(02-18-2021 05:58 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:44 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:30 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:10 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 10:53 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  I would say B1G = Midwest (plus some northeast). Northeast doesn’t have enough fan base to support its own conference. The OBE tried and failed, and the ACC and B1G now fight for the territory.

Actually, the Old BE tried and succeeded until it became unstable. That football conference was actually thriving until it was raided. It did not fail because there wasnt enough fans. It failed because of being raided so much and then being backfilled with lessor accomplished programs which made the league so unstable that when the BCS was moving to a Power 5, everyone was looking for a life raft.

Agreed, but increasing TV $$ would have killed it without Penn State. The BE was short on national Elite FB schools.

Thats possible. But it didnt fail because of lack of fanbases. Thats the only point I was making

...or the lack of a good product on the field.

LOL, the BE was not the league that had a record of 5-13 during the BCS Bowls

(02-19-2021 12:10 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-18-2021 05:58 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:44 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:30 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:10 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Actually, the Old BE tried and succeeded until it became unstable. That football conference was actually thriving until it was raided. It did not fail because there wasnt enough fans. It failed because of being raided so much and then being backfilled with lessor accomplished programs which made the league so unstable that when the BCS was moving to a Power 5, everyone was looking for a life raft.

Agreed, but increasing TV $$ would have killed it without Penn State. The BE was short on national Elite FB schools.

Thats possible. But it didnt fail because of lack of fanbases. Thats the only point I was making

...or the lack of a good product on the field.

LOL, the BE was not the league that had a record of 5-13 during the BCS Bowls

Just giving credit where it's due.


There's no need to get snarky.

(02-19-2021 02:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-19-2021 12:10 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-18-2021 05:58 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:44 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:30 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Agreed, but increasing TV $$ would have killed it without Penn State. The BE was short on national Elite FB schools.

Thats possible. But it didnt fail because of lack of fanbases. Thats the only point I was making

...or the lack of a good product on the field.

LOL, the BE was not the league that had a record of 5-13 during the BCS Bowls

Just giving credit where it's due.


There's no need to get snarky.

Wasnt sure if you were taking a shot at the BE or making a sincere compliment. My apologies if you were sincere.

Why did JB opine about the kid at Duke who quit?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...o-1-seeds/

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim offered a sharp critique of Jalen Johnson after the Duke star opted out of the regular season with six games remaining, saying Thursday in his weekly radio show that the Blue Devils are not only better without him, but "much better" without him.

"That guy was hurting them so they actually are much better now without him," he said via Syracuse.com. "He was just doing some things and keeping other people from playing that are good."

Boeheim went on to add that Duke has had "two monster wins" since he opted out and that the team is playing "good basketball," though Duke has only played one game since Johnson's opt-out and its lone win came against a Wake Forest team that is 6-10 overall and 3-10 in ACC play.

"They've got very good talent," he said. "You knew they were going to play out of this thing and now they're playing well. Every game we play is a very difficult game, a great challenge and we look forward to it."


Boeheim offered a similar criticism last year when Georgetown standout James Akinjo entered the transfer portal. Akinjo, then the team's scoring leader, later transferred to Arizona.

"They got rid of a guy that wouldn't pass the ball to anybody and just shot it every time, and that's why they're good now," Boeheim said. "Patrick [Ewing] can't say that but I can. He lost two games for them by himself."

For as bold and out there as Boeheim's take on the Johnson situation is, however, it's not a totally far-out stance. Per data from Evan Miyakawa, who runs a college basketball advanced analytics site, Johnson is the only Duke player this season who has a negative team efficiency margin on the season factoring in impact and efficiency between offense and defense. Still, it's probably too soon to say whether it's going to help or hurt Duke in the long run.

The Blue Devils face No. 7 Virginia at home on Saturday in what will be their first real post-Johnson test of the season.


In a nutshell, this is what is considered culturally unacceptable behavior by most of us in the conference. The truth of the statement is irrelevant.

What would Frank McGuire say? The original ACC New Yorker.

I was thinking about a big bet on Duke but UVA is only favored by 1.

(02-19-2021 08:55 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Why did JB opine about the kid at Duke who quit?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...o-1-seeds/

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim offered a sharp critique of Jalen Johnson after the Duke star opted out of the regular season with six games remaining, saying Thursday in his weekly radio show that the Blue Devils are not only better without him, but "much better" without him.

"That guy was hurting them so they actually are much better now without him," he said via Syracuse.com. "He was just doing some things and keeping other people from playing that are good."

Boeheim went on to add that Duke has had "two monster wins" since he opted out and that the team is playing "good basketball," though Duke has only played one game since Johnson's opt-out and its lone win came against a Wake Forest team that is 6-10 overall and 3-10 in ACC play.

"They've got very good talent," he said. "You knew they were going to play out of this thing and now they're playing well. Every game we play is a very difficult game, a great challenge and we look forward to it."


Boeheim offered a similar criticism last year when Georgetown standout James Akinjo entered the transfer portal. Akinjo, then the team's scoring leader, later transferred to Arizona.

"They got rid of a guy that wouldn't pass the ball to anybody and just shot it every time, and that's why they're good now," Boeheim said. "Patrick [Ewing] can't say that but I can. He lost two games for them by himself."

For as bold and out there as Boeheim's take on the Johnson situation is, however, it's not a totally far-out stance. Per data from Evan Miyakawa, who runs a college basketball advanced analytics site, Johnson is the only Duke player this season who has a negative team efficiency margin on the season factoring in impact and efficiency between offense and defense. Still, it's probably too soon to say whether it's going to help or hurt Duke in the long run.

The Blue Devils face No. 7 Virginia at home on Saturday in what will be their first real post-Johnson test of the season.


In a nutshell, this is what is considered culturally unacceptable behavior by most of us in the conference. The truth of the statement is irrelevant.

When I read this yesterday, I wondered why he didnt keep his mouth shut about this. He would have blown a gasket if someone had said something like this about one of his players.

(02-19-2021 10:34 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-19-2021 08:55 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Why did JB opine about the kid at Duke who quit?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...o-1-seeds/

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim offered a sharp critique of Jalen Johnson after the Duke star opted out of the regular season with six games remaining, saying Thursday in his weekly radio show that the Blue Devils are not only better without him, but "much better" without him.

"That guy was hurting them so they actually are much better now without him," he said via Syracuse.com. "He was just doing some things and keeping other people from playing that are good."

Boeheim went on to add that Duke has had "two monster wins" since he opted out and that the team is playing "good basketball," though Duke has only played one game since Johnson's opt-out and its lone win came against a Wake Forest team that is 6-10 overall and 3-10 in ACC play.

"They've got very good talent," he said. "You knew they were going to play out of this thing and now they're playing well. Every game we play is a very difficult game, a great challenge and we look forward to it."


Boeheim offered a similar criticism last year when Georgetown standout James Akinjo entered the transfer portal. Akinjo, then the team's scoring leader, later transferred to Arizona.

"They got rid of a guy that wouldn't pass the ball to anybody and just shot it every time, and that's why they're good now," Boeheim said. "Patrick [Ewing] can't say that but I can. He lost two games for them by himself."

For as bold and out there as Boeheim's take on the Johnson situation is, however, it's not a totally far-out stance. Per data from Evan Miyakawa, who runs a college basketball advanced analytics site, Johnson is the only Duke player this season who has a negative team efficiency margin on the season factoring in impact and efficiency between offense and defense. Still, it's probably too soon to say whether it's going to help or hurt Duke in the long run.

The Blue Devils face No. 7 Virginia at home on Saturday in what will be their first real post-Johnson test of the season.


In a nutshell, this is what is considered culturally unacceptable behavior by most of us in the conference. The truth of the statement is irrelevant.

When I read this yesterday, I wondered why he didnt keep his mouth shut about this. He would have blown a gasket if someone had said something like this about one of his players.

Age impacting decorum ??

(02-19-2021 10:34 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-19-2021 08:55 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Why did JB opine about the kid at Duke who quit?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...o-1-seeds/

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim offered a sharp critique of Jalen Johnson after the Duke star opted out of the regular season with six games remaining, saying Thursday in his weekly radio show that the Blue Devils are not only better without him, but "much better" without him.

"That guy was hurting them so they actually are much better now without him," he said via Syracuse.com. "He was just doing some things and keeping other people from playing that are good."

Boeheim went on to add that Duke has had "two monster wins" since he opted out and that the team is playing "good basketball," though Duke has only played one game since Johnson's opt-out and its lone win came against a Wake Forest team that is 6-10 overall and 3-10 in ACC play.

"They've got very good talent," he said. "You knew they were going to play out of this thing and now they're playing well. Every game we play is a very difficult game, a great challenge and we look forward to it."


Boeheim offered a similar criticism last year when Georgetown standout James Akinjo entered the transfer portal. Akinjo, then the team's scoring leader, later transferred to Arizona.

"They got rid of a guy that wouldn't pass the ball to anybody and just shot it every time, and that's why they're good now," Boeheim said. "Patrick [Ewing] can't say that but I can. He lost two games for them by himself."

For as bold and out there as Boeheim's take on the Johnson situation is, however, it's not a totally far-out stance. Per data from Evan Miyakawa, who runs a college basketball advanced analytics site, Johnson is the only Duke player this season who has a negative team efficiency margin on the season factoring in impact and efficiency between offense and defense. Still, it's probably too soon to say whether it's going to help or hurt Duke in the long run.

The Blue Devils face No. 7 Virginia at home on Saturday in what will be their first real post-Johnson test of the season.


In a nutshell, this is what is considered culturally unacceptable behavior by most of us in the conference. The truth of the statement is irrelevant.

When I read this yesterday, I wondered why he didnt keep his mouth shut about this. He would have blown a gasket if someone had said something like this about one of his players.

Like it or not, Jim Boeheim is the "face" of Syracuse athletics, and his running off at the mouth has done big time damage to the perception of Syracuse University from the stand point of the original ACC membership.

Is he any different that Dabo Swinney running his mouth off about Ohio State this past season? The only reason no one has a problem with Swinney is he's still winning. If Boeheim were still winning, people wouldn't care either.

(02-20-2021 10:18 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Is he any different that Dabo Swinney running his mouth off about Ohio State this past season? The only reason no one has a problem with Swinney is he's still winning. If Boeheim were still winning, people wouldn't care either.

People care. It was a big deal when Dabo did it and it's a big deal when Boeheim has done it. Dabo was a bigger deal because it came in a 2 week period where there wasn't much else to talk about. Jim's will blow over by Sunday.

(02-20-2021 08:36 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(02-19-2021 10:34 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(02-19-2021 08:55 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Why did JB opine about the kid at Duke who quit?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...o-1-seeds/

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim offered a sharp critique of Jalen Johnson after the Duke star opted out of the regular season with six games remaining, saying Thursday in his weekly radio show that the Blue Devils are not only better without him, but "much better" without him.

"That guy was hurting them so they actually are much better now without him," he said via Syracuse.com. "He was just doing some things and keeping other people from playing that are good."

Boeheim went on to add that Duke has had "two monster wins" since he opted out and that the team is playing "good basketball," though Duke has only played one game since Johnson's opt-out and its lone win came against a Wake Forest team that is 6-10 overall and 3-10 in ACC play.

"They've got very good talent," he said. "You knew they were going to play out of this thing and now they're playing well. Every game we play is a very difficult game, a great challenge and we look forward to it."


Boeheim offered a similar criticism last year when Georgetown standout James Akinjo entered the transfer portal. Akinjo, then the team's scoring leader, later transferred to Arizona.

"They got rid of a guy that wouldn't pass the ball to anybody and just shot it every time, and that's why they're good now," Boeheim said. "Patrick [Ewing] can't say that but I can. He lost two games for them by himself."

For as bold and out there as Boeheim's take on the Johnson situation is, however, it's not a totally far-out stance. Per data from Evan Miyakawa, who runs a college basketball advanced analytics site, Johnson is the only Duke player this season who has a negative team efficiency margin on the season factoring in impact and efficiency between offense and defense. Still, it's probably too soon to say whether it's going to help or hurt Duke in the long run.

The Blue Devils face No. 7 Virginia at home on Saturday in what will be their first real post-Johnson test of the season.


In a nutshell, this is what is considered culturally unacceptable behavior by most of us in the conference. The truth of the statement is irrelevant.

When I read this yesterday, I wondered why he didnt keep his mouth shut about this. He would have blown a gasket if someone had said something like this about one of his players.

Age impacting decorum ??

He was misquoted...the problem with Twitter and hot takes

(01-13-2021 09:22 PM)nole Wrote:  Change is coming

Another wave of conference realignment

The life cycles of realignment have long been attached to the impending expiration of television contracts. As conferences approach new deals, history has shown that adding universities translates to additional inventory and dollars. Will that still be the case in an age where media is increasingly more fragmented?

The Big Ten’s TV deal is set to expire after the 2022-23 season, the Pac-12’s after the 2023-24 season and the Big 12’s after the 2024-25 season. That means that the Big Ten begins dabbling in the television market as soon as this calendar year. If any of those leagues had interest in expanding, the exploration would have either already begun or will start soon.

Perhaps more relevant to the prospect of a significant shakeup is the ACC’s untenable television deal that new commissioner Jim Phillips inherits. The ACC is locked up through 2035-36, and the fixed income of that contract essentially puts the league in cement financial shoes as its peers are poised to distance themselves from the ACC financially.

Can a creative and dynamic solution arise — like the addition of new big-brand partners — to prompt a new deal? It’s tricky, as ESPN didn’t become a worldwide conglomerate by ripping up deals that are tilted significantly in its favor.

It is coming but not in a way that anybody mentioned. The game is changing in a big way and the value of content is going up, way up. I am a couple months late on this thread.
I suppose you would have to follow the Equity markets closely to realize the seismic changes coming in the streaming world. For those who do not follow the equity markets would miss out on the fact that the valuations of all of these streaming services Disney (ESPN/ABC), Paramount+ (CBS - symbol viac ), Comcast (NBC), Netflix, Apple TV, Amazon Prime etc. These companies are trading at really high valuations because they can make money directly to subscribers without the middleman cable networks in the way. The companies that are offering streaming services are on the hunt for content and it would not surprise me if they start throwing money around to get more content. I am not sure how it will play out but the more money there is available, the more chances there could be massive re-alignment.

(03-14-2021 10:36 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  It is coming but not in a way that anybody mentioned. The game is changing in a big way and the value of content is going up, way up. I am a couple months late on this thread.
I suppose you would have to follow the Equity markets closely to realize the seismic changes coming in the streaming world. For those who do not follow the equity markets would miss out on the fact that the valuations of all of these streaming services Disney (ESPN/ABC), Paramount+ (CBS - symbol viac ), Comcast (NBC), Netflix, Apple TV, Amazon Prime etc. These companies are trading at really high valuations because they can make money directly to subscribers without the middleman cable networks in the way. The companies that are offering streaming services are on the hunt for content and it would not surprise me if they start throwing money around to get more content. I am not sure how it will play out but the more money there is available, the more chances there could be massive re-alignment.

Obviously, the ACC has no intentions of releasing the text of its contract with Disney/ABC/ESPN. I don't think Disney wants it out in public, either. That said, we'll eventually find out how smart/stupid the ACC was in answer to this question: does the current contract include all streaming rights, or can the ACC still sell to ESPN+?

I think it's worth noting that
1) so far no ACC home games in any sport (AFAIK) has been on ESPN+
2) the new SEC contract specifically includes the right to put games on ESPN+
3) the last Big XII contract included rights to stream on ESPN+

Another question: the ACC Network is always referred to as a linear cable network; would it require an amendment to the contract to allow ESPN to sell ACCN direct to customers?

If the ACC did, in fact, bundle streaming rights and this is all they're getting for it, this conference is in deep doo doo; OTOH, if they retained those rights, there's still hope for a decent bump...

(03-15-2021 12:29 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-14-2021 10:36 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  It is coming but not in a way that anybody mentioned. The game is changing in a big way and the value of content is going up, way up. I am a couple months late on this thread.
I suppose you would have to follow the Equity markets closely to realize the seismic changes coming in the streaming world. For those who do not follow the equity markets would miss out on the fact that the valuations of all of these streaming services Disney (ESPN/ABC), Paramount+ (CBS - symbol viac ), Comcast (NBC), Netflix, Apple TV, Amazon Prime etc. These companies are trading at really high valuations because they can make money directly to subscribers without the middleman cable networks in the way. The companies that are offering streaming services are on the hunt for content and it would not surprise me if they start throwing money around to get more content. I am not sure how it will play out but the more money there is available, the more chances there could be massive re-alignment.

Obviously, the ACC has no intentions of releasing the text of its contract with Disney/ABC/ESPN. I don't think Disney wants it out in public, either. That said, we'll eventually find out how smart/stupid the ACC was in answer to this question: does the current contract include all streaming rights, or can the ACC still sell to ESPN+?

I think it's worth noting that
1) so far no ACC home games in any sport (AFAIK) has been on ESPN+
2) the new SEC contract specifically includes the right to put games on ESPN+
3) the last Big XII contract included rights to stream on ESPN+

Another question: the ACC Network is always referred to as a linear cable network; would it require an amendment to the contract to allow ESPN to sell ACCN direct to customers?

If the ACC did, in fact, bundle streaming rights and this is all they're getting for it, this conference is in deep doo doo; OTOH, if they retained those rights, there's still hope for a decent bump...

A few things:

1. ESPN has utilized "change by mutual agreement" language in past contracts, specifically referring to the LHN. I don't think they are so shortsighted as an entity as to paint themselves into a corner but I do think "mutual agreement" both enforces aspects of a contract that either party may want in order to have some leverage, but also allows the freedom for both to abandon an aspect of a contract that is no longer in either's self interest.

2. If the SECN, ACCN, or any other linear channel is offered via streaming expect the carriage fees to remain the same for the conferences. This will be easily handled by Disney who will profit even more if they don't have to pay carriage fees to the cable companies for the subscriptions that switch from cord to OTA.

3. Disney isn't going to give a bump for anything unless their profits justify it. So I do think expansion with the right schools would open that window.

I don’t normally tread over into the ACC page but this was a fascinating 12-page read. From an outsider’s perspective, I think a lot of hard feelings could have been spared had the ACC folks been amenable to what the Big East folks wanted since the early 90’s:

Take the ACC’s 9 plus Pitt, Cuse, BC, and Miami as fb-affiliates and that gets you 13. VT could have come in as an additional fb affiliate or as a full ACC member to round out to 14.

The northeastern schools get to maintain their basketball culture in the Big East. The ACC gets football super conference status without the Yankee personalities that dominated BE Basketball.

After 1995, the calculus gets a little more complicated because WVU and Rutgers would also need fb affiliate status in the ACC. At that point you probably need a pod structure to make the ACC super conference work.

(03-15-2021 05:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t normally tread over into the ACC page but this was a fascinating 12-page read. From an outsider’s perspective, I think a lot of hard feelings could have been spared had the ACC folks been amenable to what the Big East folks wanted since the early 90’s:

Take the ACC’s 9 plus Pitt, Cuse, BC, and Miami as fb-affiliates and that gets you 13. VT could have come in as an additional fb affiliate or as a full ACC member to round out to 14.

The northeastern schools get to maintain their basketball culture in the Big East. The ACC gets football super conference status without the Yankee personalities that dominated BE Basketball.

After 1995, the calculus gets a little more complicated because WVU and Rutgers would also need fb affiliate status in the ACC. At that point you probably need a pod structure to make the ACC super conference work.

1.The ACC is only responsible for not inviting Penn State in the 1970's.

2 The Big East is responsible for not inviting them in the 1980's

3. Miami and Virginia Tech ALWAYS wanted to be in the ACC over the Big East - again not the ACC's fault.

4. The ACC made a deal with Notre Dame that included football and it is not the ACC's fault that the Big East could not do this.

The Big East's own failures are not a reason for the ACC to worry about BE hard feelings.

(03-15-2021 07:41 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 05:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t normally tread over into the ACC page but this was a fascinating 12-page read. From an outsider’s perspective, I think a lot of hard feelings could have been spared had the ACC folks been amenable to what the Big East folks wanted since the early 90’s:

Take the ACC’s 9 plus Pitt, Cuse, BC, and Miami as fb-affiliates and that gets you 13. VT could have come in as an additional fb affiliate or as a full ACC member to round out to 14.

The northeastern schools get to maintain their basketball culture in the Big East. The ACC gets football super conference status without the Yankee personalities that dominated BE Basketball.

After 1995, the calculus gets a little more complicated because WVU and Rutgers would also need fb affiliate status in the ACC. At that point you probably need a pod structure to make the ACC super conference work.

1.The ACC is only responsible for not inviting Penn State in the 1970's.

2 The Big East is responsible for not inviting them in the 1980's

3. Miami and Virginia Tech ALWAYS wanted to be in the ACC over the Big East - again not the ACC's fault.

4. The ACC made a deal with Notre Dame that included football and it is not the ACC's fault that the Big East could not do this.

The Big East's own failures are not a reason for the ACC to worry about BE hard feelings.

The Big East had a FB deal with Notre Dame

The ACC is paying for mistakes of both the BE and the old ACC today

(03-15-2021 07:52 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 07:41 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 05:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t normally tread over into the ACC page but this was a fascinating 12-page read. From an outsider’s perspective, I think a lot of hard feelings could have been spared had the ACC folks been amenable to what the Big East folks wanted since the early 90’s:

Take the ACC’s 9 plus Pitt, Cuse, BC, and Miami as fb-affiliates and that gets you 13. VT could have come in as an additional fb affiliate or as a full ACC member to round out to 14.

The northeastern schools get to maintain their basketball culture in the Big East. The ACC gets football super conference status without the Yankee personalities that dominated BE Basketball.

After 1995, the calculus gets a little more complicated because WVU and Rutgers would also need fb affiliate status in the ACC. At that point you probably need a pod structure to make the ACC super conference work.

1.The ACC is only responsible for not inviting Penn State in the 1970's.

2 The Big East is responsible for not inviting them in the 1980's

3. Miami and Virginia Tech ALWAYS wanted to be in the ACC over the Big East - again not the ACC's fault.

4. The ACC made a deal with Notre Dame that included football and it is not the ACC's fault that the Big East could not do this.

The Big East's own failures are not a reason for the ACC to worry about BE hard feelings.

The Big East had a FB deal with Notre Dame
The ACC is paying for mistakes of both the BE and the old ACC today

An agreement that Notre Dame did not live up to and The Big East couldn't enforce. A lesson the ACC learned from the Big East's mistake.

(03-15-2021 07:41 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 05:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t normally tread over into the ACC page but this was a fascinating 12-page read. From an outsider’s perspective, I think a lot of hard feelings could have been spared had the ACC folks been amenable to what the Big East folks wanted since the early 90’s:

Take the ACC’s 9 plus Pitt, Cuse, BC, and Miami as fb-affiliates and that gets you 13. VT could have come in as an additional fb affiliate or as a full ACC member to round out to 14.

The northeastern schools get to maintain their basketball culture in the Big East. The ACC gets football super conference status without the Yankee personalities that dominated BE Basketball.

After 1995, the calculus gets a little more complicated because WVU and Rutgers would also need fb affiliate status in the ACC. At that point you probably need a pod structure to make the ACC super conference work.

1.The ACC is only responsible for not inviting Penn State in the 1970's.

2 The Big East is responsible for not inviting them in the 1980's

3. Miami and Virginia Tech ALWAYS wanted to be in the ACC over the Big East - again not the ACC's fault.

4. The ACC made a deal with Notre Dame that included football and it is not the ACC's fault that the Big East could not do this.

The Big East's own failures are not a reason for the ACC to worry about BE hard feelings.

5. Rutgers and WVU would have remained in the Atlantic 10 so the ACC would have no responsibility for their football programs.