+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+---- Thread: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." (/thread-828994.html)
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - DefCONNOne - 10-04-2017 09:08 AM
(10-04-2017 08:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
As a third-party observer whose school would have zero chance of being an ACC invitee should Louisville get the boot, I have to side with UConn here.
UConn doesn't duplicate markets, Syracuse is an upstate NY market, while UConn would draw from the northern part of NYC, solidifying that part of their footprint currently contested by the B1G. Quality of basketball and football don't matter, and UConn is a state flagship institution.
UConn would be a better choice, objectively, for the ACC, though I don't think they ever will get an invitation, not as long as memories of the 2003 lawsuit linger, and they will linger for a long time.
The 2003 lawsuit excuse died the moment the ACC added Pitt. Try again.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - DefCONNOne - 10-04-2017 09:11 AM
(10-04-2017 08:42 AM)ArQ Wrote:(10-04-2017 08:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
As a third-party observer whose school would have zero chance of being an ACC invitee should Louisville get the boot, I have to side with UConn here.
UConn doesn't duplicate markets, Syracuse is an upstate NY market, while UConn would draw from the northern part of NYC, solidifying that part of their footprint currently contested by the B1G. Quality of basketball and football don't matter, and UConn is a state flagship institution.
UConn would be a better choice, objectively, for the ACC, though I don't think they ever will get an invitation, not as long as memories of the 2003 lawsuit linger, and they will linger for a long time.
Navy in football and Georgetown in basketball might be a better choice. Especially Georgetown is not happy in Big East now. Football people and basketball people both get what they want.
That's not happening...ever. Try again.
You're just making stuff up now. Try again.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - bluesox - 10-04-2017 09:29 AM
I don't think Louisville is getting kicked out. My guess is Louisville will go all acc with new hires as president and athletic director with strong acc ties+ add a new clean cut hoop coach. Now if the acc did kick the cards out, wvu would make the most sense if the big 12 let them out...maybe a trade but that isn't happening. If no wvu than uconn or temple. The other option would be BYU football only, travel can work for just football. As for navy, I just don't see navy wanting to play 8 acc games along with nd, army and afa
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - Artifice - 10-04-2017 09:32 AM
(10-04-2017 06:36 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: https://pilotonline.com/sports/columnist/harry-minium/ncaa-should-hand-louisville-the-death-penalty-and-acc-should/article_589eab5e-0759-5d86-a061-88448bb60934.html
Counterpoint from Raleigh News & Observer: UNC should get the boot first
Quote:Without minimizing in any way the dumpster fire of scandals that festered at Louisville until things reached meltdown last week, not one thing that has happened at U of L has damaged the credibility of the ACC as much as North Carolina’s actions have in what is commonly known as the “UNC academic fraud scandal.”
Yet all of Louisville’s accumulated tawdriness does not undermine the foundations of the school’s academic integrity in the way that almost 1,500 North Carolina athletes being allowed/encouraged to take academically fraudulent classes for 18 years (1993-2011) does.
What happened in Chapel Hill is even more galling because UNC for decades boasted about its integrity and how “The Carolina Way” was the model for what college sports should be.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/latest-news/article176646751.html
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - msm96wolf - 10-04-2017 09:33 AM
Louisville is not going anywhere. Really, Louisville is worse that UNC 20 year academic fraud? Miami multiple issues? USC and UCLA scandals? Any of the SEC scandals? Swofford and the ACC took the money and the pretense that the ACC is above it all if fantasy from old timers. Sadly, I am one of the old timers but I get that boat sailed when the ACC expanded.
Now to play along, if Louisville were to be expelled. I think the ACC top choice would surprise some people.
1. SMU - Fits in well with Swofford footprint goal.
2. Navy - Football only (Gets the ACC tourney back to 14 and adds a program the competes well with Duke, BC, GT, Wake, Miami, Pitt and could give many of the the bigger state schools fits. Back in the DC market)
3. Cinci - Midwest footprint
4. Houston - One of my favorites, large TV market and the other Texas school
5. UCONN - I still think ACC is no longer looking for any more NE schools, just don't see UCONN as good fit. BC is already made fun of for lack of people caring about NE football that is not the Patriots. Basketball for mens and women history is still to hard to ignore. Hindsight, UCONN may have been the better choice than BC but I am not sure where the football program was at that time.
6. WVU - Great rivals with Pitt and the other old Big East schools but problems if the B12 let WVU bolt, that would be the first crack in the GOR for the B12.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - quo vadis - 10-04-2017 09:40 AM
(10-04-2017 09:08 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:(10-04-2017 08:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
As a third-party observer whose school would have zero chance of being an ACC invitee should Louisville get the boot, I have to side with UConn here.
UConn doesn't duplicate markets, Syracuse is an upstate NY market, while UConn would draw from the northern part of NYC, solidifying that part of their footprint currently contested by the B1G. Quality of basketball and football don't matter, and UConn is a state flagship institution.
UConn would be a better choice, objectively, for the ACC, though I don't think they ever will get an invitation, not as long as memories of the 2003 lawsuit linger, and they will linger for a long time.
The 2003 lawsuit excuse died the moment the ACC added Pitt. Try again.
Fairly or unfairly, UConn was always regarded as the ring-leader of the lawsuit. They were the most up front and adamant about it, UConn seemed to take the lead publicly in complaining about what the ACC did and about how it would harm them because they had invested in a new stadium. Yes, Pitt and others were part of the suit, but they were quieter about it. And public perceptions matter. If you run a big organization, legal disputes are inevitable so you don't necessarily hold a grudge when someone files against you. But it's one thing if the filer stays relatively quiet about it and it is worked out behind the scenes, another when the opponent goes public and disparages you in front of the cameras. That is what raises hackles.
And IIRC, it hurts to have a specific enemy, and BC in particular has long held a grudge because of disparaging comments directed at it by UConn officials at the time. It's hard to get admitted to a conference when there's one member who is an adamant "No", and UConn seems to have that in BC.
Bottom line is that IMO, the ACC remembers.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - GoldenWarrior11 - 10-04-2017 09:42 AM
I'm unfamiliar, but is there "beef" between ACC brass and West Virginia? WVU during the last cycle was a pretty strong candidate for a power conference. Football saw the program rise to top-10 levels under Rich Rodriguez, and top-25 levels under Bill Stewart. In Dana Holgerson's last season in the Big East, he went 10-3 and won the Orange Bowl. Basketball, since Bob Huggins took the reigns, was one of the top basketball programs in the Big East. Add in the power and influence of former AD, Oliver Luck, and it just seems odd that there wasn't a fit between the ACC/WVU.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - BearcatJerry - 10-04-2017 09:49 AM
(10-04-2017 09:04 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
Of course it's the obvious add...to you. I'm also shocked you'd pimp Cincy over UCONN. SHOCKED, I SAY!!!!!!!
Oh, I forgot that it's only the UConn fans who get to be homers... Sorry.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - quo vadis - 10-04-2017 09:53 AM
(10-04-2017 09:42 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: I'm unfamiliar, but is there "beef" between ACC brass and West Virginia?
I come from ACC territory so let me give this a wack: The ACC's problem with WVU has never been based on a specific issue, like UConn filing a lawsuit against them. It's cultural. The ACC, particularly the Carolina-Virginia core, has long had an elitist attitude. They have wanted to be viewed nationally as enlightened and progressive. And part of that is looking down their noses at schools like WVU, which they regard as an uncouth, backwards, "mountain" school. A wrong view, IMO, but i think that's the stereotype the ACC has of WVU.
ACC schools have always craved the respect of elite northern institutions, and they fear that northern schools tend to lump everything south of the Mason-Dixon line together in one undesirable bag. So they taken pains to avoid rubbing elbows with deep south schools (the SEC), and also schools they perceive as being backwoods/backwards, like WVU.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - orangefan - 10-04-2017 09:59 AM
(10-04-2017 09:42 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: I'm unfamiliar, but is there "beef" between ACC brass and West Virginia? WVU during the last cycle was a pretty strong candidate for a power conference. Football saw the program rise to top-10 levels under Rich Rodriguez, and top-25 levels under Bill Stewart. In Dana Holgerson's last season in the Big East, he went 10-3 and won the Orange Bowl. Basketball, since Bob Huggins took the reigns, was one of the top basketball programs in the Big East. Add in the power and influence of former AD, Oliver Luck, and it just seems odd that there wasn't a fit between the ACC/WVU.
The ACC has had a longstanding concern with WVU as a candidate for expansion due to academics. It is ranked #187 in National Universities by USNWR. I believe every member but Louisville (at #165) is in the top 100. Having said that, if the B12 had invited UL over WVU, there would have been a strong push to add WVU after Maryland left for football reasons.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - Wolfman - 10-04-2017 09:59 AM
(10-04-2017 08:22 AM)Hood-rich Wrote: So many things wrong with this article. UL isn't going anywhere.
How did adding Pitt and Syracuse prevent the SEC from raiding the ACC? Not sure about this.
Was the SEC going to raid the ACC for "Clemson, Virginia Tech and FSU"? No.
The SEC has never been interested in "raiding" the ACC but there have been mutual discussions between the SEC and several ACC schools for decades.
Adding 2 schools in 2011 got ACC schools an extra $2 million/year. This was prior to the SECN so it bridged the money gap slightly. They also increased the exit fees about that time.
VT has been the most vocal, at least publicly, about saying they don't want to go to the SEC. Clemson and FSU have been very PC with their statements. They say things like, "We like the ACC but are keeping an eye on realignment."
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - DefCONNOne - 10-04-2017 09:59 AM
(10-04-2017 09:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:08 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:(10-04-2017 08:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
As a third-party observer whose school would have zero chance of being an ACC invitee should Louisville get the boot, I have to side with UConn here.
UConn doesn't duplicate markets, Syracuse is an upstate NY market, while UConn would draw from the northern part of NYC, solidifying that part of their footprint currently contested by the B1G. Quality of basketball and football don't matter, and UConn is a state flagship institution.
UConn would be a better choice, objectively, for the ACC, though I don't think they ever will get an invitation, not as long as memories of the 2003 lawsuit linger, and they will linger for a long time.
The 2003 lawsuit excuse died the moment the ACC added Pitt. Try again.
Fairly or unfairly, UConn was always regarded as the ring-leader of the lawsuit. They were the most up front and adamant about it, UConn seemed to take the lead publicly in complaining about what the ACC did and about how it would harm them because they had invested in a new stadium. Yes, Pitt and others were part of the suit, but they were quieter about it. And public perceptions matter. If you run a big organization, legal disputes are inevitable so you don't necessarily hold a grudge when someone files against you. But it's one thing if the filer stays relatively quiet about it and it is worked out behind the scenes, another when the opponent goes public and disparages you in front of the cameras. That is what raises hackles.
And IIRC, it hurts to have a specific enemy, and BC in particular has long held a grudge because of disparaging comments directed at it by UConn officials at the time. It's hard to get admitted to a conference when there's one member who is an adamant "No", and UConn seems to have that in BC.
Bottom line is that IMO, the ACC remembers.
And yet they weren't the "ringleader", Pitt was. Do you care to venture a guess which conference Pitt is in? Take your time, I'll wait.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - DefCONNOne - 10-04-2017 10:00 AM
(10-04-2017 09:49 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:04 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
Of course it's the obvious add...to you. I'm also shocked you'd pimp Cincy over UCONN. SHOCKED, I SAY!!!!!!!
Oh, I forgot that it's only the UConn fans who get to be homers... Sorry.
Where in my post did I say that? Take your time finding it, I'll wait.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - DefCONNOne - 10-04-2017 10:02 AM
(10-04-2017 09:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:42 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: I'm unfamiliar, but is there "beef" between ACC brass and West Virginia?
I come from ACC territory so let me give this a wack: The ACC's problem with WVU has never been based on a specific issue, like UConn, and Pitt, filing a lawsuit against them. It's cultural. The ACC, particularly the Carolina-Virginia core, has long had an elitist attitude. They have wanted to be viewed nationally as enlightened and progressive. And part of that is looking down their noses at schools like WVU, which they regard as an uncouth, backwards, "mountain" school. A wrong view, IMO, but i think that's the stereotype the ACC has of WVU.
ACC schools have always craved the respect of elite northern institutions, and they fear that northern schools tend to lump everything south of the Mason-Dixon line together in one undesirable bag. So they taken pains to avoid rubbing elbows with deep south schools (the SEC), and also schools they perceive as being backwoods/backwards, like WVU.
You forgot a school. Don't worry I corrected it for you.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - Wolfman - 10-04-2017 10:02 AM
(10-04-2017 09:59 AM)orangefan Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:42 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: I'm unfamiliar, but is there "beef" between ACC brass and West Virginia? WVU during the last cycle was a pretty strong candidate for a power conference. Football saw the program rise to top-10 levels under Rich Rodriguez, and top-25 levels under Bill Stewart. In Dana Holgerson's last season in the Big East, he went 10-3 and won the Orange Bowl. Basketball, since Bob Huggins took the reigns, was one of the top basketball programs in the Big East. Add in the power and influence of former AD, Oliver Luck, and it just seems odd that there wasn't a fit between the ACC/WVU.
The ACC has had a longstanding concern with WVU as a candidate for expansion due to academics. It is ranked #187 in National Universities by USNWR. I believe every member but Louisville (at #165) is in the top 100. Having said that, if the B12 had invited UL over WVU, there would have been a strong push to add WVU after Maryland left for football reasons.
The "beef" goes back to the SoCon days. I'm not sure what it was all about. ACC members also had a "beef" with Virginia Tech during that period. They got over VT, they need to get over WVU.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - quo vadis - 10-04-2017 10:03 AM
(10-04-2017 09:59 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:08 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:(10-04-2017 08:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
As a third-party observer whose school would have zero chance of being an ACC invitee should Louisville get the boot, I have to side with UConn here.
UConn doesn't duplicate markets, Syracuse is an upstate NY market, while UConn would draw from the northern part of NYC, solidifying that part of their footprint currently contested by the B1G. Quality of basketball and football don't matter, and UConn is a state flagship institution.
UConn would be a better choice, objectively, for the ACC, though I don't think they ever will get an invitation, not as long as memories of the 2003 lawsuit linger, and they will linger for a long time.
The 2003 lawsuit excuse died the moment the ACC added Pitt. Try again.
Fairly or unfairly, UConn was always regarded as the ring-leader of the lawsuit. They were the most up front and adamant about it, UConn seemed to take the lead publicly in complaining about what the ACC did and about how it would harm them because they had invested in a new stadium. Yes, Pitt and others were part of the suit, but they were quieter about it. And public perceptions matter. If you run a big organization, legal disputes are inevitable so you don't necessarily hold a grudge when someone files against you. But it's one thing if the filer stays relatively quiet about it and it is worked out behind the scenes, another when the opponent goes public and disparages you in front of the cameras. That is what raises hackles.
And IIRC, it hurts to have a specific enemy, and BC in particular has long held a grudge because of disparaging comments directed at it by UConn officials at the time. It's hard to get admitted to a conference when there's one member who is an adamant "No", and UConn seems to have that in BC.
Bottom line is that IMO, the ACC remembers.
And yet they weren't the "ringleader", Pitt was. Do you care to venture a guess which conference Pitt is in? Take your time, I'll wait.
You missed the point entirely: It doesn't matter who technically filed papers or whatever, what matters is public perception, and the public perception at the time and now was that UConn was the school most publicly identified with the lawsuit. That's why people have to be reminded that Pitt and others were actually part of it, because nobody remembers that. But everyone remembers UConn, because UConn was most in front of the cameras complaining about the ACC.
Hey, when the lawsuit happened, i had zero skin in the game, USF wasn't involved in any way shape or form. But as a neutral observer, that's what I remember - the lawsuit was "UConn's lawsuit against the ACC", that's how it was perceived, and that's how it has resonated with the ACC.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - quo vadis - 10-04-2017 10:08 AM
(10-04-2017 10:02 AM)Wolfman Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:59 AM)orangefan Wrote:(10-04-2017 09:42 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: I'm unfamiliar, but is there "beef" between ACC brass and West Virginia? WVU during the last cycle was a pretty strong candidate for a power conference. Football saw the program rise to top-10 levels under Rich Rodriguez, and top-25 levels under Bill Stewart. In Dana Holgerson's last season in the Big East, he went 10-3 and won the Orange Bowl. Basketball, since Bob Huggins took the reigns, was one of the top basketball programs in the Big East. Add in the power and influence of former AD, Oliver Luck, and it just seems odd that there wasn't a fit between the ACC/WVU.
The ACC has had a longstanding concern with WVU as a candidate for expansion due to academics. It is ranked #187 in National Universities by USNWR. I believe every member but Louisville (at #165) is in the top 100. Having said that, if the B12 had invited UL over WVU, there would have been a strong push to add WVU after Maryland left for football reasons.
The "beef" goes back to the SoCon days. I'm not sure what it was all about. ACC members also had a "beef" with Virginia Tech during that period. They got over VT, they need to get over WVU.
The "beef" with VT was the same as the "beef" with WVU, it wasn't a specific thing, as I explained, it was cultural - VT was historically regarded by the Carolina schools and their fellow UVA as a backwoods, mountain school, thus not a good cultural fit with the high-minded progressive image that ACC schools had of themselves.
Unfortunately for WVU, they don't have another West Virginia school already a member of the ACC so that their state government can strong-arm the ACC in to taking them. It was only because Virginia Governor Warner ordered UVA to not vote for any expansion candidate but VT that VT got in.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - TexanMark - 10-04-2017 10:17 AM
(10-04-2017 08:18 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:(10-04-2017 07:22 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote: I will also say this... If UL somehow does lose its ACC membership, the obvious add is NOT UConn, but Cincinnati. Keeps the Midwest bridge and footprint open, does not duplicate markets (in the NE) and has a solid BB tradition and a better current BB program.
said the Bearcat fan.This board is funny sometimes.
What did he say that is incorrect? Cincy is a definitely a candidate for the ACC if they expand again.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - GoldenWarrior11 - 10-04-2017 10:17 AM
Thanks, Quo and Orange.
RE: "West Virginia or UConn would have been a better choice." - Huskies12 - 10-04-2017 10:18 AM
I would say UConn as the ring leader of the law suit is probably unfair. Everybody was an equal party in the law suit. You either sue somebody or you don't.