(06-23-2014 09:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 08:11 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 07:38 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 06:06 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-23-2014 05:24 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  You can't get poached unless you want to. B1G wanted UNC and UVA. They politely said.... no thanks.

What about Maryland? Did the ACC want to get poached for Maryland?

The point is, the BE did have bad leadership. We can all see that now. But you cant point at all of the BE problems and gloss over the additional problems that regularly getting poached by the ACC presented. And thank goodness for the ACC that the right BE schools were willing to be poached, or it would have experienced the same demise as the BE.

Cuseroc, I think he meant that a team can't be poached unless IT wants to be... as for the ACC poaching the Big East, I'm glad it grabbed Va Tech, but I haven't decided about Syracuse yet. Of course, if you Orange fans think it was bad for the ACC to poach the Big East, I suppose we can let you return (we could even waive the exit fee) if you insist... perhaps Cincinnati would have a different point of view?

haha, You guys can talk big and bad now that the ACC is stable!


You'll make your mind up about SU soon enough after we get through smacking you around on the fb field and basketball court like we did in the BE

iknow, Iknow, we were dead even against each other in fb, but I needed something to talk smack about to liven this place up. give me your best shot chokies

Ooh, so much smack talk! Obviously the REASON why the ACC is stable now is BECAUSE it took Va Tech instead of Syracuse in 2003. Can you imagine the decade that followed if the Hokies had NOT been a football member?

Yeah, like Syracuse could've carried the league...

Yep, the ACC and VT were made for each other. The Acc needed someone to carry the league until FSU found its legs, and VT needed an easier league to win after NOT winning the BE for so many years.
A perfect match

(06-24-2014 06:35 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  ...VT needed an easier league to win after NOT winning the BE for so many years.
A perfect match

Except for 1995, '96 and '99 you'd be absolutely correct, my friend.

(missed it by..........................................................THAT much!)

(06-25-2014 01:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 06:35 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  ...VT needed an easier league to win after NOT winning the BE for so many years.
A perfect match

Except for 1995, '96 and '99 you'd be absolutely correct, my friend.

(missed it by..........................................................THAT much!)

It was still 4 years of not winning the BE to winning the Acc every year. I believe VT only won the BE outright, only once. At least SU managed to win the REAL BE (with Miami, VT and BC) outright, twice.

(06-25-2014 01:31 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 01:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 06:35 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  ...VT needed an easier league to win after NOT winning the BE for so many years.
A perfect match

Except for 1995, '96 and '99 you'd be absolutely correct, my friend.

(missed it by..........................................................THAT much!)

It was still 4 years of not winning the BE to winning the Acc every year. I believe VT only won the BE outright, only once. At least SU managed to win the REAL BE (with Miami, VT and BC) outright, twice.

1995 Co-Champs (w/ Miami):
VT 13, Miami 7
VT 31, 'Cuse 7
NO VALID ARGUMENT FROM SYRACUSE! I'll grant you, the Hokies CHOKED in the first 2 games (BC and Cincinnati) before righting the ship and running the table.

1996 Co-Champs (w/ Miami and 'Cuse):
VT 21, 'Cuse 52 in the Carrier Dome
VT 21, Miami 14 in the Orange Bowl
'Cuse 31, Miami 38 in the Carrier Dome
3-WAY TIE (Rock/Scissors/Paper style)

So, your argument is that Va Tech went 1-1 when playing BOTH Miami and Syracuse on the road, but when the Hokies had both teams at home they swept... and somehow that means VT wasn't good enough to win the Big East in football?