Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics.

Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises.

Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

Syracuse isn't Duke north, and Vandy would pick basketball. Having really good basketball doesn't mean that a school would pick football. On one hand, NE talent dropped off and SU FB got unlucky w/ some FB hires. On the other hand, NE bball is alive and well, and SU has had the same HoF coach since the 70's. However, every major athletic decision between football and basketball has sided in favor of football.

BC and Pitt would also both pick football.

If the Teel article was a trial balloon, so far it's been a "pop".
The only place I have seen any reaction to the article (positive or negative) has been on this web site. Maybe there have been other articles written in support but I haven't seen them. Where is the negative commentary from the FSU administration. Has there been any outrage from Dabo?
Maybe it will come next week.

(06-12-2016 02:25 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the Teel article was a trial balloon, so far it's been a "pop".
The only place I have seen any reaction to the article (positive or negative) has been on this web site. Maybe there have been other articles written in support but I haven't seen them. Where is the negative commentary from the FSU administration. Has there been any outrage from Dabo?
Maybe it will come next week.

Well maybe his article was mindless speculation which reputable leaders would not comment on

Fsu and Clemson sites all over are pissed at the thought of this btw. As I said in other threads , change the divisions if you want 9 games. And give more marque games in the rotation as the big 10 is said to be doing (like osu vs Wisconsin more frequently than osu vs others in the rotation )

Because keeping wake bc and cuse in the fsu /Clemson division plus adding a 9th league game is complete garbage

(06-12-2016 02:28 PM)Ragu Wrote:  Well maybe his article was mindless speculation which reputable leaders would not comment on

Fsu and Clemson sites all over are pissed at the thought of this btw. As I said in other threads , change the divisions of you want 9 games. Because keeping wake bc and cuse in the fsu /Clemson division plus adding a 9th league game is complete garbage

pull a notre dame ...
go semi-independent for schedule stability/flexibility ...
await their countermove ...

DEAR JOHN

(06-12-2016 01:54 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself...

While I don't disagree with your observations, I don't think I'm as concerned as you are.

For one thing I think everyone is over blowing and overreacting to the 9 game proposal. It is a simple disagreement over the best interest of the school or the group, the result of either side losing is not as bad as people are making it out to be.

Secondly, it isn't as if the schools have a lot of options right now. No one is dumb enough to join the Big 12 with the Longhorn Network, and the SEC and Big 10 aren't expanding. School don't have anywhere to take their ball and go home to.

Only a person who is severely lacking in intellect would think that SU would choose lacrosse over fb or bb.

Weird post IMO. I see it as a positive that the ACC has so many schools that excel in multiple/different sports. Also, the supposed schools who get ripped on for not "caring about football" have all made significant investments in coaches and facilities for football.

I seriously can't believe the outrage on this board after 1 speculative article about a scheduling possibility. No one knows if it will happen or what form it will take. But the usual 3-4 suspects who love to ***** about everything make sure they are heard constantly.

(06-12-2016 01:54 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics.

Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises.

Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

Louisville would pick both football, basketball, baseball, and Olympic sports. After all we not a one pony show!

(06-12-2016 05:19 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Only a person who is severely lacking in intellect would think that SU would choose lacrosse over fb or bb.

My apologies and no offense intended as that comment was meant to be a joke. No, I definitely would not expect SU to pick LAX over either football or basketball.

And to answer another post later on, diversity absolutely does have it's advantages. Maybe in the long run if/when the current cable model goes belly up, the ACC with it's blend of sports and geographic range of schools will benefit. But the billion dollar question is when will this happen and will we survive until then? Maybe a better question is we will survive but will we be too far behind from a revenue standpoint For it to matter? If by chance 20 years from now football and basketball popularity switch places, then of course this would be great for the ACC but .... the only way I see this happening is if the concussion issue becomes a VERY significant factor.

(06-12-2016 01:54 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics.

Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises.

Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

1. None of this is new.

2. So in that sense don't worry.

3. NC State would pick football.

4. FSU's bitching is rooted in their own unique history, and their perceived and real shortcomings. They are a girls college that has been a real university only 60 years. With that youth comes a number of issues that only time helps.

5. Clemson's bitching is rooted in their small size and pathological need to always be better than the Gamecocks despite USC's historic financial advantage.

6. No conference changes addresses the internal issues at Clemson and FSU.

7. Likewise, the majority of problems and issues at State College are manufactured internally. Of course UNC meddles and does what it can to undercut State, but when State has **** itself, it was NC State folks leading the charge in an effort to overcome self-perceived shortcomings.

8. X is correct, the only gnashing of teeth is here and it's because the factors I cited above being expressed by folks with sympathetic ties to the various Universities who usually are not told the entire story because the entire story does not always paint the individual university in the best light.

Why blame yourself if you can blame Swofford? Why blame State if you can blame Carolina? Why blame FSU, if you can blame the ACC?

You can't waive a magic wand and make FSU's status as a university magically become 100 years older and on a par with Florida. Nor can NC State wave that wand and age itself 120 years to be on a par with UNC. Nor can Duke replicate or purchase the additional 250 years they need to be on a par with Harvard.


It's summer. It's hot and we are bored. Internet recipe for all sorts of crap.

OK ...... uncle! Sorry that I bothered to post - the ACC is fine and there are no issues either real or perceived at the conference level or with any of the member institutions. (Yes, that is dripping with sarcasm!)

Now for the sincere part ..... As a football fan and for that reason alone, I personally do wish that Clemson was in the SEC but I do not hate the ACC. In fact, I have said this before and will say it again - the ACC has been very good for Clemson in the past, is good for Clemson now, and I believe can be good for Clemson into the future. Each member school brings something unique to the conference and I am happy that Clemson is affiliated with each and every ACC school.

(06-12-2016 06:12 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  

(06-12-2016 05:19 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Only a person who is severely lacking in intellect would think that SU would choose lacrosse over fb or bb.

My apologies and no offense intended as that comment was meant to be a joke. No, I definitely would not expect SU to pick LAX over either football or basketball.

And to answer another post later on, diversity absolutely does have it's advantages. Maybe in the long run if/when the current cable model goes belly up, the ACC with it's blend of sports and geographic range of schools will benefit. But the billion dollar question is when will this happen and will we survive until then? Maybe a better question is we will survive but will we be too far behind from a revenue standpoint For it to matter? If by chance 20 years from now football and basketball popularity switch places, then of course this would be great for the ACC but .... the only way I see this happening is if the concussion issue becomes a VERY significant factor.

Theres another way that basketball can be worth more than fb without the concussion issue (which I dont think will ever stunt college fb) Keep in mind that bb is already worth many times more than fb. The difference is the NCAA controls bb tv revenue, as opposed to fb, where the conferences/schools control tv revenue. The NCAA only shares a fraction of the bb tv revenue with the schools/conferences. If the conferences/schools ever are able to control bb tv money the way they control fb tv money, you will see the value of certain schools decrease, and others increase, especially schools who have history and tradition in both revenue sports.

(06-12-2016 02:25 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the Teel article was a trial balloon, so far it's been a "pop".
The only place I have seen any reaction to the article (positive or negative) has been on this web site. Maybe there have been other articles written in support but I haven't seen them. Where is the negative commentary from the FSU administration. Has there been any outrage from Dabo?
Maybe it will come next week.

Dabo got his peepee slapped because he dared say that Clemson beating UGA three years ago was about Clemson and not the ACC. Since then he has been very careful to toe the party line.

(06-12-2016 06:47 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  OK ...... uncle! Sorry that I bothered to post - the ACC is fine and there are no issues either real or perceived at the conference level or with any of the member institutions. (Yes, that is dripping with sarcasm!)

Now for the sincere part ..... As a football fan and for that reason alone, I personally do wish that Clemson was in the SEC but I do not hate the ACC. In fact, I have said this before and will say it again - the ACC has been very good for Clemson in the past, is good for Clemson now, and I believe can be good for Clemson into the future. Each member school brings something unique to the conference and I am happy that Clemson is affiliated with each and every ACC school.

I think we can all agree that the ACC does have some real issues. But most of us except for a very small minority believe that the most issues can be solved or at least minimized with good decision making in the near future and long term. If the ACC were making these decisions without outside help from professionals, I would be much more concerned about these issues. But I am somewhat encouraged by the fact that the ACC has gone out and hired consultants to help them arrive at the appropriate decisions. I think the league can come out well when things are all said and done.

(06-12-2016 06:47 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  OK ...... uncle! Sorry that I bothered to post - the ACC is fine and there are no issues either real or perceived at the conference level or with any of the member institutions. (Yes, that is dripping with sarcasm!)

Now for the sincere part ..... As a football fan and for that reason alone, I personally do wish that Clemson was in the SEC but I do not hate the ACC. In fact, I have said this before and will say it again - the ACC has been very good for Clemson in the past, is good for Clemson now, and I believe can be good for Clemson into the future. Each member school brings something unique to the conference and I am happy that Clemson is affiliated with each and every ACC school.

Dude, you are fine. There is no shortage of people with strong opinions on this forum. To borrow a football term, this is "big boy" interwebs!

Our diversity is not a weakness. What you see as a weakness, I see as a strength! This is much like the composition of the US population. If an ACC network does come about, it will be much less boring b/c of it.

ACC has already survived...A few years ago everyone (SEC Blowhards) were stating that the ACC was dead and going to fold...And look the ACC is #3 in FB and #1 in BBall....

We are here to stay....

The ACC will survive because between the schools who put too much importance to the secondary college sport and the ones who simply strive to be average but in the future it will look a LOT different. Those of you who joked about Clemson and FSU having to go to Ames for conference games will eat a lot of crow.