Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
ACC could expand to 16 and 17 team formate
Author Message
CrazyPaco Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,178
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 101
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #51
RE: ACC could expand to 16 and 17 team formate
(01-12-2018 06:43 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(01-12-2018 05:34 PM)Bogg Wrote:  
(01-12-2018 05:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(01-12-2018 03:27 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  
(01-12-2018 01:37 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I don't have to try a damn thing. I don't have to prove anything to you. UConn is the entity on the outside, looking in.

He was one of the leading figures in the lawsuit.

He pissed off a bunch of ACC folks. Hell, I don't really have a dog in this fight, but remember the vitriol then.

Keep being how you are.

So did Pitt and Va Tech. Tell me, oh smugly superior one, what conference is Va Tech and Pitt in? Also, one of the leading figures does not equal the leading figure. But you knew that and still spit out that ignorant post.

The governors of Virginia and Pennsylvania got on TV and ran down the ACC like the governor of Connecticut did? Don't recall that. You got a link?

What I do recall is a Saturday evening at duck camp sitting around the fire ring drinking good bourbon where a Clemson BOT member said UConn wasn't getting in anyway, but whatever slim chance they ever had was gone the minute Blumenthal opened his yap.

This is the same BOT member who told you they expected UConn to the ACC to go through strongly enough after early discussions that the school made arrangements to leave to spook the rest of the conference heading into official meetings?

No, that was a totally different BOT member and before the conference had meetings. Prior to the conference vote it was a real concern for Clemson and the rest of the programs that care about football.

A it stands all the programs are where they belong. Louisville cares about football and is in the ACC, UConn doesn't and they are starting to prostitute out their football program with buy games.

Pitt's former chancellor, Mark Nordenberg, also the university's former law school dean, became the defacto leader of the football-playing schools left over in the Big East after the 2003 ACC raid. He essentially organized and spearheaded the lawsuit, along with former WVU president David Hardesty who also had a law background. The lawsuit was filed in Connecticut because that is where it had the best standing and the best argument for damages because of the investment the state of Connecticut made to elevate UConn's football program from 1AA to 1A status (with the expectation and promise it would be playing in a power conference), including the state funding the construction of Rentschler Field, in addition to the fact that UConn had already undertaken the "entry fee" of playing a free home game at each existing member (except one) as a condition of entry. Taking that legal angle meant that the state's involvement in funding UConn's move to 1A, and the state's ownership of the university itself (unlike Pitt or Syracuse), could be used to argue damages to the state itself and employ the power of the state Attorney General's office. That's why Blumenthal was involved and the face of the lawsuit. It was tactical.

But there is no truth to the fact that UConn is blackballed because of the lawsuit and the proof is Pitt's invite while Mark Nordenberg was still Chancellor. It's just business, not personal.

UConn didn't get into the ACC because the ACC was expanding for football and football markets. Pitt, for all of its recent mediocrity, is a football school located smack dab in a top 25 market and has always enjoyed good football tv ratings for various reasons, and is located in an area with good high school football talent and also extended the conference's footprint into Pennsylvania. Syracuse = NY, and also has more football pedigree and access to high school talent in NY state. UConn would have been behind Rutgers, just by virtue of the infancy of their football program playing in 1A and the high school football talent in NJ. Heck, they might have been behind Cincinnati.
(This post was last modified: 01-12-2018 08:35 PM by CrazyPaco.)
01-12-2018 08:20 PM
Find all posts by this user
Bogg Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 667
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 33
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #52
RE: ACC could expand to 16 and 17 team formate
(01-12-2018 06:43 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  No, that was a totally different BOT member and before the conference had meetings. Prior to the conference vote it was a real concern for Clemson and the rest of the programs that care about football.

A it stands all the programs are where they belong. Louisville cares about football and is in the ACC, UConn doesn't and they are starting to prostitute out their football program with buy games.

Right. It was so open-and-shut that the conference was adding Louisville no matter what that Clemson and FSU had to blackmail the conference into it. It's fine, they had leverage and used it to get what they wanted, but don't make stuff up on the internet to try to sound important.

UConn would be better-situated in the Big East regardless. I have no interest in flying to Greensboro NC to play de facto away games in the conference tournament every year.

(01-12-2018 08:20 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  Pitt's former chancellor, Mark Nordenberg, also the university's former law school dean, became the defacto leader of the football-playing schools left over in the Big East after the 2003 ACC raid. He essentially organized and spearheaded the lawsuit, along with former WVU president David Hardesty who also had a law background. The lawsuit was filed in Connecticut because that is where it had the best standing and the best argument for damages because of the investment the state of Connecticut made to elevate UConn's football program from 1AA to 1A status (with the expectation and promise it would be playing in a power conference), including the state funding the construction of Rentschler Field, in addition to the fact that UConn had already undertaken the "entry fee" of playing a free home game at each existing member (except one) as a condition of entry. Taking that legal angle meant that the state's involvement in funding UConn's move to 1A, and the state's ownership of the university itself (unlike Pitt or Syracuse), could be used to argue damages to the state itself and employ the power of the state Attorney General's office. That's why Blumenthal was involved and the face of the lawsuit. It was tactical.

But there is no truth to the fact that UConn is blackballed because of the lawsuit and the proof is Pitt's invite while Mark Nordenberg was still Chancellor. It's just business, not personal.

UConn didn't get into the ACC because the ACC was expanding for football and football markets. Pitt, for all of its recent mediocrity, is a football school located smack dab in a top 25 market and has always enjoyed good football tv ratings for various reasons, and is located in an area with good high school football talent and also extended the conference's footprint into Pennsylvania. Syracuse = NY, and also has more football pedigree and access to high school talent in NY state. UConn would have been behind Rutgers, just by virtue of the infancy of their football program playing in 1A and the high school football talent in NJ. Heck, they might have been behind Cincinnati.

Hey, look, someone who actually knows what they're talking about.
01-12-2018 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.