(05-31-2023 07:13 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 07:30 AM)Jhawkinva Wrote:  I'm not sure Kansas would've moved to the ACC at that time, unless they had heard a clear and unequivocal 'no' from the Big Ten.

To me, some of the ACC's issues go back to their early 2010s expansion.

The ACC won the war with the Big East when they took Miami, VT, and Boston College.

Pitt and Syracuse are fine schools, but it never made sense to add schools that were less attractive than the average ACC school.

Had they not made that move, they could be looking at a better future.

BC was a terrible add. Maybe in hindsight, but why did they have to add such an extreme outlier? Why would southern schools want to go there every year? Was it because of BBall as well? Just an awful addition.

Obviously, ND wasn’t coming. They wanted the CCG. I think Pitt/WVU were the most logical adds, but it should have started with Pitt (because WVU academics were unacceptable even though they took VaTech who wasn’t exactly on par with UVa academically), which would have destabilized the BE even more than BC.

Both programs were good, but Pitt would have started pushing schools like Rutgers, perhaps even UConn, closer to the ACC rather than the B1G, as they got more competitive in football.

Miami wanted BC, and at the time Miami was a very commanding presence believe it or not.

The ACC did not want #12. I’m sure even the dinosaur Big Ten voted against a conference with 11 teams sponsoring a CCG despite the fact it would benefit them as well.

West Virginia would have been a decent geographical #12 considering SC wasn’t coming back—not that we ever asked—but there wasn’t any interest. William & Mary would have been a natural #12 if they were allowed to expand their football stadium in the late 70’s.