(06-15-2016 08:49 PM)Dasville Wrote:  I don't fully understand the whole " Maryland wasn't appreciated in the ACC" angle.
Sounds like it has been festering for years.

I didn't attend Maryland, but I did live the first 18 years of my life within 15 miles of College Park and have many MD alumni friends, so I can explain that: For as long as I can remember, which dates back to the early 1970s, there was a strong perception within the Maryland community that the ACC was run by the Carolina schools, and that the further you were away from North Carolina, especially the UNC-Duke nexus, the less power you had within the conference. There was a belief that in conflicts among members, ACC officials favored the Carolina schools, and that this actually did translate down onto the basketball court (the most important ACC sport) in the form of favoritism in stuff like the site-selection for the ACC basketball tournament, and even officiating on the court.

It was something that festered for decades.

And that's why the move to the B1G didn't come close to sparking a revolt among Maryland donors and alumni. On one hand, there was significant regret and mourning over the loss of decades-old rivalries and relationships on the court and field - MD was an ACC founder after all - but that was tempered by a significant strain of relief, a "good riddance" to the ACC power structure.

(06-15-2016 06:33 PM)Rich52c Wrote:  

(06-15-2016 06:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Brutal

Rutgers is lead by a classic failure as president.
If Ohio St had Barchi as president they would also stink.
Also New Jersey has an idiot as governor and Ohio has a great governor.
Lousy leadership does count.

I hate Ohio State with all my heart but even I can admit that they have been elite and Rutgers sucked long before the current governors where in office.

(06-16-2016 06:50 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  I don't know why anyone would expect them to be successful in a division that has Urban Meyer, Jim Harbaugh and Mark Dantonio.

Over the the first decade, they frequently finish ahead of Indiana and, of course, Rutgers, do well enough cross division and OOC to go bowling, and win some of those bowl games, and are regularly strong competitors in Big Ten BBall, there won't be any "buyers remorse" at the end of the decade. They are, after all, a very good school, in a good recruiting area, in a growing media market, so they don't have to be a football "King", or even a football "Prince", in order to be quite welcome over the long haul.

(06-15-2016 04:36 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2016/6/...nd-Rutgers

"Rutgers is still terrible at almost everything"

"Maryland is good at sports that the conference doesn’t care about, less good at the ones it does"

Hey... Every conference needs a bottom feeder(s).

For a long time that was Northwestern in the Big Ten. Now, it's Rutgers.

I thought the University of Maryland was broke because, as is typical, it's, like other schools administrations, don't know how to handle money like most bureaucracies. The financial state of the school made the move to the BIG necessary. Many alums likely wanted to stay in the ACC with past rivals, but the move had to be made to right the finances of the ship. Just what I thought, not stating fact.

(06-16-2016 08:12 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  I thought the University of Maryland was broke because, as is typical, it's, like other schools administrations, don't know how to handle money like most bureaucracies. The financial state of the school made the move to the BIG necessary. Many alums likely wanted to stay in the ACC with past rivals, but the move had to be made to right the finances of the ship. Just what I thought, not stating fact.

The Terrapin Club, the UMD athletic department's scholarship fundraising arm, was guilty of operating like a mom-and-pop shop. Professional fundraisers are now in charge.

(06-16-2016 08:01 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(06-15-2016 04:36 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2016/6/...nd-Rutgers

"Rutgers is still terrible at almost everything"

"Maryland is good at sports that the conference doesn’t care about, less good at the ones it does"

Hey... Every conference needs a bottom feeder(s).

For a long time that was Northwestern in the Big Ten. Now, it's Rutgers.

Just keep sending Christmas cards to all the B12 presidents and maybe one day your wish will come true.

Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

TCU & WVU are in the Big 12 in large part because of on-field performance. I doubt Utah gets in the Pac if they regularly posted records like say, Wyoming.

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

You got picked because the only alternative was a 5-7 Connecticut team.

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

Yeah, Jim, I think that's basically right. Louisville was invited FOR its sports performance and DESPITE its academics and location.

(06-16-2016 09:09 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

Yeah, Jim, I think that's basically right. Louisville was invited FOR its sports performance and DESPITE its academics and location.

I would think location and availability had something to do with the UoL's selection as well.

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

Here is a better chart:

Missouri, TAMU, Rutgers, Nebraska, Colorado, Utah, Maryland, Pitt, Syracuse .... Expansion.

WVU, Louisville, TCU ... Backfill.

Not sure why everyone likes to dump on Rutgers. They were BE co-champions in 2012 along with Cincinnati, Louisville and Syracuse. I'm sure they'll get their act together.

(06-16-2016 09:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

Here is a better chart:

Missouri, TAMU, Rutgers, Nebraska, Colorado, Utah, Maryland, Pitt, Syracuse .... Expansion.

WVU, Louisville, TCU ... Backfill.

Louisville and TCU were excellent additions though. Louisville athletics are really growing...they are competitive in the major sports.

(06-15-2016 09:01 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(06-15-2016 06:33 PM)Rich52c Wrote:  

(06-15-2016 06:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Brutal

Rutgers is lead by a classic failure as president.
If Ohio St had Barchi as president they would also stink.
Also New Jersey has an idiot as governor and Ohio has a great governor.
Lousy leadership does count.

First off, relax. I somehow picture you getting red in the face and screaming this out. It's a message board man, not real life issues.

Second, NJ and OH both have idiot governors. Kasich only being slightly less of on idiot and less corrupt, but that's a discussion for the Spin Room.

Third, Barchi's been the one to make the moves to hire Pat Hobbs and with Hobbs to hire Ash and Pikiell. Barchi on the academic side of things, you know the actual purpose for the school, has been very, very good. As an undergraduate under McCormick and an MBA student under Barchi, Barchi's been getting things done and changing things that needed changing. McCormick was much more incremental at best.

Patt Hobbs is a big time friend of Christie(was his ethics coordinator at 75k per year now he 575k per year)
The star Ledger had him on their state Christmas tree.
The new deputy AD former head of athletic development actually runs the department and gets the gifts.

(06-16-2016 09:39 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  Not sure why everyone likes to dump on Rutgers. They were BE co-champions in 2012 along with Cincinnati, Louisville and Syracuse. I'm sure they'll get their act together.

33-2-4, 17 straight

quo (#21),

I wonder if fans in Charlottesville have held or currently hold a similar sentiment, towards the Carolina Core. I would love for the Big Ten to one day pick off Virginia. That would completely enclose DC as Big Ten territory.

I've always thought of Virginia as a core ACC member, but then again Maryland was also a founding member.

Delaney asked everyone said no except Maryland....

"Commissioner Jim Delany told CBSSports.com that his league entered confidentiality agreements with possibly six or more schools to protect conversations about conference membership....."

So at least 5 said no....

http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...expansion/

(06-16-2016 09:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 08:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Anyone else note that this nice little comparison chart was put together by a Nebraska newspaper....

The whole thing screams of "hey look we don't suck as bad as the two other new guys"....

Reality is nobody has been invited to any P5 conference because of how they perform on the field or on the court except Louisville.

1. Rutgers to The Big 10 = Location
2. Maryland to The Big 10 = Location
3. Syracuse to The ACC = Academics / Location
4. Pittsburgh to The ACC = Academics / Location
5. WVU to The Big 12 = Availability (Brand?)
6. TCU to The Big 12 = Availability (Already leaving MWC)
7. Colorado to The PAC = Location
8. Utah to The PAC = Location
9. A&M to The SEC = Location
10. Missouri to The SEC = Location

Here is a better chart:

Missouri, TAMU, Rutgers, Nebraska, Colorado, Utah, Maryland, Pitt, Syracuse .... Expansion.

WVU, Louisville, TCU ... Backfill.

This.