(03-13-2015 03:29 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 02:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:23 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I am not willing to go to Greensboro to watch ACC basketball. I never went to the Big East Tournament, either, in the 17-18 years that ND was in the Big East.

So, New York or Greensboro is not the issue. I likely would not attend any non-ND games even if the Tournament were held in New Orleans, 75 miles from my front door (even if the tickets let me see other games too---no interest). I would drive down for the ND game and then drive right back home.

I am not that interested in basketball in general nor am I interested in seeing the other ACC teams play each other.

(I don't even watch other ACC teams play on television, let alone go somewhere 12 hours away to do so in person).

I wouldn't go to the ACC Tournament even if I had free hotel, air fare and game tickets, except to exclusively watch ND play, and only the ND game(s).

I will drive 7 hours to watch a series of ND baseball games, but am not willing to watch an event that is not ND centric, especially one in Greensboro, NC.

So, I have to disagree with Paco. If I went to an ACC Tournament, and I had to pay my own way, I would not want to see any other teams play but ND (so it is not something that is remotely worth it to me for a number of reasons).

Terry,
What you said are exactly the reasons I personally hope that the ACC never allows Notre Dame to join our conference as a full member.
You guys are hard enough to stomach the way things are now, I would really hate to see the day when we treated you as an equal.
I mean no offense to you or your school, but I could live without you, but evidently we don't mind spending your money.

Everyone wants a piece of ND's money, it seems.

It never seems to end, the Big East, the Big Ten, the ACC......all chasing ND's cash generator.

Look, I could come on here and say that I love the ACC and avidly follow all of its teams in all sports.

That would be a big, fat lie, though. I am just telling the truth.

It baffles me that a North Carolina fan would want to watch Clemson basketball or Miami baseball, for instance, or even care how they do except against the teams you root for.

Realignment has taught me that many "conference cheerleaders" will up and relocate if the cash is nicer elsewhere. So much for "conference loyalty".

It isn't just an ND thing with me, though.

I follow Pittsburgh pro teams, but not the other teams in their leagues nor the leagues themselves. I don't watch the St. Louis Cardinals play the Chicago Cubs, for instance, or the Indianapolis Colts play the Dallas Cowboys. No interest here.

I know you are baffled, but I watch other ACC teams play all the time and when they are playing teams outside of the ACC I pull for them (except for Dook). We are a family and I understand that you were brought up as an orphan, and that Notre Dame's entire mantra is based on "us against the world". We will adopt you when YOU are ready, but it won't be before you get your attitude right.

I am afraid that date is far, far off or will never arrive, Lance.

I think those that count on that may be mistaken.

Look, I grew up near Pittsburgh and avidly follow its pro teams.

But despite that, I never had an interest in Pitt athletics.

Even though Pitt and ND have played each other about 70 times in football and were in the Big East together, I would never (and have not) watch a Pitt sporting event against anyone other than ND.

No offense to Pitt, I just have no interest.

Likewise, I would not expect a Pitt fan to watch ND play Arizona State or even care it is on TV.

Terry, you just don't get it.
The ACC is never going to push the issue of full membership with Notre Dame. We are getting everything we want and need from the Irish now. Several of the ACC schools would be hesitant to accept the Irish in that they have the cache to form a political block with the old Big East teams that would start a political battle within the ACC that we have never really experienced in over 60 years. The same holds true of Texas and several other Big 12 schools coming into the ACC as a block.
We'll be here when and if you need us. There is no reason to get worked up, you are just reverting back to the "us against the world" mantra. Believe me there are schools in the ACC that don't want Notre Dame as a full member almost as much as you don't want Notre Dame to join a conference.

(03-14-2015 11:32 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 10:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 09:33 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Not having a dog in this hunt, I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway:

1. If you saw any of the Big East tournament games you saw a (nearly) sold out MGS - and these teams aren't as good as the ACC. A trip to NYC is, and will always be, more exciting than a trip to Greensboro in spite of the history.

2. You have too many teams in your tournament. Eliminate the bottom 5, give the top 2 byes and make it relevant. The fans from your bottom teams didn't show up and for good reason - they didn't have a chance.

Most of the top conferences have too many teams in their tournament. I would go you one better. I would only include the top 8 teams, no byes, for a three day tournament. No doubt that would piss off a lot of fans from the other 7 teams, but you are right. They have little chance to even make it to the semifinals, much less the weekend.

As it stands now, if you are one of those weak teams, spending two or three weekdays in Greensboro doesn't sound very appealing. Not that the weekends are more exciting for anything but the hoops either. And frankly, other than restaurants and hotels, Charlotte isn't much different. If you give me an 8 team tourney, I could live with NYC. But the geographic center of the league is still NC. So maybe a rotation of MSG, Greensboro, Barclay's and Charlotte would be a good compromise.

BTW, this year, five of the top 8 seeds were within easy driving distance of either NC site, and the other three weren't near any potential tourney site.

The biggest problem I would see with an 8 team ACC tournament is ticket distribution. If you don't know in advance who is in and who is out, it's hard to pre-sell tickets. But, it was clear pretty early on that five schools would be in it and four schools would be out of it. That left 6 teams with a nearly equal chance of making the field, and that was true practically until the final week of the regular season.

That would be a tough nut to crack.

It wouldn't work in the ACC. The tournament determines the conference champion. In effect the regular season becomes the pre-season and you couldn't exclude anyone from playing the championship series.
All (except football) ACC championships are settled by conference tournaments that include every participant.

That's the way it is now, not the way it has to be. In the current way, the conference season isn't the pre-season. It is no season. Limiting the field makes the regular season count for something.

(03-14-2015 12:59 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 11:32 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 10:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 09:33 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Not having a dog in this hunt, I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway:

1. If you saw any of the Big East tournament games you saw a (nearly) sold out MGS - and these teams aren't as good as the ACC. A trip to NYC is, and will always be, more exciting than a trip to Greensboro in spite of the history.

2. You have too many teams in your tournament. Eliminate the bottom 5, give the top 2 byes and make it relevant. The fans from your bottom teams didn't show up and for good reason - they didn't have a chance.

Most of the top conferences have too many teams in their tournament. I would go you one better. I would only include the top 8 teams, no byes, for a three day tournament. No doubt that would piss off a lot of fans from the other 7 teams, but you are right. They have little chance to even make it to the semifinals, much less the weekend.

As it stands now, if you are one of those weak teams, spending two or three weekdays in Greensboro doesn't sound very appealing. Not that the weekends are more exciting for anything but the hoops either. And frankly, other than restaurants and hotels, Charlotte isn't much different. If you give me an 8 team tourney, I could live with NYC. But the geographic center of the league is still NC. So maybe a rotation of MSG, Greensboro, Barclay's and Charlotte would be a good compromise.

BTW, this year, five of the top 8 seeds were within easy driving distance of either NC site, and the other three weren't near any potential tourney site.

The biggest problem I would see with an 8 team ACC tournament is ticket distribution. If you don't know in advance who is in and who is out, it's hard to pre-sell tickets. But, it was clear pretty early on that five schools would be in it and four schools would be out of it. That left 6 teams with a nearly equal chance of making the field, and that was true practically until the final week of the regular season.

That would be a tough nut to crack.

It wouldn't work in the ACC. The tournament determines the conference champion. In effect the regular season becomes the pre-season and you couldn't exclude anyone from playing the championship series.
All (except football) ACC championships are settled by conference tournaments that include every participant.

That's the way it is now, not the way it has to be. In the current way, the conference season isn't the pre-season. It is no season. Limiting the field makes the regular season count for something.

The ACC invented the conference championship. The tournament winner in Field Hockey as well as Basketball is decided by tournament.
The season does count for something now. It allows lesser experienced teams to improve over the course of the year and develop so that the tournament is the culmination of a season of hard work. It allows every team to stay engaged until the very end, because it gives every team hope to know that if they play their best they could still be crowned conference champ.
I gather that you are not a native of the old ACC footprint. A great number of people who live in Raleigh are not.

(03-14-2015 12:44 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:29 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 02:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  Terry,
What you said are exactly the reasons I personally hope that the ACC never allows Notre Dame to join our conference as a full member.
You guys are hard enough to stomach the way things are now, I would really hate to see the day when we treated you as an equal.
I mean no offense to you or your school, but I could live without you, but evidently we don't mind spending your money.

Everyone wants a piece of ND's money, it seems.

It never seems to end, the Big East, the Big Ten, the ACC......all chasing ND's cash generator.

Look, I could come on here and say that I love the ACC and avidly follow all of its teams in all sports.

That would be a big, fat lie, though. I am just telling the truth.

It baffles me that a North Carolina fan would want to watch Clemson basketball or Miami baseball, for instance, or even care how they do except against the teams you root for.

Realignment has taught me that many "conference cheerleaders" will up and relocate if the cash is nicer elsewhere. So much for "conference loyalty".

It isn't just an ND thing with me, though.

I follow Pittsburgh pro teams, but not the other teams in their leagues nor the leagues themselves. I don't watch the St. Louis Cardinals play the Chicago Cubs, for instance, or the Indianapolis Colts play the Dallas Cowboys. No interest here.

I know you are baffled, but I watch other ACC teams play all the time and when they are playing teams outside of the ACC I pull for them (except for Dook). We are a family and I understand that you were brought up as an orphan, and that Notre Dame's entire mantra is based on "us against the world". We will adopt you when YOU are ready, but it won't be before you get your attitude right.

I am afraid that date is far, far off or will never arrive, Lance.

I think those that count on that may be mistaken.

Look, I grew up near Pittsburgh and avidly follow its pro teams.

But despite that, I never had an interest in Pitt athletics.

Even though Pitt and ND have played each other about 70 times in football and were in the Big East together, I would never (and have not) watch a Pitt sporting event against anyone other than ND.

No offense to Pitt, I just have no interest.

Likewise, I would not expect a Pitt fan to watch ND play Arizona State or even care it is on TV.

Terry, you just don't get it.
The ACC is never going to push the issue of full membership with Notre Dame. We are getting everything we want and need from the Irish now. Several of the ACC schools would be hesitant to accept the Irish in that they have the cache to form a political block with the old Big East teams that would start a political battle within the ACC that we have never really experienced in over 60 years. The same holds true of Texas and several other Big 12 schools coming into the ACC as a block.
We'll be here when and if you need us. There is no reason to get worked up, you are just reverting back to the "us against the world" mantra. Believe me there are schools in the ACC that don't want Notre Dame as a full member almost as much as you don't want Notre Dame to join a conference.

Yet ND is a full member with full voting privileges in all matters except those that are specifically football related, where they still yield influence. If there is going to be a "political block", it is already in place. I think you overestimate the cohesiveness of the old Big East teams.

I do agree the ACC isn't going to force anything on ND.

(03-14-2015 11:32 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 10:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 09:33 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Not having a dog in this hunt, I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway:

1. If you saw any of the Big East tournament games you saw a (nearly) sold out MGS - and these teams aren't as good as the ACC. A trip to NYC is, and will always be, more exciting than a trip to Greensboro in spite of the history.

2. You have too many teams in your tournament. Eliminate the bottom 5, give the top 2 byes and make it relevant. The fans from your bottom teams didn't show up and for good reason - they didn't have a chance.

Most of the top conferences have too many teams in their tournament. I would go you one better. I would only include the top 8 teams, no byes, for a three day tournament. No doubt that would piss off a lot of fans from the other 7 teams, but you are right. They have little chance to even make it to the semifinals, much less the weekend.

As it stands now, if you are one of those weak teams, spending two or three weekdays in Greensboro doesn't sound very appealing. Not that the weekends are more exciting for anything but the hoops either. And frankly, other than restaurants and hotels, Charlotte isn't much different. If you give me an 8 team tourney, I could live with NYC. But the geographic center of the league is still NC. So maybe a rotation of MSG, Greensboro, Barclay's and Charlotte would be a good compromise.

BTW, this year, five of the top 8 seeds were within easy driving distance of either NC site, and the other three weren't near any potential tourney site.

The biggest problem I would see with an 8 team ACC tournament is ticket distribution. If you don't know in advance who is in and who is out, it's hard to pre-sell tickets. But, it was clear pretty early on that five schools would be in it and four schools would be out of it. That left 6 teams with a nearly equal chance of making the field, and that was true practically until the final week of the regular season.

That would be a tough nut to crack.

It wouldn't work in the ACC. The tournament determines the conference champion. In effect the regular season becomes the pre-season and you couldn't exclude anyone from playing the championship series.
All (except football) ACC championships are settled by conference tournaments that include every participant.

The Big East tried a few years where not everyone made the conference tourney. It was quickly reverted. Absolutely not the way to go.

We all want to return to smaller, more geographically compact conferences but none of us will get our wish.

(03-14-2015 12:44 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:29 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 02:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  Terry,
What you said are exactly the reasons I personally hope that the ACC never allows Notre Dame to join our conference as a full member.
You guys are hard enough to stomach the way things are now, I would really hate to see the day when we treated you as an equal.
I mean no offense to you or your school, but I could live without you, but evidently we don't mind spending your money.

Everyone wants a piece of ND's money, it seems.

It never seems to end, the Big East, the Big Ten, the ACC......all chasing ND's cash generator.

Look, I could come on here and say that I love the ACC and avidly follow all of its teams in all sports.

That would be a big, fat lie, though. I am just telling the truth.

It baffles me that a North Carolina fan would want to watch Clemson basketball or Miami baseball, for instance, or even care how they do except against the teams you root for.

Realignment has taught me that many "conference cheerleaders" will up and relocate if the cash is nicer elsewhere. So much for "conference loyalty".

It isn't just an ND thing with me, though.

I follow Pittsburgh pro teams, but not the other teams in their leagues nor the leagues themselves. I don't watch the St. Louis Cardinals play the Chicago Cubs, for instance, or the Indianapolis Colts play the Dallas Cowboys. No interest here.

I know you are baffled, but I watch other ACC teams play all the time and when they are playing teams outside of the ACC I pull for them (except for Dook). We are a family and I understand that you were brought up as an orphan, and that Notre Dame's entire mantra is based on "us against the world". We will adopt you when YOU are ready, but it won't be before you get your attitude right.

I am afraid that date is far, far off or will never arrive, Lance.

I think those that count on that may be mistaken.

Look, I grew up near Pittsburgh and avidly follow its pro teams.

But despite that, I never had an interest in Pitt athletics.

Even though Pitt and ND have played each other about 70 times in football and were in the Big East together, I would never (and have not) watch a Pitt sporting event against anyone other than ND.

No offense to Pitt, I just have no interest.

Likewise, I would not expect a Pitt fan to watch ND play Arizona State or even care it is on TV.

Terry, you just don't get it.
The ACC is never going to push the issue of full membership with Notre Dame. We are getting everything we want and need from the Irish now. Several of the ACC schools would be hesitant to accept the Irish in that they have the cache to form a political block with the old Big East teams that would start a political battle within the ACC that we have never really experienced in over 60 years. The same holds true of Texas and several other Big 12 schools coming into the ACC as a block.
We'll be here when and if you need us. There is no reason to get worked up, you are just reverting back to the "us against the world" mantra. Believe me there are schools in the ACC that don't want Notre Dame as a full member almost as much as you don't want Notre Dame to join a conference.

I guess that you don't get it, Lance.

I have more of a "I don't care about the rest of the world" attitude than the one that you describe.

ND gets all that it wants or needs out of the ACC. Partial membership is a good symbiotic relationship.

It is a nice place to park ND's other sports. That is all I think or care about as far as the ACC is concerned.

I am not worked up about anything at all. I have never thought that the ACC would push ND for full membership.

Other people have, but not me. I don't see anything on the horizon that would change that, either.

You and I (like ND and the ACC) are good co-belligerents, not allies. We both don't want ND to be a full member of the ACC.

Works for me.

(03-14-2015 01:38 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 12:21 AM)XLance Wrote:  The Greensboro Coliseum was the first venue that ever sold out a final four game/tournament. The ticket demand in Greensboro forced the NCAA to institute a lottery system for ticket distribution. That was in 1974 when the final four in Greensboro consisted of NC State, UCLA, Kansas and Marquette.

Nobody is doubting the history. We're only doubting whether it is bigger than the biggest stage in basketball. It isn't.

Greensboro is a large venue, a great piece of history, and the home to the greatest basketball conference in the land, but that's where the line is. MSG was, and hopefully will be, much more.

on TV, the cavernous building seems lifeless ...

STALE AIR IN THE HOUSE

Just for clarification. VT is not an "Old Big East Team" as XLance describes. While VT was in the BE for a decade of so before rejoining the group, they still chalk up almost 60 years in the same conference with NC State and UNC, over 40 with Clemson, and over 30 with Duke, WF, and UVa. VT's also spent about 30 years with GT, in the Southern Conference, Metro, and now the ACC.

(03-14-2015 11:32 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 10:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 09:33 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Not having a dog in this hunt, I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway:

1. If you saw any of the Big East tournament games you saw a (nearly) sold out MGS - and these teams aren't as good as the ACC. A trip to NYC is, and will always be, more exciting than a trip to Greensboro in spite of the history.

2. You have too many teams in your tournament. Eliminate the bottom 5, give the top 2 byes and make it relevant. The fans from your bottom teams didn't show up and for good reason - they didn't have a chance.

Most of the top conferences have too many teams in their tournament. I would go you one better. I would only include the top 8 teams, no byes, for a three day tournament. No doubt that would piss off a lot of fans from the other 7 teams, but you are right. They have little chance to even make it to the semifinals, much less the weekend.

As it stands now, if you are one of those weak teams, spending two or three weekdays in Greensboro doesn't sound very appealing. Not that the weekends are more exciting for anything but the hoops either. And frankly, other than restaurants and hotels, Charlotte isn't much different. If you give me an 8 team tourney, I could live with NYC. But the geographic center of the league is still NC. So maybe a rotation of MSG, Greensboro, Barclay's and Charlotte would be a good compromise.

BTW, this year, five of the top 8 seeds were within easy driving distance of either NC site, and the other three weren't near any potential tourney site.

The biggest problem I would see with an 8 team ACC tournament is ticket distribution. If you don't know in advance who is in and who is out, it's hard to pre-sell tickets. But, it was clear pretty early on that five schools would be in it and four schools would be out of it. That left 6 teams with a nearly equal chance of making the field, and that was true practically until the final week of the regular season.

That would be a tough nut to crack.

It wouldn't work in the ACC. The tournament determines the conference champion. In effect the regular season becomes the pre-season and you couldn't exclude anyone from playing the championship series.
All (except football) ACC championships are settled by conference tournaments that include every participant.

Baseball doesn't include everyone.

(03-14-2015 01:12 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 12:59 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 11:32 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 10:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 09:33 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Not having a dog in this hunt, I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway:

1. If you saw any of the Big East tournament games you saw a (nearly) sold out MGS - and these teams aren't as good as the ACC. A trip to NYC is, and will always be, more exciting than a trip to Greensboro in spite of the history.

2. You have too many teams in your tournament. Eliminate the bottom 5, give the top 2 byes and make it relevant. The fans from your bottom teams didn't show up and for good reason - they didn't have a chance.

Most of the top conferences have too many teams in their tournament. I would go you one better. I would only include the top 8 teams, no byes, for a three day tournament. No doubt that would piss off a lot of fans from the other 7 teams, but you are right. They have little chance to even make it to the semifinals, much less the weekend.

As it stands now, if you are one of those weak teams, spending two or three weekdays in Greensboro doesn't sound very appealing. Not that the weekends are more exciting for anything but the hoops either. And frankly, other than restaurants and hotels, Charlotte isn't much different. If you give me an 8 team tourney, I could live with NYC. But the geographic center of the league is still NC. So maybe a rotation of MSG, Greensboro, Barclay's and Charlotte would be a good compromise.

BTW, this year, five of the top 8 seeds were within easy driving distance of either NC site, and the other three weren't near any potential tourney site.

The biggest problem I would see with an 8 team ACC tournament is ticket distribution. If you don't know in advance who is in and who is out, it's hard to pre-sell tickets. But, it was clear pretty early on that five schools would be in it and four schools would be out of it. That left 6 teams with a nearly equal chance of making the field, and that was true practically until the final week of the regular season.

That would be a tough nut to crack.

It wouldn't work in the ACC. The tournament determines the conference champion. In effect the regular season becomes the pre-season and you couldn't exclude anyone from playing the championship series.
All (except football) ACC championships are settled by conference tournaments that include every participant.

That's the way it is now, not the way it has to be. In the current way, the conference season isn't the pre-season. It is no season. Limiting the field makes the regular season count for something.

The ACC invented the conference championship. The tournament winner in Field Hockey as well as Basketball is decided by tournament.
The season does count for something now. It allows lesser experienced teams to improve over the course of the year and develop so that the tournament is the culmination of a season of hard work. It allows every team to stay engaged until the very end, because it gives every team hope to know that if they play their best they could still be crowned conference champ.
I gather that you are not a native of the old ACC footprint. A great number of people who live in Raleigh are not.

I am not a native North Carolinian. But I have spent 43 years of my adult life here, which is probably more than most of the natives who post here. I have been here long enough to know that the ACC didn't start its basketball tournament because it was a good way to determine a champion. It wasn't then, and it isn't now. It was started because it was an excellent way to extract large sums of money from well-heeled boosters. That motive has largely gone the way of the dinosaur, but the tourney is still a moneymaker.

And, BTW, I believe it was the Southern Conference that invented the conference tournament. The ACC just had more compelling teams. And as for the hope that the weaker teams have for getting an NCAAT bid via the tournament, no team seeded lower than sixth has ever done so in 62 years.

(03-14-2015 01:56 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 12:44 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:29 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 03:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 02:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Everyone wants a piece of ND's money, it seems.

It never seems to end, the Big East, the Big Ten, the ACC......all chasing ND's cash generator.

Look, I could come on here and say that I love the ACC and avidly follow all of its teams in all sports.

That would be a big, fat lie, though. I am just telling the truth.

It baffles me that a North Carolina fan would want to watch Clemson basketball or Miami baseball, for instance, or even care how they do except against the teams you root for.

Realignment has taught me that many "conference cheerleaders" will up and relocate if the cash is nicer elsewhere. So much for "conference loyalty".

It isn't just an ND thing with me, though.

I follow Pittsburgh pro teams, but not the other teams in their leagues nor the leagues themselves. I don't watch the St. Louis Cardinals play the Chicago Cubs, for instance, or the Indianapolis Colts play the Dallas Cowboys. No interest here.

I know you are baffled, but I watch other ACC teams play all the time and when they are playing teams outside of the ACC I pull for them (except for Dook). We are a family and I understand that you were brought up as an orphan, and that Notre Dame's entire mantra is based on "us against the world". We will adopt you when YOU are ready, but it won't be before you get your attitude right.

I am afraid that date is far, far off or will never arrive, Lance.

I think those that count on that may be mistaken.

Look, I grew up near Pittsburgh and avidly follow its pro teams.

But despite that, I never had an interest in Pitt athletics.

Even though Pitt and ND have played each other about 70 times in football and were in the Big East together, I would never (and have not) watch a Pitt sporting event against anyone other than ND.

No offense to Pitt, I just have no interest.

Likewise, I would not expect a Pitt fan to watch ND play Arizona State or even care it is on TV.

Terry, you just don't get it.
The ACC is never going to push the issue of full membership with Notre Dame. We are getting everything we want and need from the Irish now. Several of the ACC schools would be hesitant to accept the Irish in that they have the cache to form a political block with the old Big East teams that would start a political battle within the ACC that we have never really experienced in over 60 years. The same holds true of Texas and several other Big 12 schools coming into the ACC as a block.
We'll be here when and if you need us. There is no reason to get worked up, you are just reverting back to the "us against the world" mantra. Believe me there are schools in the ACC that don't want Notre Dame as a full member almost as much as you don't want Notre Dame to join a conference.

I guess that you don't get it, Lance.

I have more of a "I don't care about the rest of the world" attitude than the one that you describe.

ND gets all that it wants or needs out of the ACC. Partial membership is a good symbiotic relationship.

It is a nice place to park ND's other sports. That is all I think or care about as far as the ACC is concerned.

I am not worked up about anything at all. I have never thought that the ACC would push ND for full membership.

Other people have, but not me. I don't see anything on the horizon that would change that, either.

You and I (like ND and the ACC) are good co-belligerents, not allies. We both don't want ND to be a full member of the ACC.

Works for me.

Cool! I've never been a co-belligerent before.

(03-13-2015 10:48 PM)opossum Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 10:33 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 10:18 PM)opossum Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 10:12 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 10:03 PM)opossum Wrote:  Anyone who knows anything about college basketball knows that Greensboro Coliseum screams "BIG TIME," as much as or more than Madison Square Garden.

Homer Post Of The YEAR!

Please join the Big Twelve. Really. We're playing Tournament games on Tuesday because of you people. It's ridiculous. If you don't even appreciate what you're involved in then GTFO.

LOL, Dont get upset with me because you make such a dumb statement and I call you out on it. You also might want to show some appreciation for "you people" agreeing to come to this league to help it get its payout to a respectable amount. Remember, when SU and Pitt came to the league the leagues payout increased by $4 million per school.

I'm not upset with you, I'm tired of former Big East fans delusions. It is a fact that a true student of college basketball history would consider Greensboro Coliseum as having as important or more important a place in the history of the sport of college basketball as Madison Square Garden. That is a fact.

I agree with this. The Greensboro Coliseum is a HISTORIC venue when it comes to College Basketball. It has hosted an NCAA Final Four, it has hosted 26 ACC Tournaments (and many of those happened when the ACC was the KING of College Basketball), hosted the Big Four Tournament in the 70s and 80s. It also hosted several of Wake Forest's major games in the 70s and 80s when the arena in Winston-Salem was too small.

MSG is a great venue in a great city and it has a ton of tradition. However, the Greensboro Coliseum is also a historic venue and if you'll ask people affiliated with the ACC, they will tell you Greensboro does the best job out of any city for the ACCT (it trumps Charlotte. Thats why the ACCT rarely goes to Charlotte)

The people complaining about the ACCT in Greensboro aren't going to have a good time while their schools are members of the ACC. Greensboro is going to continue to be one of the hosts for the ACCT. I think a rotation of Greensboro, Atlanta and NYC/Brooklyn (depending on how well the ACCT does in Brooklyn) is the most likely scenario in the future.

Charlotte's parking isn't very good, I'm surprised they are going back to Charlotte in 2019.

(03-14-2015 02:20 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Just for clarification. VT is not an "Old Big East Team" as XLance describes. While VT was in the BE for a decade of so before rejoining the group, they still chalk up almost 60 years in the same conference with NC State and UNC, over 40 with Clemson, and over 30 with Duke, WF, and UVa. VT's also spent about 30 years with GT, in the Southern Conference, Metro, and now the ACC.

I don't consider VT, Miami and Louisville as Big East. VT was only a full member for three years, Louisville for eight years and Miami for 12-13 years. That is a very short time to be in a conference.

I went to Greensboro last year. The arena was better than I was expecting but the town pretty much sucked. It was relatively inexpensive (compared with NYC) and it had parking - which were both pluses.

For me, there is no reason to go back to Greensboro until my team (Pitt) has a chance to actually compete in it. We were pretty awful this year and we knew we would be eliminated on the first or second night. There is no way I'm dropping any sort of real cash outlay to watch Pitt get killed in some old arena in a mediocre, small southern town. Nothing about that is appealing to me in the least.

At least at MSG you could talk people into going by saying, "If they lose, we still have a few nights in New York City to do whatever we want." That message held a lot of appeal. Now, you say to people, "If they lose we can go to some diner and finally find out what the hell grits are and what they taste like."

Not really the same message.

As for MSG, IMHO, UConn always had the best turnout, followed by Syracuse and St. John's. Most of the others were relatively comparable. Georgetown and Villanova always repped well there too.

I'm glad to be in the ACC and I certainly respect the tradition of this tournament. However, it's just not the same as the old Big East at MSG. That atmosphere was positively electric, like Game 7 of an NBA playoff. This atmosphere is...the only word I can come up with is pleasant. I mean the people are lovely and polite and all that but it just doesn't have the same energy - or anywhere near it to be frank. Maybe it will be different in DC next year? It will probably be better in Brooklyn. I've never been to Barclay's so I'm not sure. However, MSG was the real McCoy and each of my six experiences there were significantly more impacting than my lone experience in sleepy Greensboro last year. That is not meant to be an insult but rather and honest appraisal of the situation so as to answer the issues raised by the OP.

Maybe it will get there one day but it just feels like we have taken a step (or three) backwards from an atmospheric standpoint.

Let me also state that I completely understand the thinking behind having it in Greensboro. That IS a central location for at least four or five fan bases and it is easily navigable for a good half the league. Makes perfect sense from that perspective.

I'm just saying that for schools like mine, which are not within an easy drive on that arena, we are never, ever coming there in meaningful numbers until we have a chance to win it. That's just reality.

That was the secret to the Big East Tournament's success. New York City is an event town and those tickets are so tough to get that people buy them months in advance - kind of like NCAA Tournament tickets - who aren't even fans of a specific team but rather people who just love big time college basketball. When you combine those folks with fans of so many teams located within a reasonable drive of Manhattan, and then add in its attractive and historically significant location, it gave the BET at MSG a certain cache that the ACC Tournament just cannot possibly replicate in Greensboro. Hell, I'm not sure they can replicate it anywhere but they definitely can't do it in Greensboro, NC.

Again, I get why the old school ACC folks are so married to it from both a tradition and geographic standpoint. However, neither of those factors really impact us newbies and if they do impact us, it is not in a positive way.

(03-14-2015 05:21 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I went to Greensboro last year. The arena was better than I was expecting but the town pretty much sucked. It was relatively inexpensive (compared with NYC) and it had parking - which were both pluses.

For me, there is no reason to go back to Greensboro until my team (Pitt) has a chance to actually compete in it. We were pretty awful this year and we knew we would be eliminated on the first or second night. There is no way I'm dropping any sort of real cash outlay to watch Pitt get killed in some old arena in a mediocre, small southern town. Nothing about that is appealing to me in the least.

At least at MSG you could talk people into going by saying, "If they lose, we still have a few nights in New York City to do whatever we want." That message held a lot of appeal. Now, you say to people, "If they lose we can go to some diner and finally find out what the hell grits are and what they taste like."

Not really the same message.

As for MSG, IMHO, UConn always had the best turnout, followed by Syracuse and St. John's. Most of the others were relatively comparable. Georgetown and Villanova always repped well there too.

I'm glad to be in the ACC and I certainly respect the tradition of this tournament. However, it's just not the same as the old Big East at MSG. That atmosphere was positively electric, like Game 7 of an NBA playoff. This atmosphere is...the only word I can come up with is pleasant. I mean the people are lovely and polite and all that but it just doesn't have the same energy - or anywhere near it to be frank. Maybe it will be different in DC next year? It will probably be better in Brooklyn. I've never been to Barclay's so I'm not sure. However, MSG was the real McCoy and each of my six experiences there were significantly more impacting than my lone experience in sleepy Greensboro last year. That is not meant to be an insult but rather and honest appraisal of the situation so as to answer the issues raised by the OP.

Maybe it will get there one day but it just feels like we have taken a step (or three) backwards from an atmospheric standpoint.

Phew!
Maybe the Big East will take you back, or you can petition the B1G for membership.

(03-14-2015 05:10 PM)Hitman Hart Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 02:20 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Just for clarification. VT is not an "Old Big East Team" as XLance describes. While VT was in the BE for a decade of so before rejoining the group, they still chalk up almost 60 years in the same conference with NC State and UNC, over 40 with Clemson, and over 30 with Duke, WF, and UVa. VT's also spent about 30 years with GT, in the Southern Conference, Metro, and now the ACC.

I don't consider VT, Miami and Louisville as Big East. VT was only a full member for three years, Louisville for eight years and Miami for 12-13 years. That is a very short time to be in a conference.

By that rationale, BC was only a full member of the Big East for 13 years -m the same amount of time Miami was a full member - and Pitt and Syracuse were also only a full members of the Big East for seven additional years.

That is cutting things awfully fine to make a point. Louisville I'd give you but not the others.

(03-14-2015 05:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 05:21 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I went to Greensboro last year. The arena was better than I was expecting but the town pretty much sucked. It was relatively inexpensive (compared with NYC) and it had parking - which were both pluses.

For me, there is no reason to go back to Greensboro until my team (Pitt) has a chance to actually compete in it. We were pretty awful this year and we knew we would be eliminated on the first or second night. There is no way I'm dropping any sort of real cash outlay to watch Pitt get killed in some old arena in a mediocre, small southern town. Nothing about that is appealing to me in the least.

At least at MSG you could talk people into going by saying, "If they lose, we still have a few nights in New York City to do whatever we want." That message held a lot of appeal. Now, you say to people, "If they lose we can go to some diner and finally find out what the hell grits are and what they taste like."

Not really the same message.

As for MSG, IMHO, UConn always had the best turnout, followed by Syracuse and St. John's. Most of the others were relatively comparable. Georgetown and Villanova always repped well there too.

I'm glad to be in the ACC and I certainly respect the tradition of this tournament. However, it's just not the same as the old Big East at MSG. That atmosphere was positively electric, like Game 7 of an NBA playoff. This atmosphere is...the only word I can come up with is pleasant. I mean the people are lovely and polite and all that but it just doesn't have the same energy - or anywhere near it to be frank. Maybe it will be different in DC next year? It will probably be better in Brooklyn. I've never been to Barclay's so I'm not sure. However, MSG was the real McCoy and each of my six experiences there were significantly more impacting than my lone experience in sleepy Greensboro last year. That is not meant to be an insult but rather and honest appraisal of the situation so as to answer the issues raised by the OP.

Maybe it will get there one day but it just feels like we have taken a step (or three) backwards from an atmospheric standpoint.

Phew!
Maybe the Big East will take you back, or you can petition the B1G for membership.

No, it is what it is. We made this move because we had to make it for our survival. College athletics are shamelessly corrupt and predatory and the Northeast schools screwed up when we ceded control of our own destiny because we couldn't come together to form our own all sports conference in the early 80s. Now Penn State and Rutgers are in a Midwestern conference, Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College are in a Southern conference and West Virginia is playing most of its games in the Great Plains states. Very few of us actually play each other - which is a shame but also how the game works these days. No area of the country was impacted more adversely by realignment than the Northeast.

A lot of people blame Paterno for being so heavy handed about things and they are right. He was a complete a-hole and definitely not great at compromising. However, I think it is more of a cultural thing that goes back to colonial times. I think we are too independent minded for our own good sometimes. That mentality really hurt all of us as the sands began to shift towards megaconferences. Southerners, Westerners, Midwesterners - they all stuck together. Northeasterners did not. Now we've all been divvied up like unwanted/barely accepted orphans. Don't get me wrong, it is COMPLETELY our fault but that doesn't make the cider go down any more smoothly.

Considering how things ultimately broke, we are lucky to be here and appreciative for this opportunity. I see what's become of UConn and Cincinnati and I want no part of those schools' fate. I'm just saying that as someone who can definitely compare both experiences, the Big East basketball tournament was a better experience than the ACC men's basketball tournament. That doesn't mean that I hate the ACC or that I don't value this experience too - because I do. It's just that when comparing one to the other, I'm sorry but the BET wins that one hands down because it was special. This is nice but it is not special.

I have to believe that other fans that have experienced both would agree with me. If not, speak up and tell me why I'm wrong. I do not believe that I'm wrong in the least.

(03-14-2015 06:00 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 05:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2015 05:21 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I went to Greensboro last year. The arena was better than I was expecting but the town pretty much sucked. It was relatively inexpensive (compared with NYC) and it had parking - which were both pluses.

For me, there is no reason to go back to Greensboro until my team (Pitt) has a chance to actually compete in it. We were pretty awful this year and we knew we would be eliminated on the first or second night. There is no way I'm dropping any sort of real cash outlay to watch Pitt get killed in some old arena in a mediocre, small southern town. Nothing about that is appealing to me in the least.

At least at MSG you could talk people into going by saying, "If they lose, we still have a few nights in New York City to do whatever we want." That message held a lot of appeal. Now, you say to people, "If they lose we can go to some diner and finally find out what the hell grits are and what they taste like."

Not really the same message.

As for MSG, IMHO, UConn always had the best turnout, followed by Syracuse and St. John's. Most of the others were relatively comparable. Georgetown and Villanova always repped well there too.

I'm glad to be in the ACC and I certainly respect the tradition of this tournament. However, it's just not the same as the old Big East at MSG. That atmosphere was positively electric, like Game 7 of an NBA playoff. This atmosphere is...the only word I can come up with is pleasant. I mean the people are lovely and polite and all that but it just doesn't have the same energy - or anywhere near it to be frank. Maybe it will be different in DC next year? It will probably be better in Brooklyn. I've never been to Barclay's so I'm not sure. However, MSG was the real McCoy and each of my six experiences there were significantly more impacting than my lone experience in sleepy Greensboro last year. That is not meant to be an insult but rather and honest appraisal of the situation so as to answer the issues raised by the OP.

Maybe it will get there one day but it just feels like we have taken a step (or three) backwards from an atmospheric standpoint.

Phew!
Maybe the Big East will take you back, or you can petition the B1G for membership.

No, it is what it is. We made this move because we had to make it for our survival. College athletics are shamelessly corrupt and predatory and the Northeast schools screwed up when we ceded control of our own destiny because we couldn't come together to form our own all sports conference in the early 80s. Now Penn State and Rutgers are in a Midwestern conference, Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College are in a Southern conference and West Virginia is playing most of its games in the Great Plains states. Very few of us actually play each other - which is a shame but also how the game works these days. No area of the country was impacted more adversely by realignment than the Northeast.

A lot of people blame Paterno for being so heavy handed about things and they are right. He was a complete a-hole and definitely not great at compromising. However, I think it is more of a cultural thing that goes back to colonial times. I think we are too independent minded for our own good sometimes. That mentality really hurt all of us as the sands began to shift towards megaconferences. Southerners, Westerners, Midwesterners - they all stuck together. Northeasterners did not. Now we've all been divvied up like unwanted/barely accepted orphans. Don't get me wrong, it is COMPLETELY our fault but that doesn't make the cider go down any more smoothly.

Considering how things ultimately broke, we are lucky to be here and appreciative for this opportunity. I see what's become of UConn and Cincinnati and I want no part of those schools' fate. I'm just saying that as someone who can definitely compare both experiences, the Big East basketball tournament was a better experience than the ACC men's basketball tournament. That doesn't mean that I hate the ACC or that I don't value this experience too - because I do. It's just that when comparing one to the other, I'm sorry but the BET wins that one hands down because it was special. This is nice but it is not special.

I have to believe that other fans that have experienced both would agree with me. If not, speak up and tell me why I'm wrong. I do not believe that I'm wrong in the least.

+1

The ACCT is very good. There's no denying that. In fact, it *is* the best in the land. However, it is not the best that ever was.