(05-15-2011 02:21 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Good question. BC doesn't really have a "main rival," so to speak. This is partly due to the fact that there are few schools who play college fooball that share a similar make-up to the BC. ND is obviously one of the bigger games on our calendar. We consider them to be a big rival. However, ND probably wouldn't agree (although I can assure you that we are a bigger game on their schedule than their fans would care to admit). In the ACC, its probably Clemson. BC and Clemson fans have really meshed well together and the games are big for both teams. The schools actually share a trophy each year for the winner of our annual game. VT is also an important game...and we have had some memorable games with them.

Perhaps the biggest opportunity to develop a long-term main rival comes with Syracuse. Both teams have played each other I think over six decades. The series has been competitive. We have signed up for a long-term deal to play them and the schools are aiming to play the games as an end-of-the-regular season, Thanksgiving weekend contest. It would also be a BE vs. ACC game. It has all the makings of a potentially great series. We shall see.

Getting back to this point, and giving it more thought, I realize BC and UC have something in common on this front.

UL is, by far, the BE school we've had the most history with. After that, we've played WVU, RU, and USF maybe a dozen times, at the most.

Our longest running series is with Miami-OH, one which many UC fans don't want to continue. After Miami, then UL, I think the third longest series is Ohio, which I don't think we've played in three decades.

So, while we're a public school, and not private like BC, UC has been in a transition from a MAC-level, to a major college, for the better part of 3-4 decades (perhaps longer). We're too new to major college athletics to really have a lot in common with even schools in the BE.

This is why UC fans were collectively freaking out last year, while conference realignment was the order of the day. If the BE ever imploded, and especially UL would get taken up, we'd be in considerably deep yogurt if ever left out. No doubt, we've been one of the most significant beneficiaries of the ACC raid of the BE.

(05-22-2011 11:49 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 10:36 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 03:08 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

Quote:In the ACC, its probably Clemson. BC and Clemson fans have really meshed well together and the games are big for both teams. The schools actually share a trophy each year for the winner of our annual game.

I know that Clemson views BC as a rival. 5 of 6 games since they joined the ACC being a touchdown or less. History going back to the 1940 Cotton Bowl. Clemson views BC right there with FSU and GT in the team to beat each year in the ACC.

So basically you want us to believe that for Tigers fans, BC is rival #4 after FSU, South Carolina, and GT? That's not even a "rivalry" in the truest sense of the word, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

Although it doesn't seem logical, the BC fan, and now the Clemson fan, in this thread have both stated as much. Accordingly, the BC-Clemson rivalry must really be taking off.

People stated the same thing when UC/UL/USF joined the BE. There was limited history between the new, and old, BE schools. But, pretty quickly, UL and WVU have created a pretty intense series, with title implications the first couple years. Same thing with UC, having games with the BE title on the line vs. WVU in 2007-8, and with Pitt in 2008-9. USF has also been shown to have WVU's number on occasion.

None of these hold a candle to WVU-Pitt, obviously, but games like these have made the BE rather interesting.

Games can be interesting, but that does not a "rivalry" make. SU has had 5 interesting games against ND, but it's not a rivalry.

Your last statement says it all. SU has played both WVU and Pitt for decades, but neither is a rivalry in the truest sense of the word. And saying it on a message board will never make it so.

Cheers,
Neil

Quote:#3 So, you think "BC stabbed Uconn in the back?" Funny, if I recall, BC, Miami, and Syracuse had been talking to the ACC, not just BC. You claim that Miami was the ringleader and BC was just following in their coattails - but only BC stabbed Uconn in the back?? This is exactly my earlier point about Uconn fans' almost pathological hatred of BC. Apparently, in the minds of Uconn fans, only BC stabbed Uconn in the back, not Miami. Care to explain why Miami is not guilty of such backstabbing and, if so, why they are never lambasted by you guys??

Miami gave notice that it would consider an ACC offer--this was understood. BC was in the room with the BE football schools devising ways to kick the non-IA schools not only to the curb, but off the road entirely, while at the same time dealing with the ACC on the sly. That duplicity is what Big East schools will not soon forget.

(05-21-2011 11:53 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  I thought baseball was your favorite sport, now your telling us its baseball? I guess I got that idea from your name, Uconnbaseball.

If UConn had a (real) hockey team, I guess my name would be uconnhockey.

(05-22-2011 12:17 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 11:49 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 10:36 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 03:08 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  

Quote:In the ACC, its probably Clemson. BC and Clemson fans have really meshed well together and the games are big for both teams. The schools actually share a trophy each year for the winner of our annual game.

I know that Clemson views BC as a rival. 5 of 6 games since they joined the ACC being a touchdown or less. History going back to the 1940 Cotton Bowl. Clemson views BC right there with FSU and GT in the team to beat each year in the ACC.

So basically you want us to believe that for Tigers fans, BC is rival #4 after FSU, South Carolina, and GT? That's not even a "rivalry" in the truest sense of the word, imho.

Cheers,
Neil

Although it doesn't seem logical, the BC fan, and now the Clemson fan, in this thread have both stated as much. Accordingly, the BC-Clemson rivalry must really be taking off.

People stated the same thing when UC/UL/USF joined the BE. There was limited history between the new, and old, BE schools. But, pretty quickly, UL and WVU have created a pretty intense series, with title implications the first couple years. Same thing with UC, having games with the BE title on the line vs. WVU in 2007-8, and with Pitt in 2008-9. USF has also been shown to have WVU's number on occasion.

None of these hold a candle to WVU-Pitt, obviously, but games like these have made the BE rather interesting.

Games can be interesting, but that does not a "rivalry" make. SU has had 5 interesting games against ND, but it's not a rivalry.

Your last statement says it all. SU has played both WVU and Pitt for decades, but neither is a rivalry in the truest sense of the word. And saying it on a message board will never make it so.

Cheers,
Neil

CatDaddy is right on the money. This game has become very important for both schools. Every game but one between Clemson and BC have been nail biters, going right down to the wire. When I first mentioned Clemson, I never compared our game against them to their rivaly with U. South Carolina. I only said it is becoming a game that both teams mark on their schedules and, in doing so, is becoming more of a rivalry. Sure, not the same as the Clemson- University of South Caroline rivalry - but a rivalry just the same.

Rivalries have their beginnings with the fanbases of the two schools in question. Both Clemson and BC fans are realizing that the contests between us - going back to 1940, BTW, are becoming special. There is a tremendous amount of respect bewteen the fans of both schools. I can attest to that personally. What makes it special is exactly what some BC bashers have attacked, we are so very different culturally from Clemson, but we share similar values in many ways. Those differences create fantastic conversations at tailgates between both fan bases. Clemson fans have flocked to Chestnut Hill for games and have really taken to Boston. (In fact, the mayor of Boston has taken notice and has commented on the amount of $$'s that the large number of Clemson fans have brought into the city.) BC fans have traveled to Clemson in large numbers as well - again, something I can personally attest to this. The hospitality shown by Clemson fans has collectively blown away both the BC fanbase and the BC coaches and admins. who have raved about the interaction with Clemson.

(05-22-2011 12:39 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

Quote:#3 So, you think "BC stabbed Uconn in the back?" Funny, if I recall, BC, Miami, and Syracuse had been talking to the ACC, not just BC. You claim that Miami was the ringleader and BC was just following in their coattails - but only BC stabbed Uconn in the back?? This is exactly my earlier point about Uconn fans' almost pathological hatred of BC. Apparently, in the minds of Uconn fans, only BC stabbed Uconn in the back, not Miami. Care to explain why Miami is not guilty of such backstabbing and, if so, why they are never lambasted by you guys??

Miami gave notice that it would consider an ACC offer--this was understood. BC was in the room with the BE football schools devising ways to kick the non-IA schools not only to the curb, but off the road entirely, while at the same time dealing with the ACC on the sly. That duplicity is what Big East schools will not soon forget.

With respect, I think your comments that BC was conspiring with BE the to "kick the non-1A football teams to the curb" while negotiating with the ACC is not correct. The facts can be readily found in the BE's own minutes.

Once the first round of the ACC expansion occurred in June - with ony Miami and VT going to the ACC, BC made no secret that they wanted an all-sports conference. They were absolutely opposed to a hybrid configuration. Coming out of the summer BE meeting, the FB schools had all agreed to break away and form an all-sports conference. That was in the minutes - there was nothing done "behind the back" by either BC or the BE. By September, however, the sentiment had turned for a lot of reasons and the BE decided to keep the current configuration. BC clearly stated to at the fall BE meeting that this was unacceptable to them and they intended to go back to the ACC and see if they were again a candidate for expansion given the then recent ruling by the NCAA that 12 teams would be needed to hold a CCG.

There is not a shred of proof that BC was somehow secretly neogtiating with the ACC prior to their notifying the BE of their intent to have conversations with them in the fall. If you indeed have proof of this - and I mean proof, not baseless conjecture - I would love to see it.

(05-22-2011 10:22 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Rivalries have their beginnings with the fanbases of the two schools in question.

Agreed. Which is why I say Clemson/BC is not a rivalry.

There are two regular opponents that BC sells out - Miami and ND. That is it.

Here are the averages for BC over the past 4 seasons against ACC teams:

VT - 43,132
Wake - 41,592
UNC - 41,272
GT - 40,106
FSU - 40,047
Clemson - 39,500

And as you say, Clemson fans travel well. Definitely better than Wake, UNC, and GT fans making it even more apparent that BC fans are not as into this "rivalry" as you would like to believe.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-22-2011 11:16 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 10:22 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Rivalries have their beginnings with the fanbases of the two schools in question.

Agreed. Which is why I say Clemson/BC is not a rivalry.

There are two regular opponents that BC sells out - Miami and ND. That is it.

Here are the averages for BC over the past 4 seasons against ACC teams:

VT - 43,132
Wake - 41,592
UNC - 41,272
GT - 40,106
FSU - 40,047
Clemson - 39,500

And as you say, Clemson fans travel well. Definitely better than Wake, UNC, and GT fans making it even more apparent that BC fans are not as into this "rivalry" as you would like to believe.

Cheers,
Neil

Not sure about your numbers, Neil. We have played Clemson 3 times at home since joining the ACC. The attendance for the three games were as follows:

2006: 44,500 (100% filled stadium)
2008: 41,863 (94% filled stadium)
2010: 37,137 (83% filled stadium)

By my math, thats a three-year average of 41,167. Going into last year's game, the team was an anemic 2-5 which helps to explain the lower attendance number last season (in fact, the Clemson win was the first of the five straight wins to culminate in a 7-5 regular season record).

I have never said that the Clemson game has the same meaning to BC fans as ND (of course it does not!) or Miami. I have said that it is becoming more of a rivalry. Making a difinitive conclusion otherwise based on three home games (where one was sellout) is hardly convincing, IMO. Let's see where the comparative records are after 7 or 8 home games have been played.

Regarding your last point, with respect, I have been a BC season ticket holder for for 33 years since graduating college. I belong to two alumni associations and travel frequently to away games. I think I have a pretty good perspective on the BC fan view here; but then again, maybe not.

Cheers

(05-23-2011 12:14 AM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 11:16 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-22-2011 10:22 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  Rivalries have their beginnings with the fanbases of the two schools in question.

Agreed. Which is why I say Clemson/BC is not a rivalry.

There are two regular opponents that BC sells out - Miami and ND. That is it.

Here are the averages for BC over the past 4 seasons against ACC teams:

VT - 43,132
Wake - 41,592
UNC - 41,272
GT - 40,106
FSU - 40,047
Clemson - 39,500

And as you say, Clemson fans travel well. Definitely better than Wake, UNC, and GT fans making it even more apparent that BC fans are not as into this "rivalry" as you would like to believe.

Cheers,
Neil

Not sure about your numbers, Neil. We have played Clemson 3 times at home since joining the ACC. The attendance for the three games were as follows:

2006: 44,500 (100% filled stadium)
2008: 41,863 (94% filled stadium)
2010: 37,137 (83% filled stadium)

By my math, thats a three-year average of 41,167. Going into last year's game, the team was an anemic 2-5 which helps to explain the lower attendance number last season (in fact, the Clemson win was the first of the five straight wins to culminate in a 7-5 regular season record).

I have never said that the Clemson game has the same meaning to BC fans as ND (of course it does not!) or Miami. I have said that it is becoming more of a rivalry. Making a difinitive conclusion otherwise based on three home games (where one was sellout) is hardly convincing, IMO. Let's see where the comparative records are after 7 or 8 home games have been played.

Regarding your last point, with respect, I have been a BC season ticket holder for for 33 years since graduating college. I belong to two alumni associations and travel frequently to away games. I think I have a pretty good perspective on the BC fan view here; but then again, maybe not.

Cheers

I clearly said I looked at the last 4 seasons in my post. I chose the last 4 seasons because the first run through was the "newness" of the opponents which would skewed the numbers so I didn't even bother to look at the other two seasons to allow for as many ACC teams to cycle through as possible.

Your own numbers show that the "newness" wore off rather quickly especially factoring in your own claim that Clemson fans travel to Boston well, whereas others do not.

You want to say that no "definitive" conclusion can be drawn by the attendance numbers and yet in the same breath still want to claim this is a growing "rivalry" instead of a shrinking one, rather taking into account anecdotal data of tailgates as the basis of your thesis instead of looking at the numbers.

Again, nothing about BC/Clemson screams "rivalry" game (growing or otherwise) to me. Check back in 10 years or so and let us know if the numbers show differently.

Cheers,
Neil

Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

I'm old enough to remember to hate Penn State. BC was not the rival, more like West Virginia and Pitt, we wanted a win, but no real hatred.

Clearly, BC was above Temple and Rutgers in rivalry status.

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

It is a rivalry...probably our #1 OOC rival now since PSU plays us so infrequently.

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

At one time SU's "rival" was Colgate just as at one time BC's "rival" was Holy Cross. Neither survived the transition to big-time football, so we lost these rivalry games and went searching for others.

PSU and Miami for us and ND and Miami for them are probably more accurately described as "measuring stick" games than rivalry games, but rivalry could be applied as well.

In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

Also, BC and SU have more in common in terms of institutional similarities.

Cheers,
Neil

(05-25-2011 04:01 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

I think BC found SU easier to beat. They didn't fare as well against Pitt or WVU...

(05-25-2011 05:52 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 04:01 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

I think BC found SU easier to beat. They didn't fare as well against Pitt or WVU...

Bit, you are partially right:

BC v. Pitt: 13 - 16 - 0 .448
BC v. Syracuse: 18 - 27 - 0 .400
BC v. WVU: 11 - 20 - 1 .359

I guess this means BC was just a loser...

Looks that way, doesn't it?

(05-25-2011 04:01 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

At one time SU's "rival" was Colgate just as at one time BC's "rival" was Holy Cross. Neither survived the transition to big-time football, so we lost these rivalry games and went searching for others.

PSU and Miami for us and ND and Miami for them are probably more accurately described as "measuring stick" games than rivalry games, but rivalry could be applied as well.

In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

Also, BC and SU have more in common in terms of institutional similarities.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:
I think you 100% nailed it. I agree with everything you wrote above. It is consistent with what I said earlier. When BC was in the BE, BC fans always looked at the SU game as "higher" in terms of a rivalry for the same reason that the WVU fans look at Pitt as a "higher" rivalry.

We have more history with SU, we are relatively close geographically and, besides Miami, our schools are more similar than all of the others we played in the BE. In addition, even though SU has the clear edge in the series, it was competitive as the W-L's above indicates - especially in the latter years.

I love the fact that this game is going to be scheduled on Thanksgiving weekend. The BE vs. ACC angle makes it all the more intriquing.

(05-25-2011 09:01 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 04:01 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

At one time SU's "rival" was Colgate just as at one time BC's "rival" was Holy Cross. Neither survived the transition to big-time football, so we lost these rivalry games and went searching for others.

PSU and Miami for us and ND and Miami for them are probably more accurately described as "measuring stick" games than rivalry games, but rivalry could be applied as well.

In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

Also, BC and SU have more in common in terms of institutional similarities.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:
I think you 100% nailed it. I agree with everything you wrote above. It is consistent with what I said earlier. When BC was in the BE, BC fans always looked at the SU game as "higher" in terms of a rivalry for the same reason that the WVU fans look at Pitt as a "higher" rivalry.

We have more history with SU, we are relatively close geographically and, besides Miami, our schools are more similar than all of the others we played in the BE. In addition, even though SU has the clear edge in the series, it was competitive as the W-L's above indicates - especially in the latter years.

I love the fact that this game is going to be scheduled on Thanksgiving weekend. The BE vs. ACC angle makes it all the more intriquing.

Besides all that, we owe you guys for that whoopin we took at the Dome last year.

This is the deepest team that Marrone has had to work with. That means that the Beagles are gonna be taken to the woodshed.

(05-25-2011 09:22 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 09:01 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 04:01 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

At one time SU's "rival" was Colgate just as at one time BC's "rival" was Holy Cross. Neither survived the transition to big-time football, so we lost these rivalry games and went searching for others.

PSU and Miami for us and ND and Miami for them are probably more accurately described as "measuring stick" games than rivalry games, but rivalry could be applied as well.

In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

Also, BC and SU have more in common in terms of institutional similarities.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:
I think you 100% nailed it. I agree with everything you wrote above. It is consistent with what I said earlier. When BC was in the BE, BC fans always looked at the SU game as "higher" in terms of a rivalry for the same reason that the WVU fans look at Pitt as a "higher" rivalry.

We have more history with SU, we are relatively close geographically and, besides Miami, our schools are more similar than all of the others we played in the BE. In addition, even though SU has the clear edge in the series, it was competitive as the W-L's above indicates - especially in the latter years.

I love the fact that this game is going to be scheduled on Thanksgiving weekend. The BE vs. ACC angle makes it all the more intriquing.

Besides all that, we owe you guys for that whoopin we took at the Dome last year.

This is the deepest team that Marrone has had to work with. That means that the Beagles are gonna be taken to the woodshed.

the main rival is syracuse, they play in chestnut hill, it should be a war.
i was at those syracuse bc games they were good games.

(05-25-2011 09:44 PM)Stookey57 Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 09:22 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 09:01 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 04:01 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(05-25-2011 12:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  Several BC people that I know say that the only BE team that they care about playing is Syracuse. I know that BC and Syracuse have agreed to play. Would either of those schools consider that game a rivalry?

At one time SU's "rival" was Colgate just as at one time BC's "rival" was Holy Cross. Neither survived the transition to big-time football, so we lost these rivalry games and went searching for others.

PSU and Miami for us and ND and Miami for them are probably more accurately described as "measuring stick" games than rivalry games, but rivalry could be applied as well.

In the hierarchy of the remaining BE opponents, I think BC fans see our game on a higher "rivalry" level than their games with WVU and Pitt for the most part and vice-versa. Mainly because the WVU/Pitt rivalry is such a great and long-standing one neither of those two fanbases get as excited about playing the Orange and the Eagles as they do each other.

Also, BC and SU have more in common in terms of institutional similarities.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:
I think you 100% nailed it. I agree with everything you wrote above. It is consistent with what I said earlier. When BC was in the BE, BC fans always looked at the SU game as "higher" in terms of a rivalry for the same reason that the WVU fans look at Pitt as a "higher" rivalry.

We have more history with SU, we are relatively close geographically and, besides Miami, our schools are more similar than all of the others we played in the BE. In addition, even though SU has the clear edge in the series, it was competitive as the W-L's above indicates - especially in the latter years.

I love the fact that this game is going to be scheduled on Thanksgiving weekend. The BE vs. ACC angle makes it all the more intriquing.

Besides all that, we owe you guys for that whoopin we took at the Dome last year.

This is the deepest team that Marrone has had to work with. That means that the Beagles are gonna be taken to the woodshed.

the main rival is syracuse, they play in chestnut hill, it should be a war.
i was at those syracuse bc games they were good games.

I cant wait It feels good to be playing BC again.