(02-25-2013 06:34 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  Off topic I guess but what's the likelihood of WVU considering the ACC?

I'd say it's the other way around now. The latest report on Oliver Luck making public the horrific scheduling problems WVU's experiencing in the B12 makes it pretty clear that their relationship with the rest of the conference isn't the "almost heaven" they thought it would be.

Obviously they had to leave the Big East. So did UofL, and UofL would just as obviously been glad to take their place at the time. But all Louisville fans are now glad we got passed over back then, and deep down, I bet most WVU fans wish the tables were turned.

(02-25-2013 04:00 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 03:21 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:51 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:16 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 01:26 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  But that was not the topic, making your arguments strawmen arguments.

Regardless, are you still looking forward to playing ISU, TTech, KSU, et al? If yes, please explain.

It is the topic because posters above said that most FSU/Clemson fans were idiots for wanting the BIg 12. I am saying that this is simply not true and it definitely isn't true in my case.

As for conference preference, a profitable ACC is not number 1. The SEC is the clear preference if it is the fans choice solely. The Big 10 is actually appealing because they have academics and money to pass along to any new member. But I think FSU would only have a shot at that if they went to 18. If they were to join UNC, UVA and GT to get to 18, that would definitely be an appealing option.

I don't think anyone in this thread referred to FSU and/or Clemson fans as idiots for wanting the Big 12, other threads I cannot account for.

Thanks for your opinion on where you'd like to be.

My opinion is that in the long run (a.k.a. after this TV deal) you will see the ACC get what it really is worth. Nobody disputes the current numbers and such, everyone agrees the ACC is underpaid. Most people agree the Big 12 is currently overpaid. Which is why I think any team jumping solo or in pairs to the Big 12 is on a fools errand and very short sighted.

I also think that FSU does not want to be another team in the SEC or B1G. Being the #5/6 team in the conference when they have been the king for so long is not enticing.

No offense but you don't seem to know what you are talking about in regards to FSU. They would jump to the SEC in a second if offered. And if the Big 10 offered them and a few Southern schools, they would look at that as well. Why wouldn't they? The Big 10 offers more money while also offering the academics.

Perhaps it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. I have freely stated that fans want the SEC, not an issue. I was referring to the powers that be, and I probably should have been clearer.

Big boosters don't like teams that are not in the mix annually. The powers that be at any school listen to the big boosters and the administration does not often let the fans dicatte what is done at the school.

Sorry dude, but it is CLEARLY you who doesn't get it. Quit acting like you KNOW what those at FSU are thinking. Just because all of you ACC folks hope and pray FSU never leaves you doesn't mean FSU isn't hoping and praying TO leave you. If you aren't associated with the university in ANY capacity - and we all know you aren't, then you really have no ground to make any of your claims on.

So just quit going around and telling FSU what they believe and want isn't actually what they believe and want. Everything else you've said is simply your rationalization of your erroneous beliefs.

Dunno about FSU's BOT, or about all of the Clemson's BOT....but I know without a shadow of a doubt the thinking of two members of our BOT and both prefer pretty much anything to the current alignment of the ACC because they both know it is going to lead to an increasing divide in college athletics. The Big East used to be considered a peer conference and they got shunted aside. Guess who is next? It's not the conference with Texas and Oklahoma as members.


Neither of the BOT members I personally know supported adding Pitt or Syracuse. Both wanted WVU and Louisville because they were far better solutions for the football problem the ACC has had,has currently, and will continue to have. They both think Pitt holds the best hope because they are a public school in a solid recruiting area that is football crazy. Neither sees Syracuse as anything but an add to assuage Coach K and the Tarholes.

In the 1980's it was Clemson and the seven dwarves. In the 1990's FSU had the "A-she-she". In the 2000's it was VT almost cakewalking through the ACC. Perhaps the biggest supporters of the party line "FSU and Clemson should have done better" should look perhaps look at their own programs. What have they contributed to ACC football in the past 30 years. Other than GT no fan of an ACC program other than Clemson, FSU, GT, or VT can say "We have done our best". Well, maybe Wake. I acknowledge they have limitations that no other ACC program has to face. Still, the Deacs have done more for ACC football than any other original ACC member not named Clemson, and brings up a respectable 5th behind FSU, Clemson, GT, and VT.

People like to point fingers at FSU and Clemson for not carrying the flag, but as a fan of a school that has been a flag bearer the problem has never been who is at the forefront......the problem has always been and always will be the fact that we have nothing behind that flag bearer. The same arguments today about the ACC being soft in football have always been there. The only reason anybody notices them now is the fact that there isn't a dominant program. Hell, one of the guys I hunt with has a just about rusted out Toyota 4x4 pickup that has a "Clemson and the seven dwarves" white and garnet sticker in the back window.


Maybe, just maybe instead of sitting back and waiting on Clemson, GT, FSU, and VT to carry the flag the rest of the ACC should have stepped it up. Maybe instead of waiting on Miami, VT, and WVU the newcomers should have stepped it up. And then maybe the ACC wouldn't be considered ripe for the picking.

(02-26-2013 11:46 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 04:00 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 03:21 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:51 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:16 PM)Ragu Wrote:  It is the topic because posters above said that most FSU/Clemson fans were idiots for wanting the BIg 12. I am saying that this is simply not true and it definitely isn't true in my case.

As for conference preference, a profitable ACC is not number 1. The SEC is the clear preference if it is the fans choice solely. The Big 10 is actually appealing because they have academics and money to pass along to any new member. But I think FSU would only have a shot at that if they went to 18. If they were to join UNC, UVA and GT to get to 18, that would definitely be an appealing option.

I don't think anyone in this thread referred to FSU and/or Clemson fans as idiots for wanting the Big 12, other threads I cannot account for.

Thanks for your opinion on where you'd like to be.

My opinion is that in the long run (a.k.a. after this TV deal) you will see the ACC get what it really is worth. Nobody disputes the current numbers and such, everyone agrees the ACC is underpaid. Most people agree the Big 12 is currently overpaid. Which is why I think any team jumping solo or in pairs to the Big 12 is on a fools errand and very short sighted.

I also think that FSU does not want to be another team in the SEC or B1G. Being the #5/6 team in the conference when they have been the king for so long is not enticing.

No offense but you don't seem to know what you are talking about in regards to FSU. They would jump to the SEC in a second if offered. And if the Big 10 offered them and a few Southern schools, they would look at that as well. Why wouldn't they? The Big 10 offers more money while also offering the academics.

Perhaps it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. I have freely stated that fans want the SEC, not an issue. I was referring to the powers that be, and I probably should have been clearer.

Big boosters don't like teams that are not in the mix annually. The powers that be at any school listen to the big boosters and the administration does not often let the fans dicatte what is done at the school.

Sorry dude, but it is CLEARLY you who doesn't get it. Quit acting like you KNOW what those at FSU are thinking. Just because all of you ACC folks hope and pray FSU never leaves you doesn't mean FSU isn't hoping and praying TO leave you. If you aren't associated with the university in ANY capacity - and we all know you aren't, then you really have no ground to make any of your claims on.

So just quit going around and telling FSU what they believe and want isn't actually what they believe and want. Everything else you've said is simply your rationalization of your erroneous beliefs.

I've haven't told any fan what to think, so please keep your retorts in the reality zone. You freely post your opinions without logic, links, authoirty, credibility or any other support and complain when others post their opinions.

Try supporting your claims with documentation, links to authoirties, etc. Your opinions mean nothing to anyone just as our opinions mean nothing to you.

(02-27-2013 10:17 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-26-2013 11:46 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 04:00 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 03:21 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:51 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  I don't think anyone in this thread referred to FSU and/or Clemson fans as idiots for wanting the Big 12, other threads I cannot account for.

Thanks for your opinion on where you'd like to be.

My opinion is that in the long run (a.k.a. after this TV deal) you will see the ACC get what it really is worth. Nobody disputes the current numbers and such, everyone agrees the ACC is underpaid. Most people agree the Big 12 is currently overpaid. Which is why I think any team jumping solo or in pairs to the Big 12 is on a fools errand and very short sighted.

I also think that FSU does not want to be another team in the SEC or B1G. Being the #5/6 team in the conference when they have been the king for so long is not enticing.

No offense but you don't seem to know what you are talking about in regards to FSU. They would jump to the SEC in a second if offered. And if the Big 10 offered them and a few Southern schools, they would look at that as well. Why wouldn't they? The Big 10 offers more money while also offering the academics.

Perhaps it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. I have freely stated that fans want the SEC, not an issue. I was referring to the powers that be, and I probably should have been clearer.

Big boosters don't like teams that are not in the mix annually. The powers that be at any school listen to the big boosters and the administration does not often let the fans dicatte what is done at the school.

Sorry dude, but it is CLEARLY you who doesn't get it. Quit acting like you KNOW what those at FSU are thinking. Just because all of you ACC folks hope and pray FSU never leaves you doesn't mean FSU isn't hoping and praying TO leave you. If you aren't associated with the university in ANY capacity - and we all know you aren't, then you really have no ground to make any of your claims on.

So just quit going around and telling FSU what they believe and want isn't actually what they believe and want. Everything else you've said is simply your rationalization of your erroneous beliefs.

I've haven't told any fan what to think, so please keep your retorts in the reality zone. You freely post your opinions without logic, links, authoirty, credibility or any other support and complain when others post their opinions.

Try supporting your claims with documentation, links to authoirties, etc. Your opinions mean nothing to anyone just as our opinions mean nothing to you.

You haven't told anyone what to think yet you just told me my opinions don't mean anything to my own self. Um, you just lost this one, buddy. Just sit in the back and let the big boys discuss this like rational people.

(02-27-2013 11:23 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 10:17 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-26-2013 11:46 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 04:00 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 03:21 PM)Ragu Wrote:  No offense but you don't seem to know what you are talking about in regards to FSU. They would jump to the SEC in a second if offered. And if the Big 10 offered them and a few Southern schools, they would look at that as well. Why wouldn't they? The Big 10 offers more money while also offering the academics.

Perhaps it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. I have freely stated that fans want the SEC, not an issue. I was referring to the powers that be, and I probably should have been clearer.

Big boosters don't like teams that are not in the mix annually. The powers that be at any school listen to the big boosters and the administration does not often let the fans dicatte what is done at the school.

Sorry dude, but it is CLEARLY you who doesn't get it. Quit acting like you KNOW what those at FSU are thinking. Just because all of you ACC folks hope and pray FSU never leaves you doesn't mean FSU isn't hoping and praying TO leave you. If you aren't associated with the university in ANY capacity - and we all know you aren't, then you really have no ground to make any of your claims on.

So just quit going around and telling FSU what they believe and want isn't actually what they believe and want. Everything else you've said is simply your rationalization of your erroneous beliefs.

I've haven't told any fan what to think, so please keep your retorts in the reality zone. You freely post your opinions without logic, links, authoirty, credibility or any other support and complain when others post their opinions.

Try supporting your claims with documentation, links to authoirties, etc. Your opinions mean nothing to anyone just as our opinions mean nothing to you.

You haven't told anyone what to think yet you just told me my opinions don't mean anything to my own self. Um, you just lost this one, buddy. Just sit in the back and let the big boys discuss this like rational people.

Our opinions mean nothing to you, your opinions mean nothing to us. How does that compute to your opinion means nothing to yourself? Please explain.

(02-25-2013 07:00 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 06:54 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 08:36 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  http://www.exponent-telegram.com/sports/...f887a.html

Essentially, WVU is having issues. For those FSU and Clemson fans, do you think this may have crossed your school's administration and athletic departments minds?

I'm not saying that WVU was too stupid to figure this out themselves, but they didn't have a real option, they were faced with going to the Big 12 of staying in the Big East.

FSU and Clemson clearly had real choices. Still wanting to leave for effectively the same money, more travel, more expense and more hassle? And let's not forget the high profile games at Iowa State, TTech and OSU.

I think the BoTs and administration official at each school know a lttle more than their fans know.

The entire premise of your comment is based on a reality that likely would never exist were FSU and Clemson to join the Big 12.

Travel would be less than WVU. Another southern ACC school or two would likely be convinced to leave with us. And the money would absolutely go up in the Big 12 if FSU and Clemson (and possibly/likely others joined).

It's possible the extra $1-2M in increased travel could be made up in extra revenue generated from retained 3rd tier rights alone.

By most reports, the Big 12 was only interested in FSU and possibly one of Clemson or GATech; therefore, the premise is solid and stands.

As for more money, the TV partners have already stated they will NOT increase the Big 12 deals if they add new schools. The new schools will get the same amount that the current schools get, or if you prefer, the contract will only be increased sufficiently to cover the new additions. There will not be a re-negotiation.

FSU already has tier 3 rights. They already get a game that ESPN does not broadcast. This is the same basic 3rd tier rights the Big 12 has. Besides, you're not going to get UF, Miami, UT, OU, you will get the Wofford game, just like everyone else. Itis 3rd tier for a reason.

The opinion of anybody that believes this is clearly not worth listening to.

(02-25-2013 07:20 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 07:11 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 06:57 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:16 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 01:26 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  But that was not the topic, making your arguments strawmen arguments.

Regardless, are you still looking forward to playing ISU, TTech, KSU, et al? If yes, please explain.

It is the topic because posters above said that most FSU/Clemson fans were idiots for wanting the BIg 12. I am saying that this is simply not true and it definitely isn't true in my case.

As for conference preference, a profitable ACC is not number 1. The SEC is the clear preference if it is the fans choice solely. The Big 10 is actually appealing because they have academics and money to pass along to any new member. But I think FSU would only have a shot at that if they went to 18. If they were to join UNC, UVA and GT to get to 18, that would definitely be an appealing option.

How does the B10 pass along academics? Please give specifics.

I said they have academics and they pass along money to their members. If you can't decipher that, then it is your problem. I am not going to go back and forth with someone that either can't read or is just poking at the wording I used. They have great academics and they also have more money to pass along to their members.

"they have academics and money to pass along to any new member"

Actually, it is your problem if you can't write clearly. Based on the numbers of ignorants that think the CIC bestows some sort of academic advantage on potential members, it is best that you clarify your statements instead of getting defensive about them.

So you're saying there is ZERO benefit to being associated with the research powerhouses of the Big Ten and U of Chicago?

I detect some very anti-ACC feelings in this thread. Since when did this forum turn into a pimping forum for the damn B1G and Big 12? Geez

(02-27-2013 12:43 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Maybe instead of waiting on Miami, VT, and WVU the newcomers should have stepped it up. And then maybe the ACC wouldn't be considered ripe for the picking.

...soooooo, Syracuse and/or Pitt should have done more to save the ACC, even though 1) neither school has even played an ACC down, and 2) the ACC is still very viable? Please enlighten me, what should/could Syracuse have done in the last 30 years that would have "saved" the ACC from whatever you think is destroying it?

(03-03-2013 10:11 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 07:20 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 07:11 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 06:57 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 02:16 PM)Ragu Wrote:  It is the topic because posters above said that most FSU/Clemson fans were idiots for wanting the BIg 12. I am saying that this is simply not true and it definitely isn't true in my case.

As for conference preference, a profitable ACC is not number 1. The SEC is the clear preference if it is the fans choice solely. The Big 10 is actually appealing because they have academics and money to pass along to any new member. But I think FSU would only have a shot at that if they went to 18. If they were to join UNC, UVA and GT to get to 18, that would definitely be an appealing option.

How does the B10 pass along academics? Please give specifics.

I said they have academics and they pass along money to their members. If you can't decipher that, then it is your problem. I am not going to go back and forth with someone that either can't read or is just poking at the wording I used. They have great academics and they also have more money to pass along to their members.

"they have academics and money to pass along to any new member"

Actually, it is your problem if you can't write clearly. Based on the numbers of ignorants that think the CIC bestows some sort of academic advantage on potential members, it is best that you clarify your statements instead of getting defensive about them.

So you're saying there is ZERO benefit to being associated with the research powerhouses of the Big Ten and U of Chicago?

Going by academic rankings, the ACC is better than the B1G.

(03-03-2013 10:09 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 07:00 PM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 06:54 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(02-25-2013 08:36 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  http://www.exponent-telegram.com/sports/...f887a.html

Essentially, WVU is having issues. For those FSU and Clemson fans, do you think this may have crossed your school's administration and athletic departments minds?

I'm not saying that WVU was too stupid to figure this out themselves, but they didn't have a real option, they were faced with going to the Big 12 of staying in the Big East.

FSU and Clemson clearly had real choices. Still wanting to leave for effectively the same money, more travel, more expense and more hassle? And let's not forget the high profile games at Iowa State, TTech and OSU.

I think the BoTs and administration official at each school know a lttle more than their fans know.

The entire premise of your comment is based on a reality that likely would never exist were FSU and Clemson to join the Big 12.

Travel would be less than WVU. Another southern ACC school or two would likely be convinced to leave with us. And the money would absolutely go up in the Big 12 if FSU and Clemson (and possibly/likely others joined).

It's possible the extra $1-2M in increased travel could be made up in extra revenue generated from retained 3rd tier rights alone.

By most reports, the Big 12 was only interested in FSU and possibly one of Clemson or GATech; therefore, the premise is solid and stands.

As for more money, the TV partners have already stated they will NOT increase the Big 12 deals if they add new schools. The new schools will get the same amount that the current schools get, or if you prefer, the contract will only be increased sufficiently to cover the new additions. There will not be a re-negotiation.

FSU already has tier 3 rights. They already get a game that ESPN does not broadcast. This is the same basic 3rd tier rights the Big 12 has. Besides, you're not going to get UF, Miami, UT, OU, you will get the Wofford game, just like everyone else. Itis 3rd tier for a reason.

The opinion of anybody that believes this is clearly not worth listening to.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...expansion/

"Via Dennis Dodd of CBSSports, there’s a clause within the new deal “that will give any new expansion candidates the same money as the current members (estimated to be at least $20 million per year).”

Dodd continues that “one industry source said that number applies whether the Big 12 invites, ‘Appalachian State or Florida State.’”

I'm willing to consider any proof you may have and any sound logic you present, but drive by posting with made up stuff when there is documentation to the contrary does not help your cause.

(03-03-2013 10:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 12:43 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Maybe instead of waiting on Miami, VT, and WVU the newcomers should have stepped it up. And then maybe the ACC wouldn't be considered ripe for the picking.

...soooooo, Syracuse and/or Pitt should have done more to save the ACC, even though 1) neither school has even played an ACC down, and 2) the ACC is still very viable? Please enlighten me, what should/could Syracuse have done in the last 30 years that would have "saved" the ACC from whatever you think is destroying it?

Exactly! He rants a lot, hates Syracuse immensely. No logic, as you have pointed out. I think he also missed the BC ACC championships and teh VATech ACC championships.

(03-04-2013 10:28 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(03-03-2013 10:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 12:43 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Maybe instead of waiting on Miami, VT, and WVU the newcomers should have stepped it up. And then maybe the ACC wouldn't be considered ripe for the picking.

...soooooo, Syracuse and/or Pitt should have done more to save the ACC, even though 1) neither school has even played an ACC down, and 2) the ACC is still very viable? Please enlighten me, what should/could Syracuse have done in the last 30 years that would have "saved" the ACC from whatever you think is destroying it?

Exactly! He rants a lot, hates Syracuse immensely. No logic, as you have pointed out. I think he also missed the BC ACC championships and teh VATech ACC championships.

I think we all missed the BC championships considering they have never won the ACC.

(03-04-2013 12:33 PM)Ragu Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:28 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  

(03-03-2013 10:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(02-27-2013 12:43 AM)catdaddy_2402 Wrote:  Maybe instead of waiting on Miami, VT, and WVU the newcomers should have stepped it up. And then maybe the ACC wouldn't be considered ripe for the picking.

...soooooo, Syracuse and/or Pitt should have done more to save the ACC, even though 1) neither school has even played an ACC down, and 2) the ACC is still very viable? Please enlighten me, what should/could Syracuse have done in the last 30 years that would have "saved" the ACC from whatever you think is destroying it?

Exactly! He rants a lot, hates Syracuse immensely. No logic, as you have pointed out. I think he also missed the BC ACC championships and teh VATech ACC championships.

I think we all missed the BC championships considering they have never won the ACC.

Correct, my mistake, I meant they won the division (I need to proofread more when commenting from work), the larger point still stands, the new teams have held their own.