives behind it. Of course it did. So FSU jerks the ACC chain and then all of a sudden, some of their requests start getting heard.....Louisville gets invited to the ACC instead of UCONN...The league starts changing the way they reward performance monetarily....and so forth

I'm shaking my head of the basketball thing. You're too caught up in RPI's and not enough in championships and Final Fours. Yes the Big 12 has had some decent seasons recently, but to say they are on par historically with the ACC is ludicrous. Since 2008, the Big 12 has won 1 national title (Kansas - 2008). The current ACC members have won 3 (UNC - 2009, Duke 2010, Louisville 2013). Also, since 2008, the Big 12 has been to 3 Final Fours (Kansas 2008, 2012 West Va 2010) The current ACC members have been to 6 ( UNC 2008, 2009 Duke 2010, Louisville 2012, 2013 Syracuse 2013) Not to mention UVA was a #1 seed this past tournament and they may be just as good this coming year. Pitt is still good. Notre Dame will be back. FSU will be good. The bottom of the league continues to improve so I don't see how the leagues are on par with each other.

And yet in that same time frame (roughly since you edited out 2006 & 7 when the Gators were on a run) the SEC has 6 final four appearances and 3 championships to the ACC's 2. In 2013 Louisville was a member of the Big East (AAC), so I don't think you need to borrow their accolades just yet. The fact is that the ACC bombed in this year's tournament and although highly touted and highly rated to begin each year has been slipping from its past productivity.

Now that said I still view the ACC as a preeminent basketball conference, just not as the preeminent basketball conference. And I am not arguing that the SEC is as deep as the ACC in hoops, I am just saying that the metrics you are using to wage your claim are dubious.

Dude we were talking Big 12 vs ACC. SEC (or any other conference) was not in the conversation.

(04-27-2014 08:43 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 05:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 02:00 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 08:36 AM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(04-27-2014 06:57 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Are you kidding me? It's called posturing. It's the same thing coaches do when they float their names out for another job just to get a raise. FSU has no fans in the midwest. Clemson has no fans in the midwest. Keep fooling yourself into thinking FSU seriously considered the Big 12.

As for basketball, outside of Kansas who in the Big 12 has a great basketball program? Big 12 definitely has solid basketball teams...Texas, Iowa St, West Va, Ok, Ok St, Baylor, K St. TCU and Texas Tech suck right now. But of the teams I named, who really can hold a candle to UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville.... 4>1

Look, we have actual people from FSU on record discussing moving to other conferences such as the Big 12. What you are saying is just your wish for what was true about the situation, but there isn't anything to base it on. Virtually every major sports outlet discussed that FSU and Clemson were indeed very interested in switching conferences, and FSU officials mentioned the Big 12 by name as a conference of interest. The ACC took numerous actions to try and shore up their conference--to try and pretend now all of that was imaginary is just not being honest about the situation.

As for basketball the Big 12 always has numerous NCAA teams besides just Kansas. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor are nearly always quality programs. OU, and Texas have had their years. Up until the last couple of seasons WVU has done very well--going to 5 straight NCAA,s including sweet 16's, elite 8 and final four appearances and winning an NIT tournament in the past decade. If you go back and see how many teams were in the dance, I'm not seeing an advantage for the ACC over the years. Again, just this past year we saw the Big 12 was #1 according to the experts, and the ACC was #5 with everyone except Louisville on board. The ACC isn't expected to be number one next year either--they are better than before, but not above the other P5 conferences and certainly not the Big 12 who many predict will be number one again next season.

Multiple media outlets were reporting UNC and UVA going to the Big 10. Some had UNC penciled into the SEC. You can't trust most of the realignment news. It was a bunch of rumors fueling the fires. FSU made it too convenient when they said no. President had to come out with press release to so his support for the ACC. You don't think that presser had motives behind it. Of course it did. So FSU jerks the ACC chain and then all of a sudden, some of their requests start getting heard.....Louisville gets invited to the ACC instead of UCONN...The league starts changing the way they reward performance monetarily....and so forth

I'm shaking my head of the basketball thing. You're too caught up in RPI's and not enough in championships and Final Fours. Yes the Big 12 has had some decent seasons recently, but to say they are on par historically with the ACC is ludicrous. Since 2008, the Big 12 has won 1 national title (Kansas - 2008). The current ACC members have won 3 (UNC - 2009, Duke 2010, Louisville 2013). Also, since 2008, the Big 12 has been to 3 Final Fours (Kansas 2008, 2012 West Va 2010) The current ACC members have been to 6 ( UNC 2008, 2009 Duke 2010, Louisville 2012, 2013 Syracuse 2013) Not to mention UVA was a #1 seed this past tournament and they may be just as good this coming year. Pitt is still good. Notre Dame will be back. FSU will be good. The bottom of the league continues to improve so I don't see how the leagues are on par with each other.

And yet in that same time frame (roughly since you edited out 2006 & 7 when the Gators were on a run) the SEC has 6 final four appearances and 3 championships to the ACC's 2. In 2013 Louisville was a member of the Big East (AAC), so I don't think you need to borrow their accolades just yet. The fact is that the ACC bombed in this year's tournament and although highly touted and highly rated to begin each year has been slipping from its past productivity.

Now that said I still view the ACC as a preeminent basketball conference, just not as the preeminent basketball conference. And I am not arguing that the SEC is as deep as the ACC in hoops, I am just saying that the metrics you are using to wage your claim are dubious.

Dude we were talking Big 12 vs ACC. SEC (or any other conference) was not in the conversation.

I realize that. What I was pointing out was how unreliable your direction of argumentation was. By that metric it might be argued that the SEC had the superior basketball product. Depth is the argument for the ACC vs Big 12. You have more top schools. Syracuse, Pitt, Virginia, Duke, and North Carolina compared to Iowa State and Kansas. The middle is similar to the Big 12, but larger. The tournament is line of argumentation is much much cloudier. This year out of the ACC and Big 12 Virginia and Iowa State were bonafide.