(03-18-2020 03:07 PM)schmolik Wrote:  My ideal trade has always been Kentucky and Florida to the ACC and Clemson and Georgia Tech to the SEC to put all of the state rivals in the same conferences. Florida would be in the better basketball conference, the better academic conference, and Florida isn't as "southern" as other SEC states/universities.

That would be terrible for the SEC, as they would be losing two state flagships for schools that are not flagships, and losing blue-chip football and basketball for just Clemson's football. And losing the entire state of Florida, the most valuable state in SEC territory along with east Texas.

Great for ACC, awful for SEC.

The SEC grabbing Clemson and Florida St would be a huge revenue blow to the ACC. Pulling those two out erodes a ton of football credibility and whether they stick with 12 or try adding UCF and USF to try and ease their loses the ACC would be forever hamstrung in the revenue game because they’d lack a credible football blue blood as a tentpole.

I'd like to see UConn to the MAC, where they are a better academic and athletic fit all-around.

UNC, Duke, and UVa together run the ACC. To block anything they don't like they can pick up a vote from WF, ND, or GT before playing politics with NC State or VT. UNC, Duke, and UVa are not going to answer to Bama, Tennessee, and Florida, nor to Michigan, Ohio State, and Wisconsin.

(03-18-2020 08:05 PM)Statefan Wrote:  UNC, Duke, and UVa together run the ACC. To block anything they don't like they can pick up a vote from WF, ND, or GT before playing politics with NC State or VT. UNC, Duke, and UVa are not going to answer to Bama, Tennessee, and Florida, nor to Michigan, Ohio State, and Wisconsin.

Yes, and that's similar to Texas and OU in the Big 12. In the Big 12, those two are the 900 and 800 pound gorillas surrounded by eight 100 pound chimpanzees who are dependent on them.

They'd still be gorillas in the SEC or B1G, but they would be two of several such gorillas and would no longer run the show. Same thing with UNC and UVA and Duke, the ACC is their feifdom, they'd lose that power totally if they left the ACC.

There are also cultural reasons for those schools to want to be in the ACC - the self anointed snobbish gentility of Tobacco Road and the upper-South east of the Appalachians. But power is a big part of it too.

Quo: do the chimps fling their poo at the gorillas?

(03-18-2020 08:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:05 PM)Statefan Wrote:  UNC, Duke, and UVa together run the ACC. To block anything they don't like they can pick up a vote from WF, ND, or GT before playing politics with NC State or VT. UNC, Duke, and UVa are not going to answer to Bama, Tennessee, and Florida, nor to Michigan, Ohio State, and Wisconsin.

Yes, and that's similar to Texas and OU in the Big 12. In the Big 12, those two are the 900 and 800 pound gorillas surrounded by eight 100 pound chimpanzees who are dependent on them.

They'd still be gorillas in the SEC or B1G, but they would be two of several such gorillas and would no longer run the show. Same thing with UNC and UVA and Duke, the ACC is their feifdom, they'd lose that power totally if they left the ACC.

There are also cultural reasons for those schools to want to be in the ACC - the self anointed snobbish gentility of Tobacco Road and the upper-South east of the Appalachians. But power is a big part of it too.

Quo, we prefer to call that a "Tidewater" thing. But no, those three would not be gorillas in the B10 because they are less than half the size of the average B10 school, and in the SEC they can't field a competitive football program without massive cheating.

Take Wake Forest. The ACC does not need 4 NC schools and don’t need to hold onto the old maid card for another 70 years.

(03-18-2020 09:38 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Take Wake Forest. The ACC does not need 4 NC schools and don’t need to hold onto the old maid card for another 70 years.

I heard that the Big East was licking their chops to get Wake Forest. The GOR is a problem though.

(03-19-2020 12:30 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 09:38 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Take Wake Forest. The ACC does not need 4 NC schools and don’t need to hold onto the old maid card for another 70 years.

I heard that the Big East was licking their chops to get Wake Forest. The GOR is a problem though.

Give Davidson a call.

(03-18-2020 12:01 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  I would think the SEC would like to have North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, Clemson, Florida St, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. That's 22. Throw in two of Texas Tech, Oklahoma St, Georgia Tech, and Virginia Tech for 24.

I think you would have to add Louisville into that bracket. Automatically, remove VT if Virginia not added.

At this moment, I see Oklahoma & Oklahoma State as the first to get invites.
Then Florida State & Clemson. With this move, the SEC checkmates the PAC 12 and Big 10 while destroying the ACC & Big 12 Football and upgrades SEC Basketball.

(03-18-2020 09:00 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:05 PM)Statefan Wrote:  UNC, Duke, and UVa together run the ACC. To block anything they don't like they can pick up a vote from WF, ND, or GT before playing politics with NC State or VT. UNC, Duke, and UVa are not going to answer to Bama, Tennessee, and Florida, nor to Michigan, Ohio State, and Wisconsin.

Yes, and that's similar to Texas and OU in the Big 12. In the Big 12, those two are the 900 and 800 pound gorillas surrounded by eight 100 pound chimpanzees who are dependent on them.

They'd still be gorillas in the SEC or B1G, but they would be two of several such gorillas and would no longer run the show. Same thing with UNC and UVA and Duke, the ACC is their feifdom, they'd lose that power totally if they left the ACC.

There are also cultural reasons for those schools to want to be in the ACC - the self anointed snobbish gentility of Tobacco Road and the upper-South east of the Appalachians. But power is a big part of it too.

Quo, we prefer to call that a "Tidewater" thing. But no, those three would not be gorillas in the B10 because they are less than half the size of the average B10 school, and in the SEC they can't field a competitive football program without massive cheating.

In all seriousness, the ideal conference for most of the ACC would consist of:
Maryland, UVA, Va. Tech, Carolina, State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina and Georgia Tech.
That in today's world is a perfect 10 team conference.
Corrigan suggested expansion and at an AD's meeting at Sedgefield CC in Greensboro the two schools suggested were tied at 4 votes each (Florida State and Syracuse). If we were to choose a 12 team league, those two would be good ads.
12 teams is enough for any conference.




http://nolefan.org/summary/fsu_acc.html

At the annual ACC meetings on May 22 in Myrtle Beach, S.C., Florida State was mentioned for the first time. The discussions led Corrigan to schedule another meeting on July 25 at Sedgefield Country Club in Greensboro, N.C., in the exact room where the conference was formed in 1953.

Frustrated by the league's lack of focus on the expansion issue, Corrigan opted for a different approach at the Sedgefield meeting.

"I said, 'Let's make believe that we've agreed to expand. Each one of you has to write down a name of school,' " Corrigan recalled.

The secret ballot of member schools turned up four votes each for Syracuse and Florida State.

By the close of the four-hour meeting, Corrigan had permission from the ACC athletic directors to approach both schools to gauge interest. His first call was to Syracuse A.D. Jake Crouthamel. Crouthamel expressed interest, but because the Orangemen were charter members of the Big East, said the ACC would have to build a strong case. Corrigan, however, was not interested in wining and dining and told Crouthamel: "Just forget I called."
His call to Goin, however, yielded a different response.
"Bob said, 'Oh my goodness, I was hoping there was some interest [from] the ACC,'" Corrigan said.

(03-19-2020 08:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  In all seriousness, the ideal conference for most of the ACC would consist of:
Maryland, UVA, Va. Tech, Carolina, State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina and Georgia Tech.

Agreed. Almost all of the expansion since 1990 has been "mercenary", basically forced by the need for this football team or that market, and not cultural. It's been driven by the need to ensure full-AQ parity in football with the other power conferences. But if the ACC had its druthers, meaning was guaranteed Power status in football formally and in terms of media money, it would prefer to be the pre-1990 conference, with a welcome-back to founding member South Carolina.

The one exception, surprisingly to some, would be VT. The ACC was kind of strong-armed into adding VT, but VT has proven to be a very nice cultural fit, and of course it is in the middle of the core geography as well.

(03-18-2020 09:00 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  There are also cultural reasons for those schools to want to be in the ACC - the self anointed snobbish gentility of Tobacco Road and the upper-South east of the Appalachians. But power is a big part of it too.

Quo, we prefer to call that a "Tidewater" thing.

Oh i get that. "Tidewater" is a cleaner brand name than ones that remind the northern schools the core ACC strives to identify with that ACC wealth was founded on slavery and tobacco.

Completely understandable.

(03-18-2020 03:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 03:07 PM)schmolik Wrote:  My ideal trade has always been Kentucky and Florida to the ACC and Clemson and Georgia Tech to the SEC to put all of the state rivals in the same conferences. Florida would be in the better basketball conference, the better academic conference, and Florida isn't as "southern" as other SEC states/universities.

That would be terrible for the SEC, as they would be losing two state flagships for schools that are not flagships, and losing blue-chip football and basketball for just Clemson's football. And losing the entire state of Florida, the most valuable state in SEC territory along with east Texas.

Great for ACC, awful for SEC.

I think in another 3-5 years that would look favorable in the other direction.

(03-19-2020 10:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-19-2020 08:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  In all seriousness, the ideal conference for most of the ACC would consist of:
Maryland, UVA, Va. Tech, Carolina, State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina and Georgia Tech.

Agreed. Almost all of the expansion since 1990 has been "mercenary", basically forced by the need for this football team or that market, and not cultural. It's been driven by the need to ensure full-AQ parity in football with the other power conferences. But if the ACC had its druthers, meaning was guaranteed Power status in football formally and in terms of media money, it would prefer to be the pre-1990 conference, with a welcome-back to founding member South Carolina.

The one exception, surprisingly to some, would be VT. The ACC was kind of strong-armed into adding VT, but VT has proven to be a very nice cultural fit, and of course it is in the middle of the core geography as well.

If the ACC had been more forward thinking about football in the late 1980's, the entire trajectory of eastern football may have been radically different. The main reason why both the ACC and Big East achieved AQ status shortly after that time was their aquisition of Florida State and Miami. Without those schools, there wouldn't have been a lot of incentive for the other four power conferences to guarantee either of them a seat at the New Year's table when they formed the Bowl Alliance.

Of course, as we have seen, they wouldn't have remained independent much longer in any case, and at least one of them might have wound up in the SEC. But if the ACC had added both of them before that could happen, I doubt the Big East would have had enough stature to become AQ unless they persuaded Notre Dame to come on board. They would have been a tweener conference much like today's AAC is.

(03-19-2020 11:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Of course, as we have seen, they wouldn't have remained independent much longer in any case, and at least one of them might have wound up in the SEC. But if the ACC had added both of them before that could happen, I doubt the Big East would have had enough stature to become AQ unless they persuaded Notre Dame to come on board. They would have been a tweener conference much like today's AAC is.

Yes, IIRC, in 1990, Miami joined the Big East within weeks of FSU joining the ACC.

The Big East invited Miami because the Penn State - to - B1G announcement set off a flurry of realignment and Syracuse, Pitt, and BC were antsy, didn't want to be stranded as independents in that environment.

I am not sure why the ACC didn't invite Miami concurrently with FSU. I agree, had they done so, then Pitt, Cuse, and BC probably leave the Big East, maybe for the ACC as well, and the Big East collapses at that point.

Or the Big East could have offered FSU and Miami too. Both conferences were not bold enough, and remained so, until the ACC raided the Big East 13 years later. But yes, that whole ACC/Big East history of the 90s and 2000s could have been different.

(03-19-2020 10:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 09:00 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(03-18-2020 08:34 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  There are also cultural reasons for those schools to want to be in the ACC - the self anointed snobbish gentility of Tobacco Road and the upper-South east of the Appalachians. But power is a big part of it too.

Quo, we prefer to call that a "Tidewater" thing.

Oh i get that. "Tidewater" is a cleaner brand name than ones that remind the northern schools the core ACC strives to identify with that ACC wealth was founded on slavery and tobacco.

Completely understandable.

Quo, don't conflate slavery and tobacco with the need to keep the "white trash" under control. There are separate issues it is more accurate to say the ACC is built on "classism".

(03-19-2020 12:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-19-2020 11:49 AM)ken d Wrote:  Of course, as we have seen, they wouldn't have remained independent much longer in any case, and at least one of them might have wound up in the SEC. But if the ACC had added both of them before that could happen, I doubt the Big East would have had enough stature to become AQ unless they persuaded Notre Dame to come on board. They would have been a tweener conference much like today's AAC is.

Yes, IIRC, in 1990, Miami joined the Big East within weeks of FSU joining the ACC.

The Big East invited Miami because the Penn State - to - B1G announcement set off a flurry of realignment and Syracuse, Pitt, and BC were antsy, didn't want to be stranded as independents in that environment.

I am not sure why the ACC didn't invite Miami concurrently with FSU. I agree, had they done so, then Pitt, Cuse, and BC probably leave the Big East, maybe for the ACC as well, and the Big East collapses at that point.

Or the Big East could have offered FSU and Miami too. Both conferences were not bold enough, and remained so, until the ACC raided the Big East 13 years later. But yes, that whole ACC/Big East history of the 90s and 2000s could have been different.

In the late 80's and early 90's the reputation of Miami's football players was that of a bunch of thugs. Selling FSU was difficult enough since Carolina and Duke did not want to expand meaning MD had to be cultivated.

MD did not want to listen to Florida in the late 60's early 70's. MD did not want to listen to Penn State in the 70's and early 80's. MD kicked VT and WVa out of the conference in 1954 by leaving the SoCon and forming the ACC without those two. MD along with Duke, ran the ACC for the first 15 or so years.

There has always been a strong faction in the ACC for legitimate scholar athletics as opposed to outright thugery and open cash payments - hypocritical as that may be.

(03-19-2020 10:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-19-2020 08:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  In all seriousness, the ideal conference for most of the ACC would consist of:
Maryland, UVA, Va. Tech, Carolina, State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina and Georgia Tech.

Agreed. Almost all of the expansion since 1990 has been "mercenary", basically forced by the need for this football team or that market, and not cultural. It's been driven by the need to ensure full-AQ parity in football with the other power conferences. But if the ACC had its druthers, meaning was guaranteed Power status in football formally and in terms of media money, it would prefer to be the pre-1990 conference, with a welcome-back to founding member South Carolina.

The one exception, surprisingly to some, would be VT. The ACC was kind of strong-armed into adding VT, but VT has proven to be a very nice cultural fit, and of course it is in the middle of the core geography as well.

Its the same in the Big Ten.

New Jersey's state university doesn't have much cultural alignment with Iowa, Illinois and Nebraska, either.