(03-31-2014 11:16 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:07 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:00 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  UConn fits perfectly but they aren't a school that you expand for.

That's a good point. If UConn were in the ACC right now, nobody in the ACC would be saying "damn, how did we get stuck with UConn? How can we get rid of them"? As you say, they would fit fine.

But it is also true that they don't bring enough to the table to expand for. They don't bring additional media value.

I guess that is why I started the thread to some degree, didn't this weekend show that they do have a brand that can have a real impact in the largest market in the world? I mean Rutgers got moved to the B10 on the chance that they can grow and make a real impact in NYC, Uconn is already there.

Did the ACC "need" to add Louisville?

Incredible that you graduated from Tulane. That's not why Rutgers was offered B1G membership at all. Rutgers doesn't have to "grow" a bit and the B1G would still be getting exactly what they invited them for.

The potshots regarding where someone went to school is indicative of some real immaturity issues. I really have no clue what your complaints are accomplishing other than perhaps adhering to your miserable ego.

"The strategy is about television. Mr. Delany does not expect New Yorkers to start following Rutgers football the way they follow the Giants or the Yankees, but the Big Ten alums spread throughout the New York region are likely to pay attention when Michigan and Ohio State show up"

You are more credible than the NY times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/busine....html?_r=0

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:12 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:53 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:48 AM)john01992 Wrote:  I don't think the b10 is ever inviting uconn.

the uconn campus looks nothing like your typical b10 campus. uconn's stadium is smaller than any b10 stadium. the b10 schools are much much larger and completely blow uconn away in endowment disparity.

northwestern is the only b10 school that does better in the US news than ARWU (by 11 spots). it is largely because they are a private school and the arwu has the tendency to favor public schools. uconn's us news ranking is 29 spots higher than their ARWU. just goes to show that despite being a public school landgrant, uconn academic tendencies are not in line with the b10, but they are in line with the ACC whose schools tend to do stronger in the USNRW.

we all know the acc isn't inviting them as long as cuse, bc, fsu, miami & cu are in the conference.

uconn's best bet is the b12.

Just curious, do you know whether accepting a new member must be 2/3, unanimous or majority? The B12 just doesn't feel right and I actually think UConn would rather hang around the AAC, dominate (or at least always be near the top in both sports) and wait on the B10 or ACC instead of dealing with the potential instability, travel and poor fit with the B12.

it varies by conference, but most conferences can add membership even with a few NO votes. but if you have a case like BC where there's a serious grudge between schools they can blackball them. If one school raises enough fuss they will get their way simply because the others don't want to deal with the headache.

if BC was blackballing texas from the acc, the other acc schools would out vote them because texas is well worth the headache of bringing in a school against the wishes of a member.

uconn doesn't bring enough to the table for the rest of the acc to ever override BC, and on top of that BC clearly has no shortage of allies in their anti-uconn crusade. any hope of uconn joining the ACC died when syracuse accepted the ACC invite because they will be just as persistent as BC will in blocking uconn.

With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

(03-31-2014 11:21 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:16 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:07 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:00 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  UConn fits perfectly but they aren't a school that you expand for.

That's a good point. If UConn were in the ACC right now, nobody in the ACC would be saying "damn, how did we get stuck with UConn? How can we get rid of them"? As you say, they would fit fine.

But it is also true that they don't bring enough to the table to expand for. They don't bring additional media value.

I guess that is why I started the thread to some degree, didn't this weekend show that they do have a brand that can have a real impact in the largest market in the world? I mean Rutgers got moved to the B10 on the chance that they can grow and make a real impact in NYC, Uconn is already there.

Did the ACC "need" to add Louisville?

Incredible that you graduated from Tulane. That's not why Rutgers was offered B1G membership at all. Rutgers doesn't have to "grow" a bit and the B1G would still be getting exactly what they invited them for.

The potshots regarding where someone went to school is indicative of some real immaturity issues. I really have no clue what your complaints are accomplishing other than perhaps adhering to your miserable ego.

"The strategy is about television. Mr. Delany does not expect New Yorkers to start following Rutgers football the way they follow the Giants or the Yankees, but the Big Ten alums spread throughout the New York region are likely to pay attention when Michigan and Ohio State show up"

You are more credible than the NY times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/busine....html?_r=0

Hell bo, you got all the answers /thread. What more you need to know, started out by playing clueless, now you have an answer for everything.....

(03-31-2014 11:16 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:12 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:53 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:48 AM)john01992 Wrote:  I don't think the b10 is ever inviting uconn.

the uconn campus looks nothing like your typical b10 campus. uconn's stadium is smaller than any b10 stadium. the b10 schools are much much larger and completely blow uconn away in endowment disparity.

northwestern is the only b10 school that does better in the US news than ARWU (by 11 spots). it is largely because they are a private school and the arwu has the tendency to favor public schools. uconn's us news ranking is 29 spots higher than their ARWU. just goes to show that despite being a public school landgrant, uconn academic tendencies are not in line with the b10, but they are in line with the ACC whose schools tend to do stronger in the USNRW.

we all know the acc isn't inviting them as long as cuse, bc, fsu, miami & cu are in the conference.

uconn's best bet is the b12.

Just curious, do you know whether accepting a new member must be 2/3, unanimous or majority? The B12 just doesn't feel right and I actually think UConn would rather hang around the AAC, dominate (or at least always be near the top in both sports) and wait on the B10 or ACC instead of dealing with the potential instability, travel and poor fit with the B12.

it varies by conference, but most conferences can add membership even with a few NO votes. but if you have a case like BC where there's a serious grudge between schools they can blackball them. If one school raises enough fuss they will get their way simply because the others don't want to deal with the headache.

if BC was blackballing texas from the acc, the other acc schools would out vote them because texas is well worth the headache of bringing in a school against the wishes of a member.

uconn doesn't bring enough to the table for the rest of the acc to ever override BC, and on top of that BC clearly has no shortage of allies in their anti-uconn crusade. any hope of uconn joining the ACC died when syracuse accepted the ACC invite because they will be just as persistent as BC will in blocking uconn.

Just curious. How do you know all that?

the bold part is a simple fact of life that applies everywhere.

i do a lot of reading into conference realignment and there are cases where some schools have voted NO but a school still gets an invite.

remember the big east/PSU vote was only a single vote short despite 3 schools voting no.

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value.

Ok, "wavefan"

I am done with you. You may proceed with your circle jerk.

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:12 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:53 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:48 AM)john01992 Wrote:  I don't think the b10 is ever inviting uconn.

the uconn campus looks nothing like your typical b10 campus. uconn's stadium is smaller than any b10 stadium. the b10 schools are much much larger and completely blow uconn away in endowment disparity.

northwestern is the only b10 school that does better in the US news than ARWU (by 11 spots). it is largely because they are a private school and the arwu has the tendency to favor public schools. uconn's us news ranking is 29 spots higher than their ARWU. just goes to show that despite being a public school landgrant, uconn academic tendencies are not in line with the b10, but they are in line with the ACC whose schools tend to do stronger in the USNRW.

we all know the acc isn't inviting them as long as cuse, bc, fsu, miami & cu are in the conference.

uconn's best bet is the b12.

Just curious, do you know whether accepting a new member must be 2/3, unanimous or majority? The B12 just doesn't feel right and I actually think UConn would rather hang around the AAC, dominate (or at least always be near the top in both sports) and wait on the B10 or ACC instead of dealing with the potential instability, travel and poor fit with the B12.

it varies by conference, but most conferences can add membership even with a few NO votes. but if you have a case like BC where there's a serious grudge between schools they can blackball them. If one school raises enough fuss they will get their way simply because the others don't want to deal with the headache.

if BC was blackballing texas from the acc, the other acc schools would out vote them because texas is well worth the headache of bringing in a school against the wishes of a member.

uconn doesn't bring enough to the table for the rest of the acc to ever override BC, and on top of that BC clearly has no shortage of allies in their anti-uconn crusade. any hope of uconn joining the ACC died when syracuse accepted the ACC invite because they will be just as persistent as BC will in blocking uconn.

With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved to the ACC, they (UConn) would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

(03-31-2014 11:36 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value.

Ok, "wavefan"

I am done with you. You may proceed with your circle jerk.

Thank god.

(03-31-2014 11:34 AM)Piratelife4me Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:21 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:16 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:07 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That's a good point. If UConn were in the ACC right now, nobody in the ACC would be saying "damn, how did we get stuck with UConn? How can we get rid of them"? As you say, they would fit fine.

But it is also true that they don't bring enough to the table to expand for. They don't bring additional media value.

I guess that is why I started the thread to some degree, didn't this weekend show that they do have a brand that can have a real impact in the largest market in the world? I mean Rutgers got moved to the B10 on the chance that they can grow and make a real impact in NYC, Uconn is already there.

Did the ACC "need" to add Louisville?

Incredible that you graduated from Tulane. That's not why Rutgers was offered B1G membership at all. Rutgers doesn't have to "grow" a bit and the B1G would still be getting exactly what they invited them for.

The potshots regarding where someone went to school is indicative of some real immaturity issues. I really have no clue what your complaints are accomplishing other than perhaps adhering to your miserable ego.

"The strategy is about television. Mr. Delany does not expect New Yorkers to start following Rutgers football the way they follow the Giants or the Yankees, but the Big Ten alums spread throughout the New York region are likely to pay attention when Michigan and Ohio State show up"

You are more credible than the NY times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/busine....html?_r=0

Hell bo, you got all the answers /thread. What more you need to know, started out by playing clueless, now you have an answer for everything.....

You make absolutely no sense.

Can you go promote this crap on the ACC board. It's funny the loudest voices ring from fans who are still playing ball in other leagues. If you don't think we're good enough for success, I kindly invite you to gtfo.

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:12 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:53 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Just curious, do you know whether accepting a new member must be 2/3, unanimous or majority? The B12 just doesn't feel right and I actually think UConn would rather hang around the AAC, dominate (or at least always be near the top in both sports) and wait on the B10 or ACC instead of dealing with the potential instability, travel and poor fit with the B12.

it varies by conference, but most conferences can add membership even with a few NO votes. but if you have a case like BC where there's a serious grudge between schools they can blackball them. If one school raises enough fuss they will get their way simply because the others don't want to deal with the headache.

if BC was blackballing texas from the acc, the other acc schools would out vote them because texas is well worth the headache of bringing in a school against the wishes of a member.

uconn doesn't bring enough to the table for the rest of the acc to ever override BC, and on top of that BC clearly has no shortage of allies in their anti-uconn crusade. any hope of uconn joining the ACC died when syracuse accepted the ACC invite because they will be just as persistent as BC will in blocking uconn.

With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.

if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

(03-31-2014 10:13 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:06 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:02 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 09:54 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  Why not UCF to the ACC?

Why not Tulane back to the SEC?

Why not Houston the the Pac12?

Completely useless post. None are flagships, none carry their market or have a big impact in a huge market and none have had the success of UConn or their brand. Next.....

Most definitely not a useless post...

I'm just providing you with a mirror through which you can recognize the idiocy of starting a new pointless thread, because you (for some reason) aren't able to glean that information from the countless realignment threads in this forum.

Because situations change and the final four run is important because the Bball program has clearly stabilized and they just crushed the biggest market in the world. You need to learn some manners and just not click on the thread if you have no interest. You also may need to grow up.

And you calling someone's post useless is growing up!?!

(03-31-2014 11:47 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:13 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:06 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:02 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 09:54 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  Why not UCF to the ACC?

Why not Tulane back to the SEC?

Why not Houston the the Pac12?

Completely useless post. None are flagships, none carry their market or have a big impact in a huge market and none have had the success of UConn or their brand. Next.....

Most definitely not a useless post...

I'm just providing you with a mirror through which you can recognize the idiocy of starting a new pointless thread, because you (for some reason) aren't able to glean that information from the countless realignment threads in this forum.

Because situations change and the final four run is important because the Bball program has clearly stabilized and they just crushed the biggest market in the world. You need to learn some manners and just not click on the thread if you have no interest. You also may need to grow up.

And you calling someone's post useless is growing up!?!

Because it was irrelevant and clearly over the top, so ya it was completely useless and my comments were very mature. This guy felt the need to denigrate, I was replying to his obvious over the top and unnecessary response. Six pages now, but the thread should have been cancelled in his opinion?????? So ya, useless it is....

(03-31-2014 11:45 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:12 AM)john01992 Wrote:  it varies by conference, but most conferences can add membership even with a few NO votes. but if you have a case like BC where there's a serious grudge between schools they can blackball them. If one school raises enough fuss they will get their way simply because the others don't want to deal with the headache.

if BC was blackballing texas from the acc, the other acc schools would out vote them because texas is well worth the headache of bringing in a school against the wishes of a member.

uconn doesn't bring enough to the table for the rest of the acc to ever override BC, and on top of that BC clearly has no shortage of allies in their anti-uconn crusade. any hope of uconn joining the ACC died when syracuse accepted the ACC invite because they will be just as persistent as BC will in blocking uconn.

With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.
if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

I disagree. BC isn't exactly Harvard, even though that is how they fancy themselves. Academically, BC is slightly better than UConn from a rankings perspective. However, as a research university, BC does a fraction of the research that UConn does. As a result, Boston College will never be a member of the AAU. UConn will.

Also, if ACC members were that concerned about "academic brands," then why did they take Louisville? I can tell you why. They weren't that concerned about academics as Louisville athletics makes a ton of money and they own the Louisville market in full (which has no competition from pro sports).

(03-31-2014 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:47 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:13 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:06 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:02 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Completely useless post. None are flagships, none carry their market or have a big impact in a huge market and none have had the success of UConn or their brand. Next.....

Most definitely not a useless post...

I'm just providing you with a mirror through which you can recognize the idiocy of starting a new pointless thread, because you (for some reason) aren't able to glean that information from the countless realignment threads in this forum.

Because situations change and the final four run is important because the Bball program has clearly stabilized and they just crushed the biggest market in the world. You need to learn some manners and just not click on the thread if you have no interest. You also may need to grow up.

And you calling someone's post useless is growing up!?!

Because it was irrelevant and clearly over the top, so ya it was completely useless and my comments were very mature. This guy felt the need to denigrate, I was replying to his obvious over the top and unnecessary response. Six pages now, but the thread should have been cancelled in his opinion?????? So ya, useless it is....

BigEastHomer isn't new around this parts... And the six page you bragging isn't a thread I'll be celebrating about.

This thread was not a good idea, Tulane grad.

(03-31-2014 12:10 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:45 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.
if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

I disagree. BC isn't exactly Harvard, even though that is how they fancy themselves. Academically, BC is slightly better than UConn from a rankings perspective. However, as a research university, BC does a fraction of the research that UConn does. As a result, Boston College will never be a member of the AAU. UConn will.

Also, if ACC members were that concerned about "academic brands," then why did they take Louisville? I can tell you why. They weren't that concerned about academics as Louisville athletics makes a ton of money and they own the Louisville market in full (which has no competition from pro sports).

Without a doubt BC is a strong brand, that's sort of my point as I think UConn is actually a stronger overall brand when you consider their absolutely terrific Bball (men's and women's) and what I believe to be a higher market penetration/greater TV value (when you consider their arguably larger impact in New England and penetration to NYC).

They (Uconn) clearly need to get their FBall straight and I think they will. But even still, UConn's FBall has been equal or better than BC over the past decade, no?

(03-31-2014 12:10 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:45 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.
if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

I disagree. BC isn't exactly Harvard, even though that is how they fancy themselves. Academically, BC is slightly better than UConn from a rankings perspective. However, as a research university, BC does a fraction of the research that UConn does. As a result, Boston College will never be a member of the AAU. UConn will.

Also, if ACC members were that concerned about "academic brands," then why did they take Louisville? I can tell you why. They weren't that concerned about academics as Louisville athletics makes a ton of money and they own the Louisville market in full (which has no competition from pro sports).

BC is in a group with 3 other acc schools in the 25-31 range of USNRW. the only acc school higher than #25 is duke is at #9.

i think my statement is pretty valid.

(03-31-2014 12:12 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:47 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:13 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 10:06 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  Most definitely not a useless post...

I'm just providing you with a mirror through which you can recognize the idiocy of starting a new pointless thread, because you (for some reason) aren't able to glean that information from the countless realignment threads in this forum.

Because situations change and the final four run is important because the Bball program has clearly stabilized and they just crushed the biggest market in the world. You need to learn some manners and just not click on the thread if you have no interest. You also may need to grow up.

And you calling someone's post useless is growing up!?!

Because it was irrelevant and clearly over the top, so ya it was completely useless and my comments were very mature. This guy felt the need to denigrate, I was replying to his obvious over the top and unnecessary response. Six pages now, but the thread should have been cancelled in his opinion?????? So ya, useless it is....

BigEastHomer isn't new around this parts... And the six page you bragging isn't a thread I'll be celebrating about.

This thread was not a good idea, Tulane grad.

Then don't read it, pretty simple. Oh and I received a full scholarship to Tulane, must have just tricked them hah?

(03-31-2014 12:20 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 12:10 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:45 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.
if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

I disagree. BC isn't exactly Harvard, even though that is how they fancy themselves. Academically, BC is slightly better than UConn from a rankings perspective. However, as a research university, BC does a fraction of the research that UConn does. As a result, Boston College will never be a member of the AAU. UConn will.

Also, if ACC members were that concerned about "academic brands," then why did they take Louisville? I can tell you why. They weren't that concerned about academics as Louisville athletics makes a ton of money and they own the Louisville market in full (which has no competition from pro sports).

BC is in a group with 3 other acc schools in the 25-31 range of USNRW. the only acc school higher than #25 is duke is at #9.

i think my statement is pretty valid.

But your statement was that academic brands are important to ACC members (with the insinuation that UConn was beneath the ACC). Since the ACC added Louisville instead of UConn, your point holds no water.

(03-31-2014 12:10 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:45 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:28 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:19 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  With each losing season BC's credibility has to diminish. Off the record, I'd say there are plenty of ACC schools that would prefer UConn over BC these days. These leagues are growing tired of smallerish private schools diluting the payouts and adding little value. Not to mention the ROI for some privates is diminishing and there could be some movement, even with higher end schools.

disagree. BCs academics & football history still make them more attractive to ACC schools than uconn. BC is part of the reason notre dame is willing to play ball with the acc.

BC went 7-5 (4-4) in the regular season. their football isn't a major problem either.

I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.
if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

I disagree. BC isn't exactly Harvard, even though that is how they fancy themselves. Academically, BC is slightly better than UConn from a rankings perspective. However, as a research university, BC does a fraction of the research that UConn does. As a result, Boston College will never be a member of the AAU. UConn will.

Also, if ACC members were that concerned about "academic brands," then why did they take Louisville? I can tell you why. They weren't that concerned about academics as Louisville athletics makes a ton of money and they own the Louisville market in full (which has no competition from pro sports).

because it was a move of survival not a move of luxury.

utah, colorado, mizz, aggie, pitt, cuse, rutgers, unl, & umd were all taken by conferences at a time when they weren't doing so to make up for a lost member.

wvu, tcu, & ville all were exactly those sort of moves and you can see a clear difference in tendencies by the conferences.

the "acc does not care about academics because of ville" is a troll point at best.

and your argument wasn't even relevant anyways because you were talking about conf. realignment whereas i was talking about peer groupings.

(03-31-2014 12:26 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 12:20 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 12:10 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:45 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-31-2014 11:38 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  I'd say there are AAC schools who care more about Bball. The fact is that the argument can be made and the reality is that UConn FBall probably has more actual butts in the seats than BC, despite playing an inferior schedule. If they moved tot hte ACC, they would never have the fan problem that BC has, BC has just really failed at making an impact in the Boston/New England market. UConn, I believe would be more attractive overall package for TV purposes. BC helped the ND transition, but I still don't know if ND values that relationship as much as people think.

it's not about butts in the seat.....its about who they attract. BC is one of the top academic brands in the conference. that goes a very long way in keeping membership schools from leaving and recruiting new members.
if you want more details you have to PM me cuz I won't discuss on here some inside info i have on this subject regarding BC & the ACC.

I disagree. BC isn't exactly Harvard, even though that is how they fancy themselves. Academically, BC is slightly better than UConn from a rankings perspective. However, as a research university, BC does a fraction of the research that UConn does. As a result, Boston College will never be a member of the AAU. UConn will.

Also, if ACC members were that concerned about "academic brands," then why did they take Louisville? I can tell you why. They weren't that concerned about academics as Louisville athletics makes a ton of money and they own the Louisville market in full (which has no competition from pro sports).

BC is in a group with 3 other acc schools in the 25-31 range of USNRW. the only acc school higher than #25 is duke is at #9.

i think my statement is pretty valid.

But your statement was that academic brands are important to ACC members (with the insinuation that UConn was beneath the ACC). Since the ACC added Louisville instead of UConn, your point holds no water.

read below and learn. i am so sick of this troll talking point.