(07-08-2013 11:35 PM)ilovegymnast Wrote:  MA

(07-08-2013 10:47 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:12 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  What move do you think was the most pointless? Who will end up looking like a bust?

Maryland to the Big10 wast the most pointless. Nebraska will end up looking like a bust in 10 years. Nebraska cut itself off of its key recruiting ground of Missouri and opened the door for Arkansas,Ole Miss and Kentucky to gain traction in the state.

I have never really understood the whole "recruiting ground" theory. Back in the 2000's Kent's main recruiting came from MD, PA, NJ and Florida. The MAC is in none of those states. With national coverage games I don't think there is much need to have a school in conference to have a foothold on a state. It's just up to the coach to sell his school to the recruits.

The state of Missouri is not and never has been a major recruiting ground.

(07-08-2013 10:51 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  1 - Tulane
2 - Temple
3 - Colorado
4 - SMU
5 - FIU/FAU (both mirages, I'm amazed how they get attention when even U of Miami struggles with attendance and in general.)
6 - UMass (because of football-only, MAC should have added them like C-USA added Charlotte but instead we get their worst sport and nothing else. 10,000 fans and a cruddy stadium (17,000) even after half-committed improvements)
7 - Idaho
8 - WVU ( this wont work long)
9 - Georgia Southern (I don't care how many FCS Titles they have, until they change that gimmick offense they will get crushed. App State will do good however.)

Boom! You nailed it (at least through #7).

The value of Colorado and Utah can be seen on this map:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S...rowth_rate

That map also shows why the PAC is going to keep waiting for Texas.

(07-09-2013 12:29 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:51 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  1 - Tulane
2 - Temple
3 - Colorado
4 - SMU
5 - FIU/FAU (both mirages, I'm amazed how they get attention when even U of Miami struggles with attendance and in general.)
6 - UMass (because of football-only, MAC should have added them like C-USA added Charlotte but instead we get their worst sport and nothing else. 10,000 fans and a cruddy stadium (17,000) even after half-committed improvements)
7 - Idaho
8 - WVU ( this wont work long)
9 - Georgia Southern (I don't care how many FCS Titles they have, until they change that gimmick offense they will get crushed. App State will do good however.)

I strongly disagree about Tulane. Tulane is an excellent school in the single most talent-rich area of the country, and in a major city. Their program has been weak because it was annihilated in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina, but they are in the process of building a brand new stadium. It is only a matter of time before Tulane starts winning, and when they win, New Orleans will notice.

Also, if nothing else, they are GREAT for recruiting, and I'm sure they aren't bad for expanding the conference's bowl presence. 'Nola is a great city for bowls (see Sugar Bowl) and Tulane really isn't far from Florida, or cities like Memphis and Houston.

Tulane is in a very economically depressed city. Its economic profile is really weak and getting weaker by the year. New Orleans is a long drive from Houston and Memphis. Its 10-12 hours from any major population center in Florida. For a variety of reasons (most notably the awful provincialism of the white gentry in New Orleans - which repels business and investment from elsewhere as well as the staggering crime rates) this will probably continue for the forseeable future.

Tulane went undefeated once in the 1990's. Louisiana Lafayette has put more butts in the New Orleans Superdome twice than Tulane could manage while going undefeated. Its a private school, that has weak ties to the city it resides in. And has very weak support from the citizens of New Orleans. The Superdome isn't that big. Tulane has never sold it out. Has never come close to selling it out either.

I don't see how Tulane playing in a non-AQ conference called "The American" with SMU, ECU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, and USF is going to do any better than it did when it played in a non-AQ conference called "CUSA" with teams like SMU, ECU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, and USF.

(07-09-2013 02:22 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 12:29 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:51 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  1 - Tulane
2 - Temple
3 - Colorado
4 - SMU
5 - FIU/FAU (both mirages, I'm amazed how they get attention when even U of Miami struggles with attendance and in general.)
6 - UMass (because of football-only, MAC should have added them like C-USA added Charlotte but instead we get their worst sport and nothing else. 10,000 fans and a cruddy stadium (17,000) even after half-committed improvements)
7 - Idaho
8 - WVU ( this wont work long)
9 - Georgia Southern (I don't care how many FCS Titles they have, until they change that gimmick offense they will get crushed. App State will do good however.)

I strongly disagree about Tulane. Tulane is an excellent school in the single most talent-rich area of the country, and in a major city. Their program has been weak because it was annihilated in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina, but they are in the process of building a brand new stadium. It is only a matter of time before Tulane starts winning, and when they win, New Orleans will notice.

Also, if nothing else, they are GREAT for recruiting, and I'm sure they aren't bad for expanding the conference's bowl presence. 'Nola is a great city for bowls (see Sugar Bowl) and Tulane really isn't far from Florida, or cities like Memphis and Houston.

Tulane is in a very economically depressed city. Its economic profile is really weak and getting weaker by the year. New Orleans is a long drive from Houston and Memphis. Its 10-12 hours from any major population center in Florida. For a variety of reasons (most notably the awful provincialism of the white gentry in New Orleans - which repels business and investment from elsewhere as well as the staggering crime rates) this will probably continue for the forseeable future.

Tulane went undefeated once in the 1990's. Louisiana Lafayette has put more butts in the New Orleans Superdome twice than Tulane could manage while going undefeated. Its a private school, that has weak ties to the city it resides in. And has very weak support from the citizens of New Orleans. The Superdome isn't that big. Tulane has never sold it out. Has never come close to selling it out either.

I don't see how Tulane playing in a non-AQ conference called "The American" with SMU, ECU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, and USF is going to do any better than it did when it played in a non-AQ conference called "CUSA" with teams like SMU, ECU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, and USF.

Yes and no. There average person in New Orleans is not particularly well off. However, there is a ton of money in the city (tourism, trade, and oil refining) and that isn't going to change.* Also, Nola is about 6 hours from Memphis, 5 to Houston, and 5.5 to Tallahassee. To put that in perspective, Syracuse is 7 hours by bus from the city (4.25 driving) and 5.25 driving to the AC, but that doesn't stop every ESPN commentator from complaining that SU doesn't play enough away games because we play games in NYC/north NJ.

Anyway, like Miami, USC, or pretty much any urban school (especially private ones), fans will only show up with consistent wins. If Tulane won the AAC and made a couple of BCS games in a fairly short time, then New Orleans would buzz.

*Actually, as oil prices go up, NO will likely grow in strength.

Least valuable power 5
1 - Rutgers - Never been good at either major sport, Athletic Department is strapped
2 - Maryland - Worst run Major Athletics department in the nation
3 - TCU - B12 already had a Dallas/Fort Worth presence. Only got in because they could join that year with little trouble.
4 - WVU - Isolated from their traditional rivals and recruiting bases. What's the point of having a traveling fan base if your closest conference rival is 1400 miles away.
5 - Colorado - It will take a while for them to switch recruiting Texas to California. I don't think they'll ever be elite again.
6 - Utah - It was much easier in the MWC.
7 - Notre Dame - ACC only got 5/8th of a schedule at least all other realignment candidates brought everything.

Least Valuable Gang of 5 (this won't be accurate. I can't remember all the realignment moves after the power 5)
1 - Idaho - How bad are they? Let me count the ways.....
2 - NMST - At least they had some basketball success
3 - Charlotte - better unproven than a proven failure
4 - F_U - way below UCF/USF who are way below FLA/FSU/Miami
5 - UMass - Will this even last. I could see UMass being independent soon. Why wouldn't the MAC kick them out.
6 - Marshall - Were over their heads in the previous CUSA. Should have stayed in the MAC.
7 - Tulane - This school did not deserve to move up conferences. They should have been forced to show some excellence in the new CUSA first. They'll never amount to any thing if they keep getting promoted because of market. Athletics are something to be tolerated by them. Success is irrelevant.

Boston College to the ACC.

There may have been financial positives, but in terms of making the ACC better or creating interesting match-ups, nobody around here cares.

(07-09-2013 03:47 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Least valuable power 5

5 - Colorado - It will take a while for them to switch recruiting Texas to California. I don't think they'll ever be elite again.

You might want to check CU's rosters. California has been far more important for CU recruiting than Texas since way before the Big 12 was created. CU has more alumni in CA than anywhere else. They don't have many in TX.

(07-08-2013 10:51 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  1 - Tulane
2 - Temple
3 - Colorado
4 - SMU
5 - FIU/FAU (both mirages, I'm amazed how they get attention when even U of Miami struggles with attendance and in general.)
6 - UMass (because of football-only, MAC should have added them like C-USA added Charlotte but instead we get their worst sport and nothing else. 10,000 fans and a cruddy stadium (17,000) even after half-committed improvements)
7 - Idaho
8 - WVU ( this wont work long)
9 - Georgia Southern (I don't care how many FCS Titles they have, until they change that gimmick offense they will get crushed. App State will do good however.)

U do realize that the BE at the time had to add Temple right? They were the only choice...

(07-09-2013 03:10 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 02:22 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 12:29 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:51 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  1 - Tulane
2 - Temple
3 - Colorado
4 - SMU
5 - FIU/FAU (both mirages, I'm amazed how they get attention when even U of Miami struggles with attendance and in general.)
6 - UMass (because of football-only, MAC should have added them like C-USA added Charlotte but instead we get their worst sport and nothing else. 10,000 fans and a cruddy stadium (17,000) even after half-committed improvements)
7 - Idaho
8 - WVU ( this wont work long)
9 - Georgia Southern (I don't care how many FCS Titles they have, until they change that gimmick offense they will get crushed. App State will do good however.)

I strongly disagree about Tulane. Tulane is an excellent school in the single most talent-rich area of the country, and in a major city. Their program has been weak because it was annihilated in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina, but they are in the process of building a brand new stadium. It is only a matter of time before Tulane starts winning, and when they win, New Orleans will notice.

Also, if nothing else, they are GREAT for recruiting, and I'm sure they aren't bad for expanding the conference's bowl presence. 'Nola is a great city for bowls (see Sugar Bowl) and Tulane really isn't far from Florida, or cities like Memphis and Houston.

Tulane is in a very economically depressed city. Its economic profile is really weak and getting weaker by the year. New Orleans is a long drive from Houston and Memphis. Its 10-12 hours from any major population center in Florida. For a variety of reasons (most notably the awful provincialism of the white gentry in New Orleans - which repels business and investment from elsewhere as well as the staggering crime rates) this will probably continue for the forseeable future.

Tulane went undefeated once in the 1990's. Louisiana Lafayette has put more butts in the New Orleans Superdome twice than Tulane could manage while going undefeated. Its a private school, that has weak ties to the city it resides in. And has very weak support from the citizens of New Orleans. The Superdome isn't that big. Tulane has never sold it out. Has never come close to selling it out either.

I don't see how Tulane playing in a non-AQ conference called "The American" with SMU, ECU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, and USF is going to do any better than it did when it played in a non-AQ conference called "CUSA" with teams like SMU, ECU, Houston, UCF, Tulsa, Memphis, and USF.

Yes and no. There average person in New Orleans is not particularly well off. However, there is a ton of money in the city (tourism, trade, and oil refining) and that isn't going to change.* Also, Nola is about 6 hours from Memphis, 5 to Houston, and 5.5 to Tallahassee. To put that in perspective, Syracuse is 7 hours by bus from the city (4.25 driving) and 5.25 driving to the AC, but that doesn't stop every ESPN commentator from complaining that SU doesn't play enough away games because we play games in NYC/north NJ.

Anyway, like Miami, USC, or pretty much any urban school (especially private ones), fans will only show up with consistent wins. If Tulane won the AAC and made a couple of BCS games in a fairly short time, then New Orleans would buzz.

*Actually, as oil prices go up, NO will likely grow in strength.

I have lived in Baton Rouge for thirty years, about 75 miles from downtown New Orleans.

I have to agree with Tom about Tulane, unfortunately.

LSU/Tulane used to be a decent rivalry forty to fifty years ago.

Even twenty five years ago, you had a fairly large Tulane following in New Orleans.

Now? Almost non-existent. I went to the Tulane/Syracuse game in 2011. There were less than 6,000 fans (combined for both teams) in the 65,000 seat Superdome.

The New Orleans Saints and (to a somewhat smaller degree) the LSU Tigers have displaced Tulane as a fan favorite in New Orleans.

I wish Tulane the best, but don't think that it has much of a chance to grow very much in popularity or interest in New Orleans or elsewhere in South Louisiana.

(07-08-2013 10:48 PM)TRest3 Wrote:  Rutgers, Colorado, Mizzou. Probably Pitt. And Miami has never paid off for the ACC.

LOL. Funny how a UCONN fan and a WVU fan both mention Pitt as a mistake...

I'll play too...

Worst exchange in value was the BE in 2004 who lost Miami, VT and BC and got UL, UC and UCONN. UL was the best one solid but wasn't quite as good as Miami and VT at the time. UC was a BB add at the time but made the most of their situation; however, did not bring in the TV numbers and revenue that the 3 departing members could. UCONN was already a BE member, so the only thing the conference got was a FB program that can never become great because the recruiting grounds suck and both MBB and WBB takes priority over football.

(07-09-2013 06:02 AM)lew240z Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 03:47 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Least valuable power 5

5 - Colorado - It will take a while for them to switch recruiting Texas to California. I don't think they'll ever be elite again.

You might want to check CU's rosters. California has been far more important for CU recruiting than Texas since way before the Big 12 was created. CU has more alumni in CA than anywhere else. They don't have many in TX.

OK, so they've already transitioned over and they still suck. So there is no light at the end of the tunnel and this is as good as we can ever expect them to be. Definately a least valuable addition.

1. Tulane
2. Kansas City - The WAC is far cry from what it ever was, no good reason to leave the Summit
3. West Virginia - The Big12 should of been after Louisville since the beginning of their expansion. The two should of came together.
4. Tulsa - Overall quality athletic program, however it's hard to see what upside do they bring to the American in a small state dominated by OK and OSU supporters
5. Boston College - UConn would be a fine replacement for BC or compliment to the ACC's effort to increase its profile in the North East
6. Idaho - The Sunbelt provided them a life raft

(07-09-2013 07:16 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:48 PM)TRest3 Wrote:  Rutgers, Colorado, Mizzou. Probably Pitt. And Miami has never paid off for the ACC.

LOL. Funny how a UCONN fan and a WVU fan both mention Pitt as a mistake...

I'll play too...

Worst exchange in value was the BE in 2004 who lost Miami, VT and BC and got UL, UC and UCONN. UL was the best one solid but wasn't quite as good as Miami and VT at the time. UC was a BB add at the time but made the most of their situation; however, did not bring in the TV numbers and revenue that the 3 departing members could. UCONN was already a BE member, so the only thing the conference got was a FB program that can never become great because the recruiting grounds suck and both MBB and WBB takes priority over football.

I like it when your reasonable act drops and you lash out. UConn's football program, as a start-up, was the equal to historic Pitt. And it wasn't an exchange, it was a move made necessary by the ACC raid. Enjoy your continued mediocrity, a change of scenery won't change your underwhelming athletic department.

(07-09-2013 07:30 AM)monarchman Wrote:  1. Tulane
2. Kansas City - The WAC is far cry from what it ever was, no good reason to leave the Summit
3. West Virginia - The Big12 should of been after Louisville since the beginning of their expansion. The two should of came together.
4. Tulsa - Overall quality athletic program, however it's hard to see what upside do they bring to the American in a small state dominated by OK and OSU supporters
5. Boston College - UConn would be a fine replacement for BC or compliment to the ACC's effort to increase its profile in the North East
6. Idaho - The Sunbelt provided them a life raft

Agree except for kansas city. Yes it made no sense for KC to leave the summit but the move may have saved the wac.

Colorado instantly contributed to the PAC's basketball pot, so I don't see how that makes them a bust? Yeah, the football is down, but these guys were on the PAC's radar for years.

Utah hasn't put in anything yet. If they aren't sending their hoops team to the tournament or bowling anytime soon, #12 will look like an arbitrary pick.

Least valuable additions?
1) Utah
2) San Jose State
3) Elon
4) UMKC
5) UMass-Lowell

(07-09-2013 07:16 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:48 PM)TRest3 Wrote:  Rutgers, Colorado, Mizzou. Probably Pitt. And Miami has never paid off for the ACC.

LOL. Funny how a UCONN fan and a WVU fan both mention Pitt as a mistake...

I'll play too...

Worst exchange in value was the BE in 2004 who lost Miami, VT and BC and got UL, UC and UCONN. UL was the best one solid but wasn't quite as good as Miami and VT at the time. UC was a BB add at the time but made the most of their situation; however, did not bring in the TV numbers and revenue that the 3 departing members could. UCONN was already a BE member, so the only thing the conference got was a FB program that can never become great because the recruiting grounds suck and both MBB and WBB takes priority over football.

I don't really care about your argument, but for accuracy's sake, they lost Boston College, Miami, Temple (FB) and Virginia Tech and added Cincinnati, Connecticut (FB), Louisville and South Florida over the course of 2004-2005.

(07-09-2013 08:19 AM)TRest3 Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 07:16 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 10:48 PM)TRest3 Wrote:  Rutgers, Colorado, Mizzou. Probably Pitt. And Miami has never paid off for the ACC.

LOL. Funny how a UCONN fan and a WVU fan both mention Pitt as a mistake...

I'll play too...

Worst exchange in value was the BE in 2004 who lost Miami, VT and BC and got UL, UC and UCONN. UL was the best one solid but wasn't quite as good as Miami and VT at the time. UC was a BB add at the time but made the most of their situation; however, did not bring in the TV numbers and revenue that the 3 departing members could. UCONN was already a BE member, so the only thing the conference got was a FB program that can never become great because the recruiting grounds suck and both MBB and WBB takes priority over football.

I like it when your reasonable act drops and you lash out. UConn's football program, as a start-up, was the equal to historic Pitt. And it wasn't an exchange, it was a move made necessary by the ACC raid. Enjoy your continued mediocrity, a change of scenery won't change your underwhelming athletic department.

TRest, you are wasting your time and energy. There is no fan base in the country with a louder bark on a message board relative to its bite on the field than Pitt. Beyond playing spoiler to WVU in 2007 (on its way to yet another losing season), Pitt football has been largely irrelevant since the early 80s. Like you, I see no reason why that will not continue in the ACC.

If you're a new AAC member, then your expectations are going to be a LOT lower than they are if you're a new B1G member.

Tulane, SMU, and Tulsa are going to have to carry a LOT less of a load than Rutgers will.

If Tulane picks up 6-7 wins a year and obtains 90% attendance in their small new stadium then they've done just fine. Tulsa and SMU need to do about the same (and Tulsa can probably win 8+ in the new league on a yearly basis).

On the other hand, Rutgers will need about 8 wins a year AND will need to pull the NYC market away from the ACC.

Was Tulane a baffling addition? Yes. The good news: they don't have much load to carry, and there is a snowball's chance in hell that they can get that measly amount done.

(07-08-2013 10:12 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  What move do you think was the most pointless? Who will end up looking like a bust?

The SBC and CUSA should have merged instead of what occurred with both conferences....