(01-16-2014 02:55 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 02:24 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 10:56 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 09:49 AM)esayem Wrote:  Not Cincinnati again. They play in a 30k seat stadium. I'd rather have Tulane, better school and destination.

The ACC is not expanding!

I am not saying UC should go to the ACC, but to correct your facts they had a 35K seat stadium in 2013 which will be expanded to 40K the next time they play in Nippert.

Persuade Wake Forest to leave the ACC. Do it and you will replace them. Better basketball. Better football. A new market. A rival for UL.

I know that was tongue-in-cheek, but we appreciate the somewhat kind words anyway. Your username makes me chuckle. Marge was quite the character to put it gently.

Wake is a founding member and a great school. Their athletic department could certainly use a lot of work, but they get credit for having it together at the beginning.

I don't know how much they had it together or not. They had the pure luck of being located literally right next door to UNC, NC State and Duke (even though they have since moved). I would gladly trade Wake for Temple even, and that's not tongue in cheek. I'm serious. I would.

Marge can suck it.

(01-16-2014 04:52 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 04:33 PM)TampaKnight Wrote:  The University of Central Florida whooped Baylor University.

Not CFU. Not UFO, not Orlando U, not Florida Tech.

#UCF

And what's that gotten you? Don't get me wrong, it was a big win to be sure. Huge for your program. However, people don't see Central Florida winning as much as they see Baylor LOST to CENTRAL Florida. That's just the national perception of the whole thing...again, right or wrong, folks see Baylor losing to a directional Florida school instead of seeing the win for what it was. If you guys had a different name, I think folks would see it as an upset or big win, ect. and focus on the WIN over the loss.

Five years ago just as many people knew of Baylor as they did UCF, because Baylor was a nobody, a never-was. They were a joke of a BCS school that had an horrific basketball murder/cover-up story.

(01-16-2014 05:01 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 04:52 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 04:33 PM)TampaKnight Wrote:  The University of Central Florida whooped Baylor University.

Not CFU. Not UFO, not Orlando U, not Florida Tech.

#UCF

And what's that gotten you? Don't get me wrong, it was a big win to be sure. Huge for your program. However, people don't see Central Florida winning as much as they see Baylor LOST to CENTRAL Florida. That's just the national perception of the whole thing...again, right or wrong, folks see Baylor losing to a directional Florida school instead of seeing the win for what it was. If you guys had a different name, I think folks would see it as an upset or big win, ect. and focus on the WIN over the loss.

I think your point about what if UofL was called Central KY illustrated it perfectly. What if Cincy was Southern Ohio U? Names are the most important part of a brand.

And that's the key to it all. BRAND. Calling yourself "University of a direction from your state" is all but branding yourself as 2nd rate in terms of perception. You're not FLORIDA...you're just....Central Florida. Or South Florida. You're not a state school, you're just somewhere you go when you can't get into the state school. Is that truth? Is that accurate? No, not always anyhow. I get that. I'm not saying it's RIGHT or it's FAIR, I'm saying that it's the perception of such schools. How would the world look if USF was called University of Tampa and Miami was called the University of South Florida? How would history have played out differently? As an out of state, or in-state for that matter, recruit...which one would be more likely to top your list between the two?

In terms of branding, it's important to have an identity...whether that's a branch of your state such as Florida Tech, or a city such as Orlando. Like I said, Louisville wouldn't be Louisville if we were University of Central Kentucky or Central Kentucky University. People wouldn't see us as any different from WKU, NKU, or EKU. RECRUITS wouldn't see us as any different...As it is, we're Louisville. We're "The Ville". We have a brand that we can sell. Folks don't understand just how far a BRAND can carry you.

(01-16-2014 05:58 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 05:01 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 04:52 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 04:33 PM)TampaKnight Wrote:  The University of Central Florida whooped Baylor University.

Not CFU. Not UFO, not Orlando U, not Florida Tech.

#UCF

And what's that gotten you? Don't get me wrong, it was a big win to be sure. Huge for your program. However, people don't see Central Florida winning as much as they see Baylor LOST to CENTRAL Florida. That's just the national perception of the whole thing...again, right or wrong, folks see Baylor losing to a directional Florida school instead of seeing the win for what it was. If you guys had a different name, I think folks would see it as an upset or big win, ect. and focus on the WIN over the loss.

I think your point about what if UofL was called Central KY illustrated it perfectly. What if Cincy was Southern Ohio U? Names are the most important part of a brand.

And that's the key to it all. BRAND. Calling yourself "University of a direction from your state" is all but branding yourself as 2nd rate in terms of perception. You're not FLORIDA...you're just....Central Florida. Or South Florida. You're not a state school, you're just somewhere you go when you can't get into the state school. Is that truth? Is that accurate? No, not always anyhow. I get that. I'm not saying it's RIGHT or it's FAIR, I'm saying that it's the perception of such schools. How would the world look if USF was called University of Tampa and Miami was called the University of South Florida? How would history have played out differently? As an out of state, or in-state for that matter, recruit...which one would be more likely to top your list between the two?

In terms of branding, it's important to have an identity...whether that's a branch of your state such as Florida Tech, or a city such as Orlando. Like I said, Louisville wouldn't be Louisville if we were University of Central Kentucky or Central Kentucky University. People wouldn't see us as any different from WKU, NKU, or EKU. RECRUITS wouldn't see us as any different...As it is, we're Louisville. We're "The Ville". We have a brand that we can sell. Folks don't understand just how far a BRAND can carry you.

I pretty much agree with you but I think there is a difference between an elite private school like Miami and a large public school. Southern Cal is not a directional school, because they are an elite private university. I think the same would hold true for the U even if they were called Southern Florida.

(01-16-2014 05:35 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 02:55 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 02:24 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 10:56 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 09:49 AM)esayem Wrote:  Not Cincinnati again. They play in a 30k seat stadium. I'd rather have Tulane, better school and destination.

The ACC is not expanding!

I am not saying UC should go to the ACC, but to correct your facts they had a 35K seat stadium in 2013 which will be expanded to 40K the next time they play in Nippert.

Persuade Wake Forest to leave the ACC. Do it and you will replace them. Better basketball. Better football. A new market. A rival for UL.

I know that was tongue-in-cheek, but we appreciate the somewhat kind words anyway. Your username makes me chuckle. Marge was quite the character to put it gently.

Wake is a founding member and a great school. Their athletic department could certainly use a lot of work, but they get credit for having it together at the beginning.

I don't know how much they had it together or not. They had the pure luck of being located literally right next door to UNC, NC State and Duke (even though they have since moved). I would gladly trade Wake for Temple even, and that's not tongue in cheek. I'm serious. I would.

Marge can suck it.

Word

I only picked Miami in that "Southern Florida" would've been an apt name for it.

(01-16-2014 08:44 AM)goofus Wrote:  keep in mind Notre Dame is a member for non-football sports. That is another reason to take Cincinnati to fill in gao between Notre Dame and Pitt.

of course if ND and cincy end up joining ACC full time, they will not be in the same pod.

I don't think that ACC basketball has any gaps. ND CLEARLY doesn't mind playing on the east coast, and a game in the Chicago area every other year isn't going to kill any ACC team. SU used to play in the same conference as ND (Chi area), DePaul (Chi), and Marquette (Wisc.), and we survived. I would MUCH rather have Georgetown filling in the UMD hole. GU has better non-football, better ACC rivalries, and better academics.

UC has a good athletic dept., but I don't see what they add that is worth anything to the ACC. IMHO, they would do great in the Big XII, and the Big XII has a MASSIVE gap that UC could help fill. That's where UC should go.

I think that UH would do well there, too. Winning back Houston would be excellent for recruiting. It's not coincidence that OU has billboards in Houston advertising their football program. They miss A&M.

(01-16-2014 05:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  It wouldn't have mattered if BC supported UConn or not, as you pointed out BC was only one vote and from what I have been told multiple times UConn didn't get anywhere near the votes for BC's vote to matter one way or another.

They needed to be a conference where FSU could consider a multi-year GOR, and an ACC that added Louisville was far more on the road to that than an ACC that added UConn.

(01-16-2014 04:05 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  I still think UCF would get taken more seriously if they were still Florida Tech or the University of Orlando as oppose to "some directional school from Florida". It cuts both ways, honestly. How seriously do you think Louisville would be taken if we were called something like University of Central Kentucky? When you have weaker "directional schools" in your state, it's hard to stand up and show that YOU are different from THEM. I think it's one reason too, why Memphis always finds itself in conversations discussing BigXII expansion despite how bad they've been in anything but basketball.

Knights fans may not like it or want to hear it, and I'm not saying whether it's right or it's wrong, but the name has an affect on the perception and in the hearts and minds of the people, perception = reality.

I'm pretty sure Florida Tech would have a problem with UCF calling themselves that.

(01-16-2014 04:33 PM)TampaKnight Wrote:  The University of Central Florida whooped Baylor University.

Not CFU. Not UFO, not Orlando U, not Florida Tech.

#UCF

Are you sure that was UCF? I could have sworn it was USF that beat Baylor. USF is the one in Orlando, right?

Smarta**.

(01-16-2014 07:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 08:44 AM)goofus Wrote:  keep in mind Notre Dame is a member for non-football sports. That is another reason to take Cincinnati to fill in gao between Notre Dame and Pitt.

of course if ND and cincy end up joining ACC full time, they will not be in the same pod.

I don't think that ACC basketball has any gaps. ND CLEARLY doesn't mind playing on the east coast, and a game in the Chicago area every other year isn't going to kill any ACC team. SU used to play in the same conference as ND (Chi area), DePaul (Chi), and Marquette (Wisc.), and we survived. I would MUCH rather have Georgetown filling in the UMD hole. GU has better non-football, better ACC rivalries, and better academics.

UC has a good athletic dept., but I don't see what they add that is worth anything to the ACC. IMHO, they would do great in the Big XII, and the Big XII has a MASSIVE gap that UC could help fill. That's where UC should go.

I think that UH would do well there, too. Winning back Houston would be excellent for recruiting. It's not coincidence that OU has billboards in Houston advertising their football program. They miss A&M.

While UC makes a little bit of sense in bridging the gap to WVU, they would only detract the current monetary payouts per member in the Big12. Their addition would also require an adjustment to the number of times that the north teams can play in Texas and Oklahoma per year. So they are a no go. Central Florida would make another island and decrease payout for the conference members. Again, no go. If you can't add to the current members payouts, we don't want to add you to our conference. Hopefully, the ACC pushing an advanced form of league championship game will put all of this expansion mess to bed.

(01-16-2014 10:06 PM)Groo Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 07:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 08:44 AM)goofus Wrote:  keep in mind Notre Dame is a member for non-football sports. That is another reason to take Cincinnati to fill in gao between Notre Dame and Pitt.

of course if ND and cincy end up joining ACC full time, they will not be in the same pod.

I don't think that ACC basketball has any gaps. ND CLEARLY doesn't mind playing on the east coast, and a game in the Chicago area every other year isn't going to kill any ACC team. SU used to play in the same conference as ND (Chi area), DePaul (Chi), and Marquette (Wisc.), and we survived. I would MUCH rather have Georgetown filling in the UMD hole. GU has better non-football, better ACC rivalries, and better academics.

UC has a good athletic dept., but I don't see what they add that is worth anything to the ACC. IMHO, they would do great in the Big XII, and the Big XII has a MASSIVE gap that UC could help fill. That's where UC should go.

I think that UH would do well there, too. Winning back Houston would be excellent for recruiting. It's not coincidence that OU has billboards in Houston advertising their football program. They miss A&M.

While UC makes a little bit of sense in bridging the gap to WVU, they would only detract the current monetary payouts per member in the Big12. Their addition would also require an adjustment to the number of times that the north teams can play in Texas and Oklahoma per year. So they are a no go. Central Florida would make another island and decrease payout for the conference members. Again, no go. If you can't add to the current members payouts, we don't want to add you to our conference. Hopefully, the ACC pushing an advanced form of league championship game will put all of this expansion mess to bed.

Do you think the Big12-2 survive past the current contract. Many do not think so, with or w/o realignment additions. I do not believe so because of networks cutting back on money spent for these contracts in the future, especially with conferences looking for for their own networks, and your conference not joining this group.

(01-16-2014 03:49 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 01:03 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 11:00 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 10:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 10:49 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  The part you missed is that ESPN wanted UConn and BC balked and said they would rather have Pitt because BC delusionally thinks they have a chance to claim New England as their own.

This may not be the full story, so you could be right. However, it's clearly stated that ESPN wanted only Pitt and Cuse in the ACC.....

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

The ACC first targeted Syracuse, then UConn. But Boston College had major objections to UConn, stemming from BC's move from the Big East to the ACC in 2005, some nasty comments and a lawsuit.

BC athletics director Gene DeFilippo seemingly confirmed what many had been reporting/presuming over the past month -- that BC blocked UConn from receiving an invite to the ACC.

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

The fact that BC didn't want Uconn in the ACC seems pretty clear. However, Uconn fans like to forget three important points also associated with this issue:

1. Uconn was considered by many to be the lead in the lawsuit against BC, Miami, and the ACC in 2003-2004. BC and ACC leaders were sued PERSONALLY. The suit was based in Connecticut and conducted by the then-CT State Officials. See the attached and note the comments by these aforementioned CT State Officials. Boston College and Miami were exiting the Big East under the Big East's own exit provisions. You can imagine that the charges of "fraud" and "deceit" did not sit well with them.

https://www.wral.com/news/local/story/105570/

2. Boston College is ONE VOTE in the ACC. It is ludicrous to suggest that they alone had the power to derail Uconn getting into the ACC. (What is even more laughable is that these same Uconn fans often mocked BC as having no influence whatsoever in the ACC. Now, when it suits them, they portray BC as this all-powerful presence dictating ACC decisions.)

A number of other schools had to likewise not elect to extend an invitation to Uconn. Of course, since many of the ACC school and Conference officials back in 2003 are still around, could that also be a factor in the ultimate selections? It's just my opinion, of course, but maybe it wasn't such a good idea to take the vocal lead in a lawsuit filed PERSONALLY against ACC school and Conference officials, when you would, a few years later, be asking those same people to include you in their club.

Uconn fans in these threads seem to believe that nothing prior to the 2011 had anything to do with how events played out for them with the ACC. In my opinion, they are the ones who are deluding themsleves.

3. In my opinion, I do believe that the so-called "market block" was also a factor in this. So what? These type of "market blocks" are speculated about in these threads and elsewhere all the time. People often speculate on this being the reason any one of a number of ACC teams were not scooped up at one time or another by the SEC.

The funny thing is that many UMass fans claim that Uconn has exercised the same "market block" on Umass getting into the AAC. It is interesting to note that since Uconn elevated their program to FBS, they have played Umass only ONCE - and no future games are scheduled at this point. This is interesting as both are flagship schools in neighboring states that are the closest FBS programs to one another.

Personally, I think Uconn fans engage in a bit of hypocrisy bringing up this "market block" topic.

I concede that some may be hypocritical in that regard. I however am not and would welcome UMass into the AAC or an annual OOC game with them. I'd love to see UConn play UMass at Gillette every other year and actually feel at this juncture the two FBS state flagships in New England should be working in concert.

Most UCONN fans I've talked to said they'd have no issue with UMASS in the AAC. I doubt UCONN would block them.

We all know the southern football ACC schools (and BC) didn't want UCONN in the ACC. If you go to the AAC conference forum, you'll see that most of the southern/western schools (UCF, USF, East Carolina, Houston, SMU) want no part in UMASS or any other northern school joining the conference.

UCONN wouldn't be UMASS's biggest opposition. It'd be the southern football schools that have the votes (similarly to UCONN's problem with the ACC).

Florida University would be good!

(01-16-2014 07:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 08:44 AM)goofus Wrote:  keep in mind Notre Dame is a member for non-football sports. That is another reason to take Cincinnati to fill in gao between Notre Dame and Pitt.

of course if ND and cincy end up joining ACC full time, they will not be in the same pod.

I don't think that ACC basketball has any gaps. ND CLEARLY doesn't mind playing on the east coast, and a game in the Chicago area every other year isn't going to kill any ACC team. SU used to play in the same conference as ND (Chi area), DePaul (Chi), and Marquette (Wisc.), and we survived. I would MUCH rather have Georgetown filling in the UMD hole. GU has better non-football, better ACC rivalries, and better academics.

UC has a good athletic dept., but I don't see what they add that is worth anything to the ACC. IMHO, they would do great in the Big XII, and the Big XII has a MASSIVE gap that UC could help fill. That's where UC should go.

I think that UH would do well there, too. Winning back Houston would be excellent for recruiting. It's not coincidence that OU has billboards in Houston advertising their football program. They miss A&M.

I don't think the ACC is missing anything as is, but if they needed a couple new markets to get ESPN to give the ACC Network a go, I think UC's market, recruiting area, competitive performance, and solid athletic department would be enough to receive an invite. Absent that premise though, there isn't much reason for the ACC to make a move.

UC would fit much better in the ACC than the Big XII IMO. I don't foresee us going anywhere in the near future, but the ACC would make more sense from our end.

(01-15-2014 05:56 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  UCF probably only has a shot if one of the 2 current Florida programs leave because right now, neither of them are going to support taking in a G5 team, legitimizing them and turning them into a viable threat to hurt their recruiting.

It's been said before, but I guess it bears repeating: So long as Florida State and Miami/FL are both in the ACC, neither UCF nor USF will be.

It really is that simple.

With UConn, the calculus is different. I think they bring a lot to the table, and quite honestly I think they bring more than Louisville, even though the ACC obviously formed the opposite conclusion. But even with UConn, you have the problem of numbers (ACC is already a 14-team league for football, and a 15-team league for everything else), and the fact that there is still bad blood dating back the war between the ACC and the old Big East from 2003-2011. That problem (along with several others) will have to be solved before UConn gets the call they're waiting for.

(01-16-2014 03:57 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 03:49 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 01:03 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 11:00 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 10:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  This may not be the full story, so you could be right. However, it's clearly stated that ESPN wanted only Pitt and Cuse in the ACC.....

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...ppo-espn/1

The ACC first targeted Syracuse, then UConn. But Boston College had major objections to UConn, stemming from BC's move from the Big East to the ACC in 2005, some nasty comments and a lawsuit.

BC athletics director Gene DeFilippo seemingly confirmed what many had been reporting/presuming over the past month -- that BC blocked UConn from receiving an invite to the ACC.

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

The fact that BC didn't want Uconn in the ACC seems pretty clear. However, Uconn fans like to forget three important points also associated with this issue:

1. Uconn was considered by many to be the lead in the lawsuit against BC, Miami, and the ACC in 2003-2004. BC and ACC leaders were sued PERSONALLY. The suit was based in Connecticut and conducted by the then-CT State Officials. See the attached and note the comments by these aforementioned CT State Officials. Boston College and Miami were exiting the Big East under the Big East's own exit provisions. You can imagine that the charges of "fraud" and "deceit" did not sit well with them.

https://www.wral.com/news/local/story/105570/

2. Boston College is ONE VOTE in the ACC. It is ludicrous to suggest that they alone had the power to derail Uconn getting into the ACC. (What is even more laughable is that these same Uconn fans often mocked BC as having no influence whatsoever in the ACC. Now, when it suits them, they portray BC as this all-powerful presence dictating ACC decisions.)

A number of other schools had to likewise not elect to extend an invitation to Uconn. Of course, since many of the ACC school and Conference officials back in 2003 are still around, could that also be a factor in the ultimate selections? It's just my opinion, of course, but maybe it wasn't such a good idea to take the vocal lead in a lawsuit filed PERSONALLY against ACC school and Conference officials, when you would, a few years later, be asking those same people to include you in their club.

Uconn fans in these threads seem to believe that nothing prior to the 2011 had anything to do with how events played out for them with the ACC. In my opinion, they are the ones who are deluding themsleves.

3. In my opinion, I do believe that the so-called "market block" was also a factor in this. So what? These type of "market blocks" are speculated about in these threads and elsewhere all the time. People often speculate on this being the reason any one of a number of ACC teams were not scooped up at one time or another by the SEC.

The funny thing is that many UMass fans claim that Uconn has exercised the same "market block" on Umass getting into the AAC. It is interesting to note that since Uconn elevated their program to FBS, they have played Umass only ONCE - and no future games are scheduled at this point. This is interesting as both are flagship schools in neighboring states that are the closest FBS programs to one another.

Personally, I think Uconn fans engage in a bit of hypocrisy bringing up this "market block" topic.

I concede that some may be hypocritical in that regard. I however am not and would welcome UMass into the AAC or an annual OOC game with them. I'd love to see UConn play UMass at Gillette every other year and actually feel at this juncture the two FBS state flagships in New England should be working in concert.

They opened the season against eachother last year. It was enjoyable, yet completely uncompetitive. Uconn is not running from local competition, and there has never been a report that UConn is blocking Umass from joining the AAC.

It's an imaginary hypocrisy. If UConn did block Umass eventually in their pursuit of AAC membership, I'd be embarassed for my alma mater. I just have a hard time seeing the AAC extend that invitation as things currently stand.

Yes, Uconn did play Umass last year. I mentioned that in my thread. Again, what I find interesting is that Umass and Uconn are two neighboring state flagship universities that are located closer to one another then any other FBS program. Uconn has been D1 for over a decade and has only played Uconn once, with no follow up games scheduled. Interesting. The inference that Umass is not competitive to Uconn is a bit strange. They are new to FBS and, of course, there will be initial competitive gaps. That hasn't stopped BC from playing Umass several times during that same period, with several more games scheduled over the next few years. I was at the BC/Uconn game in 2000 when Uconn was transitioning to FBS. BC won that game 55-3. While BC won all of the subsequent three games against Uconn as well, they were more competitive. I would expect that Umass will be more competitive in the future as well.

Uconn fans often like to cite BC's unwillingness to play Uconn. However, let me ask you: why hasn't Uconn scheduled more games with Umass other than the "one-and-done."??

(01-16-2014 11:47 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 07:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 08:44 AM)goofus Wrote:  keep in mind Notre Dame is a member for non-football sports. That is another reason to take Cincinnati to fill in gao between Notre Dame and Pitt.

of course if ND and cincy end up joining ACC full time, they will not be in the same pod.

I don't think that ACC basketball has any gaps. ND CLEARLY doesn't mind playing on the east coast, and a game in the Chicago area every other year isn't going to kill any ACC team. SU used to play in the same conference as ND (Chi area), DePaul (Chi), and Marquette (Wisc.), and we survived. I would MUCH rather have Georgetown filling in the UMD hole. GU has better non-football, better ACC rivalries, and better academics.

UC has a good athletic dept., but I don't see what they add that is worth anything to the ACC. IMHO, they would do great in the Big XII, and the Big XII has a MASSIVE gap that UC could help fill. That's where UC should go.

I think that UH would do well there, too. Winning back Houston would be excellent for recruiting. It's not coincidence that OU has billboards in Houston advertising their football program. They miss A&M.

I don't think the ACC is missing anything as is, but if they needed a couple new markets to get ESPN to give the ACC Network a go, I think UC's market, recruiting area, competitive performance, and solid athletic department would be enough to receive an invite. Absent that premise though, there isn't much reason for the ACC to make a move.

UC would fit much better in the ACC than the Big XII IMO. I don't foresee us going anywhere in the near future, but the ACC would make more sense from our end.

I forgot about recruiting. Ohio has some solid recruits. I agree, though. I don't think that UC is moving. It's a shame, too. There are a number of power teams that don't belong, and UC more than deserves their place.

Out of curiosity though, why do you think that UC would fit the ACC better than the Big XII?

Editorial side note: If UC can't get into the Big XII (which is probably the case), I would love to see SMU, UH, UC, Rice, Tulane, Memphis, UL, Tulsa, USM, and Ark St. in a conference, with Xavier and Creighton as basketball-only schools. Obviously that won't happen, but it would be a great conference if it did. IMHO, it would be very competitive in basketball and football, and there would be a ton of real rivalries. It would also have some GREAT recruiting.

(01-16-2014 03:57 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 03:49 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 01:03 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  many UMass fans claim that UConn has exercised the same "market block" on UMass getting into the AAC.

I concede that some may be hypocritical in that regard. I however am not and would welcome UMass into the AAC or an annual OOC game with them.

It's an imaginary hypocrisy. If UConn did block UMass eventually in their pursuit of AAC membership, I'd be embarrassed for my alma mater. I just have a hard time seeing the AAC extend that invitation as things currently stand.

UMass is one of a few different programs that AAC leaders probably have their eye on with respect to future development/expansion possibilities. But right now, UMass simply does not have any of the raw ingredients that would be necessary for the AAC, and the idea that UConn has kept them out of the league is just silly.