REALIGNMENT MOCK DRAFT .:. ON THE CLOCK: Big South (R2, #12), AAC (R1, #8) [pending trade approval], Big12 (R1, #11)

Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
Author Message
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,530
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 621
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Charlotte, NC
Post: #21
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 11:47 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Great topic for discussion. Thanks for thinking of it.

I get no credit for thinking of it - it was MSTiger02's idea.
05-21-2019 12:21 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 30,164
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 728
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #22
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 11:15 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 10:36 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 08:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 06:55 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Sometimes it works out best when things DON'T go according to plan (e.g. Louisville replacing Maryland also).

Thoughts?

Louisville replacing Maryland was a huge downgrade for the ACC. Massive. Every conference in the country would rather have Maryland than Louisville.

If you polled the 14 ACC Presidents, Maryland would win that vote 14-0 IMO. Presidents care more about location and academics than athletics.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

Throughout their history Maryland was an obstructionist element that cost the ACC multiple chances to better itself as a conference in the decades leading up to the last realignment.

Like .... ?

Maryland is just better than Louisville in every way. It's not close. State flagship located in richest area of the country, ten miles from the White House. Excellent academics, long athletic tradition. Maryland was an ACC founder and a crown jewel of the conference.

That's why Maryland was head-hunted from the ACC to an even better conference, the B1G, while Louisville was still stuck in the sinking Big East even after five other schools had been taken by other conferences.

By the actions of the other Power conferences, including the ACC, Louisville was *sixth* ranked among the Big East teams. If Maryland hadn't left for greener pastures, Louisville would be barking against UCF and Houston for AAC titles right now.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2019 12:29 PM by quo vadis.)
05-21-2019 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 5,098
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 156
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #23
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
No doubt that the ACC school presidents would vote 14-0 in favor of UMd over Louisville.

That being said, Louisville has outperformed Maryland in the two major sports the last decade or so. Well, the basketball championship has an asterisk, but the Cards have a Heisman winner.
05-21-2019 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,143
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 362
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #24
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
I am a Louisville fan, yet in general I’d agree that Maryland is much preferred over Louisville. I say “in general” because time and place matter. For similar reasons as why there Amy have been others teams the big 12 wishes hey had in place of TCU, at the time of their invitation they were exactly what the big 12 needed. For different reasons Louisville - at the time of the invnite - was a great fit for wahtbthe acc needed at that specific time.

But in general, yes four out of five dentists recommend Maryland.
05-21-2019 01:01 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable
*

Posts: 22,448
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 2096
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #25
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 12:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 11:15 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 10:36 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 08:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 06:55 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Sometimes it works out best when things DON'T go according to plan (e.g. Louisville replacing Maryland also).

Thoughts?

Louisville replacing Maryland was a huge downgrade for the ACC. Massive. Every conference in the country would rather have Maryland than Louisville.

If you polled the 14 ACC Presidents, Maryland would win that vote 14-0 IMO. Presidents care more about location and academics than athletics.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

Throughout their history Maryland was an obstructionist element that cost the ACC multiple chances to better itself as a conference in the decades leading up to the last realignment.

Like .... ?

Fought tooth and nail to prevent FSU being issued an invitation, only agreeing when it was a done deal.

There is strong belief that Maryland leaked confidential ACC information to the Big Slow prior to officially being issued an invitation.

They were opposed to the ACC football championship game being played in Charlotte.

And a myriad of other minor instances. Maryland was not a good ACC partner the last few decades of membership, and I don't see how they could have improved that relationship being as flat ass broke as they are.
05-21-2019 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 663
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 36
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #26
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 11:15 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 10:36 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 08:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 06:55 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Sometimes it works out best when things DON'T go according to plan (e.g. Louisville replacing Maryland also).

Thoughts?

Louisville replacing Maryland was a huge downgrade for the ACC. Massive. Every conference in the country would rather have Maryland than Louisville.

If you polled the 14 ACC Presidents, Maryland would win that vote 14-0 IMO. Presidents care more about location and academics than athletics.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

Throughout their history Maryland was an obstructionist element that cost the ACC multiple chances to better itself as a conference in the decades leading up to the last realignment. There was some bad blood there. enough so that there were some who weren't all that upset to see Maryland go.

People forget that Maryland formed the Southern Conference. In 1921 it was a DC to Atlanta to Birmingham conference. Maryland and GT had all the socio-economic advantages that came from being located in or near a real city. When the VT president made MD and Clemson mad over the bowl ban, MD took it's ball and went home. The ACC was a DC to Charlotte conference - again with MD having all the relative socio-economic advantages.

In the ensuing years, MD made it known they would not support Florida (the late 1960's). MD made it known they would never support West Va. They did not support replacing SC with PSU in the 1970's. MD supported the 800 SAT rule because they have better high school education in MD, northern Va, and Pa. That rule really hurt South Carolina and Clemson who operated in a state with poor high school education.

MD liked playing PSU but not directly competing in conference. MD again ran it's mouth against adding FSU. In short MD was a prima -donna long before Carolina took up that role.

When the leadership at MD was changed out to all Big 10 folks, Kirwan planned to take MD out of the ACC and to the B10 to his newly beloved Ohio State.

When Maryland ran the ACC they were happy. From the mid-1970's onward, they did not and became unhappy.

Kap and I rarely agree. But if anything he is being generous to MD over their last 30 years. The MD administration started to go to hell after the graduate programs were taken away in 1970. Len Bias' death accelerated the decline. Kirwan took advantage of the mess. The reason they are broke is that donors were lied to about their donations and the funds redirected all around the University. If you give 100K to IPTAY, you didn't give the money to fund the political science department. It's amazing no one has gone to jail.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2019 03:03 PM by Statefan.)
05-21-2019 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 663
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 36
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #27
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.
05-21-2019 03:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,757
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 121
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #28
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 10:24 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Virginia Tech won 4 of the first 7 ACC football titles after joining the ACC, and won at least 10 games in each of those 7 seasons.

So if the ACC had expanded with Miami/Cuse/BC and without VT, then VT would have been crushing the Big East during that time, and VT would have been very high on the list of any conference looking for new members.

There's another "what if" scenario:

Part of the story of that ACC expansion is that, after the ACC presidents' first vote to invite Miami/Cuse/BC failed, there was a vote to invite Miami only that failed by one vote, followed by the vote to invite Miami and VT that passed with UVa's yes vote.

What if the Miami-only vote had passed? The ACC would have had an even 10 members. Would they have ever gone back for more Big East football teams?

No they wouldn't have. They would have had to deal with the Rich Rod WVU teams, those Petrino Louisville teams and strong Cincy, Rutgers and Pitt teams. I don't think VT won any of those BCS bowls while the Big East champs won regularly.
05-21-2019 03:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,757
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 121
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #29
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 03:14 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.

No they wouldn't have and they aren't anywhere close to the DC market. They are on the complete other side of the state.
05-21-2019 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,388
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #30
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
Have you ever been to Maryland?

It was traditionally regarded locally as a commuter school.
05-21-2019 04:27 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kit-Cat Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,388
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #31
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
I think the moves worked out fine for the ACC.

The membership is diversified instead of regional now.
05-21-2019 04:29 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ColKurtz Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 177
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 31
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Raleigh
Post: #32
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 04:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 03:14 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.

No they wouldn't have and they aren't anywhere close to the DC market. They are on the complete other side of the state.

Which is irrelevant. DC proper is sort of a maryland/virginia hybrid with most of its population commuting from one of those states. The largest contingent of VT alumni is in the DC/NOVA area. Insomuch as DC itself follows college football, VT would probably draw the most coverage.
05-21-2019 04:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
zoocrew Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 477
Joined: Mar 2019
Reputation: 17
I Root For: PITT, NAVY, MBB
Location:
Post: #33
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 04:36 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 04:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 03:14 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.

No they wouldn't have and they aren't anywhere close to the DC market. They are on the complete other side of the state.

Which is irrelevant. DC proper is sort of a maryland/virginia hybrid with most of its population commuting from one of those states. The largest contingent of VT alumni is in the DC/NOVA area. Insomuch as DC itself follows college football, VT would probably draw the most coverage.

Correct.
05-21-2019 05:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
zoocrew Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 477
Joined: Mar 2019
Reputation: 17
I Root For: PITT, NAVY, MBB
Location:
Post: #34
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
I mean as a Pitt fan give me Louisville over Maryland but if I’m building a conference without my allegiances give me Maryland.
05-21-2019 05:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 663
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 36
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #35
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 04:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 03:14 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.

No they wouldn't have and they aren't anywhere close to the DC market. They are on the complete other side of the state.

https://www.thevab.com/wp-content/upload...MA-Map.pdf

Take some time to look at the above DMA map. This was the B10's Bible back in the day.

VT delivers the State of VA, plus the DC/Hagerstown DMA, the NC Piedmont Triad, The TN/Va Tri-Cities, and Bluefield WVa. Delivers means the first, second, or third property in the particular market niche. UNC and NC State will be first in the Triad, VT will run third. UT will run first in the Tri-Cities, but VT second. WVa will run in Bluefield, but VT will run second. MD might run first in DC/Hagerstown, but VT will run second. That's roughly 12-13 million eyeballs - just what the B10 was seeking, and an addition that would please PSU.

Remember the B10 profile is a research intensive, graduate oriented university. VT is much more like that than UVa. VT is a smaller version of a B10 school. UVa is a larger version of an Ivy League school.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2019 05:45 PM by Statefan.)
05-21-2019 05:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 7,733
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 680
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #36
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 10:08 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 08:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 06:55 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Sometimes it works out best when things DON'T go according to plan (e.g. Louisville replacing Maryland also).

Thoughts?

Louisville replacing Maryland was a huge downgrade for the ACC. Massive. Every conference in the country would rather have Maryland than Louisville.

Wow.

[Image: 1PM2rEF.gif]

Consider the source. His MO since stumbling onto the board has been to post some outlandish take, sit back and wait for responses. Once you realize that, you ignore him.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2019 05:50 PM by CardinalJim.)
05-21-2019 05:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,757
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 121
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #37
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 05:42 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 04:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 03:14 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.

No they wouldn't have and they aren't anywhere close to the DC market. They are on the complete other side of the state.

https://www.thevab.com/wp-content/upload...MA-Map.pdf

Take some time to look at the above DMA map. This was the B10's Bible back in the day.

VT delivers the State of VA, plus the DC/Hagerstown DMA, the NC Piedmont Triad, The TN/Va Tri-Cities, and Bluefield WVa. Delivers means the first, second, or third property in the particular market niche. UNC and NC State will be first in the Triad, VT will run third. UT will run first in the Tri-Cities, but VT second. WVa will run in Bluefield, but VT will run second. MD might run first in DC/Hagerstown, but VT will run second. That's roughly 12-13 million eyeballs - just what the B10 was seeking, and an addition that would please PSU.

Remember the B10 profile is a research intensive, graduate oriented university. VT is much more like that than UVa. VT is a smaller version of a B10 school. UVa is a larger version of an Ivy League school.

No, they don't. No matter how you try and spin it VT does not deliver the DC market. You don't get the carriage fees for DC when you are closer to Tennessee than DC. Thats not how it works at all.

The B1G wasn't ever looking at VT. Never ever were they one of the conferences options. Thats why after maryland they wanted UVA, UNC, Duke and GT. No mention anywhere ever of VT to the B1G. It's only grounded in the reality that David resides in.
05-21-2019 06:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,649
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 77
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #38
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 05:48 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 10:08 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 08:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 06:55 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Sometimes it works out best when things DON'T go according to plan (e.g. Louisville replacing Maryland also).

Thoughts?

Louisville replacing Maryland was a huge downgrade for the ACC. Massive. Every conference in the country would rather have Maryland than Louisville.

Wow.

[Image: 1PM2rEF.gif]

Consider the source. His MO since stumbling onto the board has been to post some outlandish take, sit back and wait for responses. Once you realize that, you ignore him.

Quo is among the most reasonable posters here, even if I don't always agree with him. He can certainly put AAC fanboys in their place.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2019 07:55 PM by Nerdlinger.)
05-21-2019 07:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,171
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #39
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
The conservative rewrite of this story goes something like this:

2004-2005: the ACC adds BC, Syracuse, and Miami

The Big East still raids C-USA but with just UConn and Pitt being the only pre-1991 football schools it's much more likely that the league splits. Miami and Syracuse slump in the ACC--VT, WVU, L'ville, all surge.

2012: TAMU joins the SEC. The SEC looks to hotshot VT as #14. The Big 12 replaces them with TCU.

2013: A vulnerable ACC takes Pitt and WVU from the ACC

2014: The Big Ten raids for Maryland and Rutgers, the ACC adds Louisville. UConn, Cincy, and USF are still left to rebuild the league.

You have to wonder if an ACC without VT feels more vulnerable and at risk. Perhaps FSU is lured to the SEC as #14. At which point, total chaos ensues.
05-21-2019 07:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 663
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 36
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #40
RE: What if ACC expansion had gone according to plan?
(05-21-2019 06:22 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 05:42 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 04:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  
(05-21-2019 03:14 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The original premise is difficult to imagine because Duke, UNC, and NC State did not support the three schools at the same time. All three had a reason not to go for Syracuse, and all three had a reason to support VT. Swofford got rolled because he didn't check with the ptb in Chapel Hill. The ptb wanted VT for a myriad of reasons and Syracuse and BC be damned.

If VT was left at the alter again in 2003, then I think they end up in the Big 10. With the B10's TV strategy, VT carries the state of Virginia, plus DC for B10 purposes. VT in 2010 and 2012 could have been shoehorned into the AAU after Syracuse and Nebraska were forced out if the B10 as a block supported VT, if Delany and Mary Sue Coleman wanted that fig leaf. That's a move that hurts the ACC AND SEC.

No they wouldn't have and they aren't anywhere close to the DC market. They are on the complete other side of the state.

https://www.thevab.com/wp-content/upload...MA-Map.pdf

Take some time to look at the above DMA map. This was the B10's Bible back in the day.

VT delivers the State of VA, plus the DC/Hagerstown DMA, the NC Piedmont Triad, The TN/Va Tri-Cities, and Bluefield WVa. Delivers means the first, second, or third property in the particular market niche. UNC and NC State will be first in the Triad, VT will run third. UT will run first in the Tri-Cities, but VT second. WVa will run in Bluefield, but VT will run second. MD might run first in DC/Hagerstown, but VT will run second. That's roughly 12-13 million eyeballs - just what the B10 was seeking, and an addition that would please PSU.

Remember the B10 profile is a research intensive, graduate oriented university. VT is much more like that than UVa. VT is a smaller version of a B10 school. UVa is a larger version of an Ivy League school.

No, they don't. No matter how you try and spin it VT does not deliver the DC market. You don't get the carriage fees for DC when you are closer to Tennessee than DC. Thats not how it works at all.

The B1G wasn't ever looking at VT. Never ever were they one of the conferences options. Thats why after maryland they wanted UVA, UNC, Duke and GT. No mention anywhere ever of VT to the B1G. It's only grounded in the reality that David resides in.

I'm sorry you can't read a map.

I also regret that you have not traveled all over the United States so that you could find out that DMA's are how TV is/was delivered in America, not State lines. The DC DMA includes 7 counties in West Va, 9 counties and the District in MD, and 17 counties in Va.

You also seem to miss the point of the thread, which is what happens if VT had not been picked up in 2003 by the ACC. UVa and UNC to the Big 10 was a pipe dream. An unattached VT would have been a viable possibility instead of a illusory mirage. All Rutgers brings to the B10 is a televsion market for the B10, VT would have brought a television market and a football team.
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2019 08:51 PM by Statefan.)
05-21-2019 08:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.