(05-16-2016 12:31 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 12:24 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  It would have cut the head off the snake that is conference realignment once and for all. There would not have been an AAC. The only school left behind would have been USF and they would have simply joined C-USA. Schools like UCF, Houston, Memphis, etc. would not have risen their profiles and have been clamoring for a P5 spot.

Actually, the American was formed with Louisville, Rutgers, Cincy, UConn and USF. Louisville and Rutgers were invited to new leagues in Year 1 of the American.

Had the Big 12 taken Cincy, Louisville, West Va and TCU, then Rutgers, UConn and USF would have been left.

His scenario still had The Big 10 expanding with MD and Rutgers, only with the ACC backfilling with UConn instead of Louisville (or Cincinnati), who was the no longer available

(05-16-2016 01:09 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  The question I have is what is the real value to the program and the conference of going from G5 to P5? With the only examples being Utah and TCU, I think its difficult to measure how said programs have helped the conference. In that regard, Louisville's brief demotion might be instructive.

Louisville, Cincinnati, USF, Utah, and TCU all went from non-BCS/G5 to BCS/P5 (Rutgers, Cuse, and Pitt were all in power conferences their entire existence). Louisville and Utah had started having their own major successes before moving up, Louisville via exposure on ESPN, and Utah by sheer will of winning two BCS games, and having great seasons. TCU lived in Boise's shadow for a while IMO, but to me seemed to start to get their due when they were announced to be joining a (then) power conference in the Big East, even though they had been very successful before that. And I think Cincinnati is a prime example of what moving to a power conference can do for you. For that matter USF in the mid 2000's.

Louisville and Rutgers were never really demoted, as the AAC's first year, it technically was still a BCS conference, and each school was only "demoted" for about six months, in theory only (i.e. future outlook), so it is hard to say.

and if someone had loaded up the football fairies with dust, football could have been a happy place today.

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

Sorry, but this the kind of laughable nonsense that often occurs when fans form conclusions in the echo chamber that is their own fan board and parrot this stuff on here.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any concrete data to support the claim that Uconn was "ahead" of Pitt as the choice of the ACC - other than in the CT media, blogs, or other speculative reports.

Boston College didn't "blackball" anybody, IMO.

The idea that Boston College had the power in the ACC to "command" the rest of the schools who to to accept into the Conference is absurd (and, remember, I am a BC guy) - especially coming from a fanbase that laughingly referred to BC as the "red-headed stepchild" of the ACC. So which is it? Conference small-fry or Conference power broker?

The truth, IMO, is a bit more nuanced. I am sure that BC was a "no" vote for Uconn at that time, as the former BC AD indicated. Not hard to understand why. Yes, they were concerned about another local team coming into the Conference from a region that was not "CFB rich" to begin with. (No different than many other teams from "CFB rich" regions.) They were also upset about the way they were treated in the lawsuit by the CT AG (suing BC admins personally, basically accusing them of participating in some sort of illegal scheme, etc.). The former BC AD said as much.

Lots of bad blood, to be sure. But, make no mistake, IMO, BC had no influence over the other ACC schools in this decision - to the extent they would change their support for one school and switch it to another. Maybe....just maybe...other schools were likewise upset about the fact the Conference was sued. (Yes, Pitt was also a plaintiff, but the case was handled out of CT, by CT officials.) I don't think we know for a fact who were the yay's and nay's, but I would not be shocked if Miami was also a "nay," given their admins were also sued personally by the CT AG, if memory serves. I think it only took three or four schools at the time to deny a school admittance to the Conference; so it is not a stretch to see how this played out, IMO.

(05-16-2016 03:22 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

Sorry, but this the kind of laughable nonsense that often occurs when fans form conclusions in the echo chamber that is their own fan board and parrot this stuff on here.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any concrete data to support the claim that Uconn was "ahead" of Pitt as the choice of the ACC - other than in the CT media, blogs, or other speculative reports.

Boston College didn't "blackball" anybody, IMO.

The idea that Boston College had the power in the ACC to "command" the rest of the schools who to to accept into the Conference is absurd (and, remember, I am a BC guy) - especially coming from a fanbase that laughingly referred to BC as the "red-headed stepchild" of the ACC. So which is it? Conference small-fry or Conference power broker?

The truth, IMO, is a bit more nuanced. I am sure that BC was a "no" vote for Uconn at that time, as the former BC AD indicated. Not hard to understand why. Yes, they were concerned about another local team coming into the Conference from a region that was not "CFB rich" to begin with. (No different than many other teams from "CFB rich" regions.) They were also upset about the way they were treated in the lawsuit by the CT AG (suing BC admins personally, basically accusing them of participating in some sort of illegal scheme, etc.). The former BC AD said as much.

Lots of bad blood, to be sure. But, make no mistake, IMO, BC had no influence over the other ACC schools in this decision - to the extent they would change their support for one school and switch it to another. Maybe....just maybe...other schools were likewise upset about the fact the Conference was sued. (Yes, Pitt was also a plaintiff, but the case was handled out of CT, by CT officials.) I don't think we know for a fact who were the yay's and nay's, but I would not be shocked if Miami was also a "nay," given their admins were also sued personally by the CT AG, if memory serves. I think it only took three or four schools at the time to deny a school admittance to the Conference; so it is not a stretch to see how this played out, IMO.

E78, no need to explain your side again! UConn sues everyone, Baylor sues everyone, WVU sues its way out, threatens a scorched earth and trashes the ACC conference at every turn. Then they wonder why they get the shaft!

(05-16-2016 03:52 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 03:22 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

Sorry, but this the kind of laughable nonsense that often occurs when fans form conclusions in the echo chamber that is their own fan board and parrot this stuff on here.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any concrete data to support the claim that Uconn was "ahead" of Pitt as the choice of the ACC - other than in the CT media, blogs, or other speculative reports.

Boston College didn't "blackball" anybody, IMO.

The idea that Boston College had the power in the ACC to "command" the rest of the schools who to to accept into the Conference is absurd (and, remember, I am a BC guy) - especially coming from a fanbase that laughingly referred to BC as the "red-headed stepchild" of the ACC. So which is it? Conference small-fry or Conference power broker?

The truth, IMO, is a bit more nuanced. I am sure that BC was a "no" vote for Uconn at that time, as the former BC AD indicated. Not hard to understand why. Yes, they were concerned about another local team coming into the Conference from a region that was not "CFB rich" to begin with. (No different than many other teams from "CFB rich" regions.) They were also upset about the way they were treated in the lawsuit by the CT AG (suing BC admins personally, basically accusing them of participating in some sort of illegal scheme, etc.). The former BC AD said as much.

Lots of bad blood, to be sure. But, make no mistake, IMO, BC had no influence over the other ACC schools in this decision - to the extent they would change their support for one school and switch it to another. Maybe....just maybe...other schools were likewise upset about the fact the Conference was sued. (Yes, Pitt was also a plaintiff, but the case was handled out of CT, by CT officials.) I don't think we know for a fact who were the yay's and nay's, but I would not be shocked if Miami was also a "nay," given their admins were also sued personally by the CT AG, if memory serves. I think it only took three or four schools at the time to deny a school admittance to the Conference; so it is not a stretch to see how this played out, IMO.

E78, no need to explain your side again! UConn sues everyone, Baylor sues everyone, WVU sues its way out, threatens a scorched earth and trashes the ACC conference at every turn. Then they wonder why they get the shaft!

I hear ya. You're right; and I don't take any of this personally. That said, IMO, if you don't correct the record on some of this stuff, these urban myths become accepted as "fact" by many who pay less attention to things in genaral.

(05-16-2016 10:21 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  According to Brando UConn is in a great spot now. So everyone won a trophy!

(05-16-2016 03:22 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

Sorry, but this the kind of laughable nonsense that often occurs when fans form conclusions in the echo chamber that is their own fan board and parrot this stuff on here.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any concrete data to support the claim that Uconn was "ahead" of Pitt as the choice of the ACC - other than in the CT media, blogs, or other speculative reports.

Boston College didn't "blackball" anybody, IMO.

The idea that Boston College had the power in the ACC to "command" the rest of the schools who to to accept into the Conference is absurd (and, remember, I am a BC guy) - especially coming from a fanbase that laughingly referred to BC as the "red-headed stepchild" of the ACC. So which is it? Conference small-fry or Conference power broker?

I can take it one step further. If UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt initially, then how in the hell did Louisville get in, over the team they would have preferred over Pittsburgh? In the Syracuse/Pitt expansion it is plausible that a hard no vote could keep a team out. It really could. But when Md left and the ACC was forced to go on the defensive, a single no vote from BC would not have mattered (see big east expansion and USF and novas no votes).

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

That is interesting. I did not realize that Boston College wielded that much power within the ACC. How the hell did Gene DeFillipo manage to blackball UConn all by himself?

(05-16-2016 05:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

That is interesting. I did not realize that Boston College wielded that much power within the ACC. How the hell did Gene DeFillipo manage to blackball UConn all by himself?

You should ask him. That is what he insinuated.

This article pretty much sums it up. I suppose Eagle and company think it's all a bunch of BS...

http://archive.boston.com/sports/college...cc/?page=1

If the XII had taken Louisville instead of West Virginia, I have to believe that WV would be in the ACC today. It would've been either WV, UConn, Cincy or USF. I just have to believe that WV would've risen to the top, even with the supposed hatred between WV and the core ACC schools.

(05-16-2016 05:18 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

That is interesting. I did not realize that Boston College wielded that much power within the ACC. How the hell did Gene DeFillipo manage to blackball UConn all by himself?

You should ask him. That is what he insinuated.

This article pretty much sums it up. I suppose Eagle and company think it's all a bunch of BS...

http://archive.boston.com/sports/college...cc/?page=1

The way I read that article is that BC chose Pitt football over UConn football. If BC hated both Pitt and UConn but one of them were destined to be added to the ACC, they voted football! Is it any wonder why they were added and play in the Atlantic Division? BC might not be great right now but, they are football first!

(05-16-2016 05:18 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

That is interesting. I did not realize that Boston College wielded that much power within the ACC. How the hell did Gene DeFillipo manage to blackball UConn all by himself?

You should ask him. That is what he insinuated.

This article pretty much sums it up. I suppose Eagle and company think it's all a bunch of BS...

http://archive.boston.com/sports/college...cc/?page=1

No, Husky, the article you attached is not BS. It's the spin that you attach to it that is BS, IMO. This is a perfect example, IMO, of what happens when facts are "examined" by fans in the echo chamber of their own fan board.

As the article notes, here is what GDF is quoted as saying:

"We didn't want them in,'' DeFilippo told the Globe. "It was a matter of turf. We wanted to be the New England team.''

GDF was clearly talking about BC's preference - which, of course translated into a "no" vote, as I indicated above. Simple enough. If that resulted in some kind of block, IMO, it was because BC's "no" vote was added to other "no" votes (maybe Miami? Others?). The point is that nowhere in the article is there any evidence presented that BC actually coerced other schools to change their votes on Uconn's candidacy from "yes" to "no". That is the spin that you guys put on it - which receives a receptive audience and confirmation bias on your own board - but is probably viewed more skeptically in a more neutral environment.

See the point?

(05-16-2016 05:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the XII had taken Louisville instead of West Virginia, I have to believe that WV would be in the ACC today.

Probably, and that would have been a better place for WVU. But you take your life-rafts where you can find them.

(05-16-2016 06:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the XII had taken Louisville instead of West Virginia, I have to believe that WV would be in the ACC today.

Probably, and that would have been a better place for WVU. But you take your life-rafts where you can find them.

It would have been edge of your seat crazy! UofL is the only University not to sue to get out of their conference. Probably the reason WVU was chosen to go to Big 12. Imagine if the Big 12 chose UofL and UofL waited the whole 2 years before joining. What if TCU waited a year? The Big 12 playing one year with 8 teams. Crazy!

(05-16-2016 05:49 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:18 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 01:05 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 11:11 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  What if the Big 12 expanded initially as they were looking to do with Pitt and Louisville? Does the ACC even expand to 14?

According to BC's AD at the time, UConn was the choice ahead of Pitt, but when he blackballed UConn, they went with Pitt.

That is interesting. I did not realize that Boston College wielded that much power within the ACC. How the hell did Gene DeFillipo manage to blackball UConn all by himself?

You should ask him. That is what he insinuated.

This article pretty much sums it up. I suppose Eagle and company think it's all a bunch of BS...

http://archive.boston.com/sports/college...cc/?page=1

No, Husky, the article you attached is not BS. It's the spin that you attach to it that is BS, IMO. This is a perfect example, IMO, of what happens when facts are "examined" by fans in the echo chamber of their own fan board.

As the article notes, here is what GDF is quoted as saying:

"We didn't want them in,'' DeFilippo told the Globe. "It was a matter of turf. We wanted to be the New England team.''

GDF was clearly talking about BC's preference - which, of course translated into a "no" vote, as I indicated above. Simple enough. If that resulted in some kind of block, IMO, it was because BC's "no" vote was added to other "no" votes (maybe Miami? Others?). The point is that nowhere in the article is there any evidence presented that BC actually coerced other schools to change their votes on Uconn's candidacy from "yes" to "no". That is the spin that you guys put on it - which receives a receptive audience and confirmation bias on your own board - but is probably viewed more skeptically in a more neutral environment.

See the point?

Okay...

No arguing with stupid.

(05-16-2016 06:40 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 06:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the XII had taken Louisville instead of West Virginia, I have to believe that WV would be in the ACC today.

Probably, and that would have been a better place for WVU. But you take your life-rafts where you can find them.

It would have been edge of your seat crazy! UofL is the only University not to sue to get out of their conference. Probably the reason WVU was chosen to go to Big 12. Imagine if the Big 12 chose UofL and UofL waited the whole 2 years before joining. What if TCU waited a year? The Big 12 playing one year with 8 teams. Crazy!

I agree here. Louisville was a class act when it came to conference departure.

(05-16-2016 06:40 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 06:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the XII had taken Louisville instead of West Virginia, I have to believe that WV would be in the ACC today.

Probably, and that would have been a better place for WVU. But you take your life-rafts where you can find them.

It would have been edge of your seat crazy! UofL is the only University not to sue to get out of their conference. Probably the reason WVU was chosen to go to Big 12. Imagine if the Big 12 chose UofL and UofL waited the whole 2 years before joining. What if TCU waited a year? The Big 12 playing one year with 8 teams. Crazy!

FWIW Syracuse and Pitt did not sue the Big East either. They parted amicably.

(05-16-2016 07:36 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 06:40 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 06:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-16-2016 05:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the XII had taken Louisville instead of West Virginia, I have to believe that WV would be in the ACC today.

Probably, and that would have been a better place for WVU. But you take your life-rafts where you can find them.

It would have been edge of your seat crazy! UofL is the only University not to sue to get out of their conference. Probably the reason WVU was chosen to go to Big 12. Imagine if the Big 12 chose UofL and UofL waited the whole 2 years before joining. What if TCU waited a year? The Big 12 playing one year with 8 teams. Crazy!

FWIW Syracuse and Pitt did not sue the Big East either. They parted amicably.

Pitt may not have sued (the last time), but there was A LOT of shadiness on their part...

(05-16-2016 11:31 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I think the Big 12 clearly screwed up by not taking Louisville and Cincinnati when it took West Virginia. I don't care what bullshitt anyone tries to sell me, that was definitely a miscalculation on their part and it is one of the reasons why they find themselves in their current straits.

I get why it happened: they were in survival mode and could not afford to think long term. Texas was holding a gun to the heads of everyone else and the other members had no choice but to capitulate to UT's demands.

However, think about how different the entire landscape would look had they added Louisville and Cincinnati to go along with West Virginia. The B12 would be in a radically different position and the ACC would've had no choice but to replace Maryland with Connecticut.

Big mistake by the XII.

You are absolutely correct. The three best teams from a BCS conference were just sitting there and they dropped the ball big time. If that did happen then UConn is the addition to replace Maryland and only USF is left holding the Big East FB bag.