(12-08-2014 06:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:12 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How is it that an absolute scrub like Baylor can turn it around but these ACC schools can't? They're even a private school.

Baylor cares about football.

They are reportedly paying close to $4 million a year to their head coach.

They just spent $266 million on a state of the art football stadium.

How many schools in the ACC do you see willing to make such a commitment to football?

How much did they care 10 years ago when they were barely avoiding going winless every year?

They didn't spend all of that money until they started winning.

(12-08-2014 10:26 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:12 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How is it that an absolute scrub like Baylor can turn it around but these ACC schools can't? They're even a private school.

Baylor cares about football.

They are reportedly paying close to $4 million a year to their head coach.

They just spent $266 million on a state of the art football stadium.

How many schools in the ACC do you see willing to make such a commitment to football?

How much did they care 10 years ago when they were barely avoiding going winless every year?

They didn't spend all of that money until they started winning.

IMO, the Baylor football story is a more advanced version of Duke football. No inside info here, just circumstantial evidence, but here goes anyway...

When the SWC died there was only room for 4 Texas teams. Houston, Rice, SMU and TCU lost out, but Baylor road the Longhorn coattails into the Big XII. Fast forward to when the Big Ten raided Nebraska and Colorado jumped ship to the Pac-12. By now Baylor could probably see the writing on the wall and - voila! - they start playing good football around that same time. (Amazing what a near death experience can do in terms of motivation).

"Isn't Duke about to spend 250 million in upgrades?"


No.


That is the amount they are raising for ALL sports, not how much they are spending on football.



ACC schools have some of the largest athletic endowments in the nation, but traditionally, ACC schools just don't invest in football. It is a cultural thing in the ACC. They just haven't adjusted like other Power 5 conferences.


But make NO mistake. ACC schools like Ga Tech, UVA, UNC, and Duke are LOADED and have HUGE boosters. Football is just not a priority for these schools like other power 5 conferences.

(12-08-2014 06:12 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How is it that an absolute scrub like Baylor can turn it around but these ACC schools can't? They're even a private school.

For every 1 Art Briles there are 100 Lane Kiffins.

(12-08-2014 11:56 PM)nole Wrote:  But make NO mistake. ACC schools like Ga Tech, ... are LOADED and have HUGE boosters. Football is just not a priority for these schools like other power 5 conferences.

Football is the athletic priority at GT. But I'll offer some counterpoints:

1) The GTAA is not "loaded". It is actually swimming in debt. It even still has some debt lingering from the 2003 football stadium expansion. They also around that time frame did a Russ Chandler Stadium renovation. In the last five years: The new indoor practice facility. The new softball facility. The new tennis facility. The new basketball practice facility. The McCamish Pavilion renovation.

The only major facilities on campus not to undergo a multi-million dollar renovation at minimum has been O'Keefe Gymnasium (volleyball) and the Aquatics Center (1996 Olympic games freebie). I don't count the golf practice and track and field as major facilities. They are more or less fields.

They just got done paying off Chan Gailey to not coach. They're still paying Paul Hewitt not to coach. And they're about to start paying Brian Gregory not to coach. The GTAA debt service is quite substantial indeed.


2) The GTAA is hampered by "The Hill" (GT Administration) who dropped the academic hammer after Gailey had flunk-gate his first year by severely limiting exemptions (just recently relaxed). And they have for more than 40 years now imposed silly mandates like calculus for everyone regardless of major.


3) The GTAA is hampered by the Georgia Board of Regents, a body dominated by UGAg alumni. They refuse to allow GT to expand into liberal arts (aka football friendly majors) since that would duplicate degree offerings elsewhere in the system like UGAg and Georgia State. But that sure as **** didn't stop them from giving UGAg a brand new engineering school just recently despite that competing with Georgia Tech, Georgia Tech - Savannah, and Georgia Southern.


4) The GTAA is hampered by the very location of GT. Real estate aint cheap. It took a concerted nine figure effort for GT to finally jump across The Connector (I-85/I-75) to expand on the other side of the interstate. Unlike at Clemson, you can't just buy up some damn farmland and go to town building crap. It is way more expensive to expand.





If you want to accurately trace the downturn of GT Athletics writ large entering the new millenium ... it is the departure of Homer Rice as athletic director and the entrance of Dave Braine.

Bobby Cremmins? Homer Rice hire. <-- Put GT basketball on the map ... went to Final Four ... point guard U.
Paul Hewitt? Dave Braine hire.

Danny Hall? Homer Rice hire. <-- Put GT baseball on the map ... went to CWS multiple times

George O'Leary? Homer Rice hire. <-- Took football from 1 win to 10 in 5 seasons.
Chan Gailey? Dave Braine hire.

Shelton Collier? Homer Rice hire. <-- Took volleyball from 248th to 16th in 5 seasons.
Bond Shymansky? Dave Braine hire.

Bruce Heppler? Homer Rice hire. <-- First recruit was Matt Kuchar. Cleanin' house since. National runner up two or three times now.


The one and only good hire made by Braine was Bryan Shelton of the women's tennis team who won a National Championship. He left a few years later to coach Florida, which tells you how he probably wasn't adequately appreciated despite the fact that he won a title and was a Georgia Tech alumni and former player. An OK hire is MaChelle Joseph, still coaching women's basketball today. She took GT to the NCAAT several times, got as far as the Sweet 16 (program record), beat UGAg for the first time ever, and got several 20+ win seasons. She's been a new high water mark for that program, but not a game changer.

So far the track record of Radakovich's hires is mixed at best. Paul Johnson is doing OK. Brian Gregory (MBB, soon to be fired), Tonya Johnson (VB, fired) are not so hot.

(12-08-2014 11:56 PM)nole Wrote:  "Isn't Duke about to spend 250 million in upgrades?"


No.


That is the amount they are raising for ALL sports, not how much they are spending on football.



ACC schools have some of the largest athletic endowments in the nation, but traditionally, ACC schools just don't invest in football. It is a cultural thing in the ACC. They just haven't adjusted like other Power 5 conferences.


But make NO mistake. ACC schools like Ga Tech, UVA, UNC, and Duke are LOADED and have HUGE boosters. Football is just not a priority for these schools like other power 5 conferences.

You have to assume a good portion of that is going to football (Wallace Wade Stadium is getting a facelift). Even if it's just 100 million for football...for Duke that's BIG.

(12-08-2014 06:12 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How is it that an absolute scrub like Baylor can turn it around but these ACC schools can't? They're even a private school.

Gotta point...and really look at what Duke has done..solid right now.

A few thoughts:


*Duke hired a great coach and got results.

*Many ACC schools are too patient with their football coaches. Yes, I don't want guys fired after 2 weeks, but it doesn't take 5 years to see if a program is stalled or declining.

*Jim Grobe was one of the best coaches EVER in the ACC (or college football IMHO). Winning at the level he did at Wake was insane and will never be appreciated. He turned down the Neb. job and wanted to stay at Wake. Wake basically refused to support him. He left pissed off at the school for not keeping promises. THIS SAYS EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT AILS THE ACC. A rare school with a great hire who turned down better jobs and the school STILL didn't support him.

*Even when the ACC hires solid coaches, the support system is a TINY fraction of what you see at other schools. Assist. coaches salaries, strength trainers, facilities, and the new trend....basically other assist coaches with different titles (Bama has 27 something hired...FSU around 7). ACC is failing behind in these areas....NOT catching up.

*Expectations.....many ACC fan bases just don't have much for their program and that is a self fulfilling prophecy. I truly believe UNC, UVA, Duke, Va Tech, Miami, Ga Tech should all be regular (ie yearly, not ever 5-10 years) top 25 schools. Sometimes they do get there, but the trend isn't as frequently as it should be. Fan bases seem easily content in ACC compared to our non ACC peer fan bases.

(12-09-2014 09:28 AM)nole Wrote:  *Expectations.....many ACC fan bases just don't have much for their program and that is a self fulfilling prophecy. I truly believe UNC, UVA, Duke, Va Tech, Miami, Ga Tech should all be regular (ie yearly, not ever 5-10 years) top 25 schools. Sometimes they do get there, but the trend isn't as frequently as it should be. Fan bases seem easily content in ACC compared to our non ACC peer fan bases.

Va Tech fans are NOT satisfied with 7-5 and 6-6 records, and they have begun showing it by staying away (the sell-out streak is over; no telling how many tickets VT could have sold during peak demand, but now they can't sell out at 6-6).

(12-09-2014 09:28 AM)nole Wrote:  A few thoughts:


*Duke hired a great coach and got results.

*Many ACC schools are too patient with their football coaches. Yes, I don't want guys fired after 2 weeks, but it doesn't take 5 years to see if a program is stalled or declining.

*Jim Grobe was one of the best coaches EVER in the ACC (or college football IMHO). Winning at the level he did at Wake was insane and will never be appreciated. He turned down the Neb. job and wanted to stay at Wake. Wake basically refused to support him. He left pissed off at the school for not keeping promises. THIS SAYS EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT AILS THE ACC. A rare school with a great hire who turned down better jobs and the school STILL didn't support him.

*Even when the ACC hires solid coaches, the support system is a TINY fraction of what you see at other schools. Assist. coaches salaries, strength trainers, facilities, and the new trend....basically other assist coaches with different titles (Bama has 27 something hired...FSU around 7). ACC is failing behind in these areas....NOT catching up.

*Expectations.....many ACC fan bases just don't have much for their program and that is a self fulfilling prophecy. I truly believe UNC, UVA, Duke, Va Tech, Miami, Ga Tech should all be regular (ie yearly, not ever 5-10 years) top 25 schools. Sometimes they do get there, but the trend isn't as frequently as it should be. Fan bases seem easily content in ACC compared to our non ACC peer fan bases.

I would be inclined to believe you if I didn't see what has happened to Florida, Texas, Michigan, Tennessee. All big schools with plenty of financial support but are suffering because of misfires on the coaching side.

Cash infusion certainly doesn't equate to success on the field. Look no further than my Alma mater. A consistent mind numbing decisions with hiring football coaches have kept UNC in a state of mediocrity or below. Certainly, the Mack Brown hire was great and the failure to pony up to keep him was even more egregious. The decisions that followed were even worse. Torbusch, Bunting and Butch. And now Fedora.

I am not going to speculate that Butch had us heading in the right direction. Personally, you cant pay someone to achieve the same record we always seem to achieve. 8-6, 7-5, etc. For that big of a name, I wanted to see better in the win/lose column. Unfortunately, we will never know due to the scandal.

Anyway, I certainly can see how GT can be strapped for cash. Paying these former coaches is crazy and to see GT bball fall like it did is certainly sad. They are a long way from Tom Hammonds, Lethal Weapons 3, etc.

It all goes to hiring decisions. We certainly set ourselves back with the head coaches we hired since Mack Brown.

(12-09-2014 11:09 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 09:28 AM)nole Wrote:  A few thoughts:


*Duke hired a great coach and got results.

*Many ACC schools are too patient with their football coaches. Yes, I don't want guys fired after 2 weeks, but it doesn't take 5 years to see if a program is stalled or declining.

*Jim Grobe was one of the best coaches EVER in the ACC (or college football IMHO). Winning at the level he did at Wake was insane and will never be appreciated. He turned down the Neb. job and wanted to stay at Wake. Wake basically refused to support him. He left pissed off at the school for not keeping promises. THIS SAYS EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT AILS THE ACC. A rare school with a great hire who turned down better jobs and the school STILL didn't support him.

*Even when the ACC hires solid coaches, the support system is a TINY fraction of what you see at other schools. Assist. coaches salaries, strength trainers, facilities, and the new trend....basically other assist coaches with different titles (Bama has 27 something hired...FSU around 7). ACC is failing behind in these areas....NOT catching up.

*Expectations.....many ACC fan bases just don't have much for their program and that is a self fulfilling prophecy. I truly believe UNC, UVA, Duke, Va Tech, Miami, Ga Tech should all be regular (ie yearly, not ever 5-10 years) top 25 schools. Sometimes they do get there, but the trend isn't as frequently as it should be. Fan bases seem easily content in ACC compared to our non ACC peer fan bases.

I would be inclined to believe you if I didn't see what has happened to Florida, Texas, Michigan, Tennessee. All big schools with plenty of financial support but are suffering because of misfires on the coaching side.

Nowhere do I suggest schools, even major ones, don't have off cycles. All those schools you mentioned will fire coaches rather quickly, normally. They all invest, HEAVILY in football. 3 of the 4 have won national titles in the last 15 years.


So how do those 4 schools disprove anything I posted re: the ACC? And how are any ACC schools comparable to them?

I guess I just simply disagree with the dominant mentality in this thread. The public has already seen Florida State/Louisville and Florida State/Clemson. We don't need to see that again. We already know how that's likely going to end. I was much more interested in Florida State/Georgia Tech than I would've been in Florida State versus those other schools that they already beaten.

To be honest, I have always felt that way about the SEC is well. I had already seen Alabama/LSU. I did not need to see it again and I thought it was a travesty that they played a rematch for the national championship.

I just don't see any reason to change a single thing about the way the ACC is currently constructed. I know some of you are going to be overjoyed at that sentiment but really, what's there to argue about?

Florida State played for the national championship last year and has been selected to have the opportunity to play for it again this year provided they win their semi final game against Oregon. That is under the current divisional structure. I don't understand how anyone could possibly make the argument that the structure of the ACC has harmed Florida State or any other league school in any way because that is very obviously false?

The way I look at it is if it is not broken there is no need to fix it. Very clearly the ACC in its current state is not broken. Therefore, I see no reason to change a single thing.

Now, if all these bogeyman stories come to fruition and do start to affect the ACC negatively then I would happily revisit this issue. However, on the heels of two straight finals/semi finals appearances, I don't want to hear about how we need to change everything because that would be a mistake.

Nole, I agree with you that it does come down to priorities. However, as someone who is an enormous football fan and who owns season tickets to an NFL and a major college program and whose life is dominated by football, I don't admire schools like yours at all and I would be appalled if my school followed your lead.

I think the reason why everyone in the media seems to be bending over backwards to snub Florida State - and it is ridiculous the lengths people are going to to try to denigrate the Seminoles - is because most of the country views you as a win-at-all-costs institution that has probably covered up crimes and Lord knows what else to keep the money train rolling.

I think most people see the North Carolina in that same light. Given what we know about each of your schools, it is very difficult to argue with those folks because they are almost certainly correct. Most of the country sees you as a school that has sold its soul to the devil to win. It is perfectly fine with me if you are okay with that. And I know that it's easy to justify and accuse every other successful program of also being guilty of that. Who knows, you may be right about that? However, I don't wish for my school to be like that. I'm sorry I just don't want to be that.

I want the $100 million donations to my school to continue to go towards things like cancer research, not luxury suites and indoor practice facilities. Will that mean that we will never be able to compete with the likes of Alabama and Texas on the gridiron? Probably. However, I'm fine with that if we are competing with them on the much more lucrative and much more important front – which is in our academic mission.

That does not mean that I do not want my school to commit itself to playing big-time college football because I do. However, the key word there is "college." I know a lot of people cynically think that is a naïve position but it is one I will cling to until I die because I do not believe that you have to sacrifice your principles to win. I still believe you can win and still sleep at night.

I don't want to see my school's football program turn into a minor league professional football program. If it degenerates to that point I will simply ignore the whole thing altogether and dedicate myself to the major-league version of the sport.

(12-08-2014 07:07 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:48 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:31 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:29 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:12 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How is it that an absolute scrub like Baylor can turn it around but these ACC schools can't? They're even a private school.

Well they play in Texas, lately tend to have had Top 30 recruiting classes, willing to pay $3 million plus for their head coach, etc, etc, etc.

TCU is private as well.

Maybe the ACC should add both.

Cheers,
Neil

Last I checked Baylor has always been in Texas but until Art Briles got there....SUCKED. He turned that around and now it's viewed differently.

True but it's easier to recruit in Texas than it is for any other private in the ACC not named Miami.

So what they did was pay for a quality coach to get the recruits to come.

Duke has a quality coach in Cutliffe, who has done a good job, but it's not like he's going to get Top 30 recruiting classes like Baylor or even Top 40 ones like TCU.

SU gets what they paid for. Addazio has a chance to revitalize BC (and I just typing that), but once he does - he gone.

Cheers,
Neil

Actually, Duke has a top 30 recruiting class at this point per ESPN.
http://insider.espn.go.com/college-sport...tion=login

Congrats. But what was implied and not stated was Top 30/40 recruiting classes on a consistent basis (like 3 out of every 5 years)

Sorry, should have worded it better. Again congrats. I hope SU one day hires a coach as good as Duke has.

Cheers,
Neil

It's not broken? Half of the conference faces the other half just twice every 12 years. That's broken.

And lol at FSU "covers up crimes". You continue to show your ignorance.

(12-10-2014 01:52 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  It's not broken? Half of the conference faces the other half just twice every 12 years. That's broken.

Take that comment with a grain of salt. The Doctor is quite happy with the Coastal Division set-up since the Panthers get Miami, VT, and GT on an annual basis.

I think most of the fans from programs in that division are content if there are no divisional changes. But Pitt fans seem the happiest of them.

Cheers,
Neil

(12-10-2014 07:31 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 01:52 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  It's not broken? Half of the conference faces the other half just twice every 12 years. That's broken.

Take that comment with a grain of salt. The Doctor is quite happy with the Coastal Division set-up since the Panthers get Miami, VT, and GT on an annual basis.

I think most of the fans from programs in that division are content if there are no divisional changes. But Pitt fans seem the happiest of them.

Cheers,
Neil

I'm well aware of how much they "cry" over the divisions.

The ACC should have at least 5 ranked teams to begin next year. FSU, GT, Clemson, UofL, and Duke should all be top 25 preseason. That will help if we can strategically schedule early conference match ups.

(12-08-2014 06:29 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 06:12 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How is it that an absolute scrub like Baylor can turn it around but these ACC schools can't? They're even a private school.

Well they play in Texas, lately tend to have had Top 30 recruiting classes, willing to pay $3 million plus for their head coach, etc, etc, etc.

TCU is private as well.

Maybe the ACC should add both.

Cheers,
Neil

If the ACC added TCU and Baylor, and then brought in Texas with an ND type deal, you know how good this conference would be????

IMO, the ACC has done a good job at being proactive. Maryland left? they didn't miss a beat.....they went and picked up an excellent replacement in Louisville

All of the bad press about the Big East raid was a bunch of BS anyways....thats what conferences do....they grow and invite more teams. No one had a gun to Miami, VT, and BC

IMO, the ACC is just now reaping the benefits of being proactive. They need to continue that way