Thanks Dude, MFer3, Swaim, Chip, etc....

You saved the ACC in your efforts to destroy.

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...6752.story

But the grant of rights, the securing of membership, was paramount.

“We started talking about the grant of rights to some degree at our president’s meeting in September 2011 (when Pittsburgh and Syracuse invited),” Swofford said. “That’s when we increased the exit fee (to $20 million). And then the following September is when we brought in Notre Dame, and once again extended the exit fee to (approximately $52 million).

“At both of those meetings we had some discussions about the grant of rights. So there was some progression there, in terms of the discussion, and the education that needed to go along with that.

“Then when Maryland left (last November), the presidents were very much caught off guard, we all were, and they came out, our council of presidents, with a statement about the solidarity of the league, their commitment to the league. Yet there continued to be rumors out there … and I think we all got tired of that. As unfounded as they were, it certainly was not helpful and kept sort of chipping away at the perceived stability of the league.

“In talking with a number of our presidents after that statement of very strong words, I finally just told them, ‘The verbiage is terrific, and I know you mean it, and you know you mean it, but the one thing that is an action that can put it to rest is the grant of rights. And that’s when we became more serious about taking that next step.”

Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...full.story

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Thanks Dude, MFer3, Swaim, Chip, etc....

You saved the ACC in your efforts to destroy.

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...6752.story

But the grant of rights, the securing of membership, was paramount.

“We started talking about the grant of rights to some degree at our president’s meeting in September 2011 (when Pittsburgh and Syracuse invited),” Swofford said. “That’s when we increased the exit fee (to $20 million). And then the following September is when we brought in Notre Dame, and once again extended the exit fee to (approximately $52 million).

“At both of those meetings we had some discussions about the grant of rights. So there was some progression there, in terms of the discussion, and the education that needed to go along with that.

“Then when Maryland left (last November), the presidents were very much caught off guard, we all were, and they came out, our council of presidents, with a statement about the solidarity of the league, their commitment to the league. Yet there continued to be rumors out there … and I think we all got tired of that. As unfounded as they were, it certainly was not helpful and kept sort of chipping away at the perceived stability of the league.

“In talking with a number of our presidents after that statement of very strong words, I finally just told them, ‘The verbiage is terrific, and I know you mean it, and you know you mean it, but the one thing that is an action that can put it to rest is the grant of rights. And that’s when we became more serious about taking that next step.”

Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...full.story

Frank the Tank was correct in his view on the ACC/B1G...

Glad Virginia didn't consider the B1G, would hate having them in the B1G personally, would much prefer teams in the west.

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

Too bad the B1G would NEVER invite ANY of those teams.

Yeah, that would have been a Boring League! LOL!!!!

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

Catch-22 for both the SEC and B1G, the very teams that they wanted the most (UNC and UVA) were never going anywhere. The teams that might have gone (including FSU) were never considered seriously because of geographic overlap and/or university profile.

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

I was told third hand that Syracuse actually had an invite to the B1G before the ACC invite but Cuse was committed to making the Big East work back in 2010/early 2011. (I know not sure if I beleive it either but the source is usually pretty good) At that time the Big East was expecting something like $17M per FB team with the TV contract. When that contract got scuttled is when the ACC came in and offered Cuse. Syracuse has always felt the ACC was a better fit than the B1G. It has worked out for the best. Maryland obviously hurts Cuse as they were a bridge to the southern teams. I still think UConn is in play for the ACC due to geography.

(05-08-2013 08:07 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

I was told third hand that Syracuse actually had an invite to the B1G before the ACC invite but Cuse was committed to making the Big East work back in 2010/early 2011. (I know not sure if I beleive it either but the source is usually pretty good) At that time the Big East was expecting something like $17M per FB team with the TV contract. When that contract got scuttled is when the ACC came in and offered Cuse. Syracuse has always felt the ACC was a better fit than the B1G. It has worked out for the best. Maryland obviously hurts Cuse as they were a bridge to the southern teams. I still think UConn is in play for the ACC due to geography.

If they actually had a Big 10 invite in hand, whoever turned it down should be fired. And I'm not just talking about hindsight here; even at the time it was clearly the better conference to be with, both long-term and short-term.

(05-08-2013 08:12 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:07 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

I was told third hand that Syracuse actually had an invite to the B1G before the ACC invite but Cuse was committed to making the Big East work back in 2010/early 2011. (I know not sure if I beleive it either but the source is usually pretty good) At that time the Big East was expecting something like $17M per FB team with the TV contract. When that contract got scuttled is when the ACC came in and offered Cuse. Syracuse has always felt the ACC was a better fit than the B1G. It has worked out for the best. Maryland obviously hurts Cuse as they were a bridge to the southern teams. I still think UConn is in play for the ACC due to geography.

If they actually had a Big 10 invite in hand, whoever turned it down should be fired. And I'm not just talking about hindsight here; even at the time it was clearly the better conference to be with, both long-term and short-term.

Translation:

"Syracuse should have taken that opportunity, leaving an open slot in the ACC for which, surely, UC would have been considered a great fit. Whoever turned that invite down should be fired!!"

----

How's that? :)

(05-08-2013 07:34 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

Too bad the B1G would NEVER invite ANY of those teams.

Yes, the threat was more from the SEC because the B1G was wooing schools that wouldn't leave (UNC, UVA), but there at least was SOME chance the SEC would want schools like GT and FSU and Clemson that would have left.

(05-08-2013 07:52 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

Catch-22 for both the SEC and B1G, the very teams that they wanted the most (UNC and UVA) were never going anywhere. The teams that might have gone (including FSU) were never considered seriously because of geographic overlap and/or university profile.

Yes. The Maryland defection was a thunderbolt because Maryland was a founding member so the thinking was if Maryland would leave, anyone would. But, once the B1G overtures to UNC and UVA fell flat, the ACC was not really in any danger, at least for the time being.

The value of the GoR was in protecting the ACC beyond the time being, as in, what if the SEC or B1G changed its mind about inviting those other schools two years from now?

(05-08-2013 08:23 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:12 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:07 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

I was told third hand that Syracuse actually had an invite to the B1G before the ACC invite but Cuse was committed to making the Big East work back in 2010/early 2011. (I know not sure if I beleive it either but the source is usually pretty good) At that time the Big East was expecting something like $17M per FB team with the TV contract. When that contract got scuttled is when the ACC came in and offered Cuse. Syracuse has always felt the ACC was a better fit than the B1G. It has worked out for the best. Maryland obviously hurts Cuse as they were a bridge to the southern teams. I still think UConn is in play for the ACC due to geography.

If they actually had a Big 10 invite in hand, whoever turned it down should be fired. And I'm not just talking about hindsight here; even at the time it was clearly the better conference to be with, both long-term and short-term.

Translation:

"Syracuse should have taken that opportunity, leaving an open slot in the ACC for which, surely, UC would have been considered a great fit. Whoever turned that invite down should be fired!!"

Maybe his POV is that of UC, but nevertheless, he is correct: If Syracuse actually did turn down a B1G bid while still in the Big East, that was massively bone-headed decision. So bone-headed i seriously doubt it ever happened.

(05-08-2013 08:07 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-07-2013 11:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Another article stating UVA never signed a non-disclosure and never seriously considered the B1G.

This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

I was told third hand that Syracuse actually had an invite to the B1G before the ACC invite but Cuse was committed to making the Big East work back in 2010/early 2011. (I know not sure if I beleive it either but the source is usually pretty good) At that time the Big East was expecting something like $17M per FB team with the TV contract. When that contract got scuttled is when the ACC came in and offered Cuse. Syracuse has always felt the ACC was a better fit than the B1G. It has worked out for the best. Maryland obviously hurts Cuse as they were a bridge to the southern teams. I still think UConn is in play for the ACC due to geography.

I gotta say, I don't believe that your source's information is valid. Syracuse was certainly not frothing at the mouth to get into the B1G, like Missouri for instance. However, with the B1G looking at 1 or 3 additions at that time, and Syracuse generally mentioned as being among the short list of 8-10 candidates, I can't believe Syracuse would not have taken an invite if offered. Syracuse was fully prepared to leave for the ACC in 2003. I'm not sure why that attitude would have changed. My guess is that any negative comments towards the B1G were sour grapes after not being extended an offer - "we didn't want to join the B1G anyway."

I do recall it being reported that the Big East's turning down of the ESPN extension offer triggered some football members to go into full search mode. Given the timing, early 2011, it is likely that Syracuse's view towards changing conferences became more open and active in mid-2011, prior to the ACC process.

There was no chance Clemson was leaving.

1) Their administration was always solid in its allegiance to the ACC.

2) The SEC wasn't interested, as Clemson doesn't expand the footprint.

And people say message board idiots have no impact...

How would TexanMark have reacted if 'Cuse went to the Big Ten instead? Would there still be so much hate for the Big Ten or would he currently be going off on any of the other conferences (ACC/SEC/BEast)?

(05-08-2013 08:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:23 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:12 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:07 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  This doesn't surprise me. The core of the ACC is the Carolina-Virginia axis, and none of those six schools was leaving the ACC unless the conference lost so much that it was no longer tenable as a major football league.

The danger to the ACC was a pincer movement by the SEC in the south (invites to FSU, Clemson, Miami) and the B1G to the north (invites to Louisville, Pitt, BC, Syracuse). All of those schools would have left the ACC if invited.

The ACC existed at the pleasure of the SEC and B1G, not because its core would abandon it (it wouldn't) but because the core could have been left isolated by SEC and B1G raids.

I was told third hand that Syracuse actually had an invite to the B1G before the ACC invite but Cuse was committed to making the Big East work back in 2010/early 2011. (I know not sure if I beleive it either but the source is usually pretty good) At that time the Big East was expecting something like $17M per FB team with the TV contract. When that contract got scuttled is when the ACC came in and offered Cuse. Syracuse has always felt the ACC was a better fit than the B1G. It has worked out for the best. Maryland obviously hurts Cuse as they were a bridge to the southern teams. I still think UConn is in play for the ACC due to geography.

If they actually had a Big 10 invite in hand, whoever turned it down should be fired. And I'm not just talking about hindsight here; even at the time it was clearly the better conference to be with, both long-term and short-term.

Translation:

"Syracuse should have taken that opportunity, leaving an open slot in the ACC for which, surely, UC would have been considered a great fit. Whoever turned that invite down should be fired!!"

Maybe his POV is that of UC, but nevertheless, he is correct: If Syracuse actually did turn down a B1G bid while still in the Big East, that was massively bone-headed decision. So bone-headed i seriously doubt it ever happened.

That is why I put the disclaimer in there...I didn't hear it personlly and I have my doubts...but Cuse fits the ACC profile much better than the B1G. But leaving the Big East was a hard decision as Syracuse was the "heart n soul" of the league.

(05-08-2013 09:12 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  How would TexanMark have reacted if 'Cuse went to the Big Ten instead? Would there still be so much hate for the Big Ten or would he currently be going off on any of the other conferences (ACC/SEC/BEast)?

I would've been happy to go but actually prefer the ACC. I knew the Big East was never going to be a valid conference unless ND came in full time and Penn State would join. I supported the Big East but wanted a ticket off the sinking life raft.

I've always preferred the ACC over the Big 10. It fits our school and fan base better. BTW, I don't hate the B1G...just critical of the arrogance.

(05-08-2013 09:32 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 09:12 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  How would TexanMark have reacted if 'Cuse went to the Big Ten instead? Would there still be so much hate for the Big Ten or would he currently be going off on any of the other conferences (ACC/SEC/BEast)?

I would've been happy to go but actually prefer the ACC. I knew the Big East was never going to be a valid conference unless ND came in full time and Penn State would join. I supported the Big East but wanted a ticket off the sinking life raft.

I've always preferred the ACC over the Big 10. It fits our school and fan base better. BTW, I don't hate the B1G...just critical of the arrogance.

Ahh okay, I agree and I do know what you mean about the arrogance, I've grown up in the shadow of scUM and get to deal with the jackwagons that are brainwashed into thinking scUM is god and Michigan Stadium is heaven and State fans like myself are bullied quite often, but the people that are on this board aren't too bad.