(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

Cuse was a founding member of the Big East, but unlike Georgetown, Providence, and St. Johns, they played a FBS football. My understanding is that Cuse was more aligned with football schools in the Big East and may well had been unhappy.

Now let me ask you a question.

Why did the Big Ten invite UMCP over Syracuse? Cuse is smaller but the state of New York is much bigger than Maryland. Was the AAU a real reason? Or the Big Ten just wanted to stick it to the ACC?

Lance would have been much happier if the Big Ten had taken Cuse instead of UMCP...

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

I think the biggest motivation for Maryland was money but I think there was a degree of frustration with the Tobacco Road schools

(06-12-2021 07:14 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

Cuse was a founding member of the Big East, but unlike Georgetown, Providence, and St. Johns, they played a FBS football. My understanding is that Cuse was more aligned with football schools in the Big East and may well had been unhappy.

Now let me ask you a question.

Why did the Big Ten invite UMCP over Syracuse? Cuse is smaller but the state of New York is much bigger than Maryland. Was the AAU a real reason? Or the Big Ten just wanted to stick it to the ACC?

Lance would have been much happier if the Big Ten had taken Cuse instead of UMCP...

The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

(06-12-2021 08:21 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

I think the biggest motivation for Maryland was money but I think there was a degree of frustration with the Tobacco Road schools

Maryland had their way in the ACC while Bob James (Maryland grad) was commissioner for 16 years.
James died quickly after being diagnosed with cancer in 1987 Gene
Corrigan (Duke) took over followed by Swofford, so the power in the league shifted from Maryland to North Carolina.
Maryland never got over not being able to control the league as they saw fit.

(06-12-2021 09:56 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

(06-12-2021 11:35 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 09:56 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

Well Syracuse and Pittsburgh were in the exact situation with the ACC that TCU was with the Big East. I think if the Big Ten offered Pittsburgh an invite they would've preferred them over the ACC. Syracuse could go either way. Then again, if you're the Big Ten do you take a team that the ACC just added or a long time member? Would Syracuse and/or Pittsburgh have been subject to the same financial penalties that Maryland was? It's clear Rutgers was the easiest add of all among the four (they also could've added UConn, Temple, or Cincinnati as old Big East/AAC members.

(06-12-2021 11:00 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 08:21 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

I think the biggest motivation for Maryland was money but I think there was a degree of frustration with the Tobacco Road schools

Maryland had their way in the ACC while Bob James (Maryland grad) was commissioner for 16 years.
James died quickly after being diagnosed with cancer in 1987 Gene
Corrigan (Duke) took over followed by Swofford, so the power in the league shifted from Maryland to North Carolina.
Maryland never got over not being able to control the league as they saw fit.

True

Also the AAU thing in the Big 10 is a red herring. They knew Nebraska was getting kicked out before it happened because UM's president was running the AAU. They use that to keep the politicians at bay in certain states.

(06-12-2021 08:21 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

I think the biggest motivation for Maryland was money but I think there was a degree of frustration with the Tobacco Road schools

No.

The motivation was the System President wanted to make the move because he had become an Ohio State and Big 10 man while at OSU. It also allowed him to play politics in an effort to consolidate programs back at UMCP that had been farmed out in the 1970's.

MD has suffered administrative disfunction for decades. It started in 1970 when graduate programs were relocated to Baltimore, it is typified by UMCP putting discreet donations into one large black bag and then spending them on what the staff or a board sees fit. This helped to undermine athletic fundraising. Then Len Bias died and they shot the football and basketball programs in the head. Then they required full and robust Title 9 compliance because of their location in the DC media. Then Sweaty Gary quit recruiting then Fridge reneged on his retirement. Then MD tried to take over certain programs and entities in DC itself.

Someone should write a book. Bill Cobey who was UNC's AD in the late 70's/80's knows all about MD because his dad was AD at MD. Debbie Yow knows all about MD because she was AD there during some of the madness around 2000-2011 or so. You can sit in Chapel Hill and Raleigh and learn all you want to about UMCP if you talk to the right folks.

(06-12-2021 12:40 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 11:35 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 09:56 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

Well Syracuse and Pittsburgh were in the exact situation with the ACC that TCU was with the Big East. I think if the Big Ten offered Pittsburgh an invite they would've preferred them over the ACC. Syracuse could go either way. Then again, if you're the Big Ten do you take a team that the ACC just added or a long time member? Would Syracuse and/or Pittsburgh have been subject to the same financial penalties that Maryland was? It's clear Rutgers was the easiest add of all among the four (they also could've added UConn, Temple, or Cincinnati as old Big East/AAC members.

The Big Ten's ultimate goal was to build a bridge into Virginia and North Carolina. Maryland was the first step.

Syracuse would have been a decent addition, but Rutgers helped them secure a presence in NYC and NJ at the same time.

Debatable as to which school would offer more penetration in NY, but Rutgers was an AAU and a large state school. Syracuse was a private with a smaller enrollment.

(06-12-2021 12:40 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 11:35 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 09:56 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

Well Syracuse and Pittsburgh were in the exact situation with the ACC that TCU was with the Big East. I think if the Big Ten offered Pittsburgh an invite they would've preferred them over the ACC. Syracuse could go either way. Then again, if you're the Big Ten do you take a team that the ACC just added or a long time member? Would Syracuse and/or Pittsburgh have been subject to the same financial penalties that Maryland was? It's clear Rutgers was the easiest add of all among the four (they also could've added UConn, Temple, or Cincinnati as old Big East/AAC members.

A little side conversation here—

When the Big Ten first talked about going for a CCG and that they had 12, 14, and 16 models on the table, I was pulling for ND, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Missouri. My thought process was that 3 schools would be enough to wreck Big East football to the point that ND would have to look at leaving and the Big Ten would be the only reasonable place to go.

(06-12-2021 07:14 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

Cuse was a founding member of the Big East, but unlike Georgetown, Providence, and St. Johns, they played a FBS football. My understanding is that Cuse was more aligned with football schools in the Big East and may well had been unhappy.

Now let me ask you a question.

Why did the Big Ten invite UMCP over Syracuse? Cuse is smaller but the state of New York is much bigger than Maryland. Was the AAU a real reason? Or the Big Ten just wanted to stick it to the ACC?

Lance would have been much happier if the Big Ten had taken Cuse instead of UMCP...

The B1G should have taken Pitt. Syracuse is actually a good athletic fit for the ACC. We would actually be much better off with BC, Syracuse and Maryland than what we currently have.

(06-12-2021 05:29 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 12:40 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 11:35 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 09:56 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

Well Syracuse and Pittsburgh were in the exact situation with the ACC that TCU was with the Big East. I think if the Big Ten offered Pittsburgh an invite they would've preferred them over the ACC. Syracuse could go either way. Then again, if you're the Big Ten do you take a team that the ACC just added or a long time member? Would Syracuse and/or Pittsburgh have been subject to the same financial penalties that Maryland was? It's clear Rutgers was the easiest add of all among the four (they also could've added UConn, Temple, or Cincinnati as old Big East/AAC members.

A little side conversation here—

When the Big Ten first talked about going for a CCG and that they had 12, 14, and 16 models on the table, I was pulling for ND, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Missouri. My thought process was that 3 schools would be enough to wreck Big East football to the point that ND would have to look at leaving and the Big Ten would be the only reasonable place to go.

I, for one (and most ND fans too, I think) are glad that it didn't work out that way.

Most of us see joining the Big Ten as ND's worst case scenario in realignment.

All of ND's moves since 1991 (NBC deal, 1995 Big East membership, 1999 Big Ten rejection and 2012 ACC membership) have been to keep football independent and out of the Big Ten.

ND thinks that would regionalize it and that the Big Ten (specifically Michigan and Ohio State) would put ND in the West and "Nebraska" it to try to control and damage the program.

(06-13-2021 09:02 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND thinks that would regionalize it and that the Big Ten (specifically Michigan and Ohio State) would put ND in the West and "Nebraska" it to try to control and damage the program.

Being in the west division isn't what ails the Huskers. They "Nebraska'd" themselves with poor coaching hires. If the Huskers were as good as they were in the last 10 years that Osborne coached, they would be dominating the Big Ten's west division.

(06-13-2021 09:02 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 05:29 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 12:40 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 11:35 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 09:56 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The ACC had just invited Syracuse (and Pittsburgh) in September 2011. Would either school leave a conference they just accepted an invitation to? TCU did but that was from a conference that was a poor geographic fit to a dream geographic fit. I would rather the Big Ten have taken Pittsburgh or Syracuse or even UConn over Rutgers. I'll never know whether the Big Ten would have preferred Rutgers over Syracuse or Pittsburgh but the fact is the ACC got to them first.

True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

Well Syracuse and Pittsburgh were in the exact situation with the ACC that TCU was with the Big East. I think if the Big Ten offered Pittsburgh an invite they would've preferred them over the ACC. Syracuse could go either way. Then again, if you're the Big Ten do you take a team that the ACC just added or a long time member? Would Syracuse and/or Pittsburgh have been subject to the same financial penalties that Maryland was? It's clear Rutgers was the easiest add of all among the four (they also could've added UConn, Temple, or Cincinnati as old Big East/AAC members.

A little side conversation here—

When the Big Ten first talked about going for a CCG and that they had 12, 14, and 16 models on the table, I was pulling for ND, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Missouri. My thought process was that 3 schools would be enough to wreck Big East football to the point that ND would have to look at leaving and the Big Ten would be the only reasonable place to go.

I, for one (and most ND fans too, I think) are glad that it didn't work out that way.

Most of us see joining the Big Ten as ND's worst case scenario in realignment.

All of ND's moves since 1991 (NBC deal, 1995 Big East membership, 1999 Big Ten rejection and 2012 ACC membership) have been to keep football independent and out of the Big Ten.

ND thinks that would regionalize it and that the Big Ten (specifically Michigan and Ohio State) would put ND in the West and "Nebraska" it to try to control and damage the program.

I think fears of being in a rural western division are unfounded. Remember the Big Ten originally went zipper and had they landed ND, probably never would have abandoned it (although I hope they’d come up with better names eventually). They would have surely ended up with a couple of Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/(Nebraska today, Missouri in my scenario) but not all of them.

I bet the Big Ten would have (and still would) go to great lengths to welcome the Irish. In a Legends/Leaders style split, you’d likely be grouped with old friends/rivals Mich, Mich St, and Purdue.

(06-13-2021 04:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-13-2021 09:02 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 05:29 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 12:40 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 11:35 AM)Jared7 Wrote:  True. But it was more than the geographic fit. The Big East was in the process of falling apart with many of the schools looking for the fastest exit possible. And the Frogs weren't actual members in the sense of actually playing games and earning revenue. And the Big 12 had (and has) much larger revenue streams. It did cost us $5 million though. (Not that TCU doesn't have money...)

Well Syracuse and Pittsburgh were in the exact situation with the ACC that TCU was with the Big East. I think if the Big Ten offered Pittsburgh an invite they would've preferred them over the ACC. Syracuse could go either way. Then again, if you're the Big Ten do you take a team that the ACC just added or a long time member? Would Syracuse and/or Pittsburgh have been subject to the same financial penalties that Maryland was? It's clear Rutgers was the easiest add of all among the four (they also could've added UConn, Temple, or Cincinnati as old Big East/AAC members.

A little side conversation here—

When the Big Ten first talked about going for a CCG and that they had 12, 14, and 16 models on the table, I was pulling for ND, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Missouri. My thought process was that 3 schools would be enough to wreck Big East football to the point that ND would have to look at leaving and the Big Ten would be the only reasonable place to go.

I, for one (and most ND fans too, I think) are glad that it didn't work out that way.

Most of us see joining the Big Ten as ND's worst case scenario in realignment.

All of ND's moves since 1991 (NBC deal, 1995 Big East membership, 1999 Big Ten rejection and 2012 ACC membership) have been to keep football independent and out of the Big Ten.

ND thinks that would regionalize it and that the Big Ten (specifically Michigan and Ohio State) would put ND in the West and "Nebraska" it to try to control and damage the program.

I think fears of being in a rural western division are unfounded. Remember the Big Ten originally went zipper and had they landed ND, probably never would have abandoned it (although I hope they’d come up with better names eventually). They would have surely ended up with a couple of Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/(Nebraska today, Missouri in my scenario) but not all of them.

I bet the Big Ten would have (and still would) go to great lengths to welcome the Irish. In a Legends/Leaders style split, you’d likely be grouped with old friends/rivals Mich, Mich St, and Purdue.

ND can never trust the Big 10 as long as scUM is a member of the Big 10

(06-12-2021 06:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 07:14 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:27 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-11-2021 01:20 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-10-2021 09:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think Syracuse and BC are quite happy in the ACC. They would not want to compete with the meg-budgets in the Big 10.

Agree on BC but not sure about Cuse. I think they used to be a big fish. If UMCP and Rutgers were not afriad of being in the BIG, why should Cuse?

ACC fans can answer this question: Was Maryland happy in the ACC or did they feel inferior/second fiddle to North Carolina/Duke? So is being second fiddle to Penn State/Ohio State really any different?

As for Rutgers, they weren't an original member of the Big East so now they're not an original member of the Big Ten. Again, is it really any different?

By contrast, Syracuse was a Big East founder and one of the leaders and most respected members of the conference vs. an afterthought in the ACC, especially with the Southern members and football fans who don't care about how good their men's basketball team is.

Cuse was a founding member of the Big East, but unlike Georgetown, Providence, and St. Johns, they played a FBS football. My understanding is that Cuse was more aligned with football schools in the Big East and may well had been unhappy.

Now let me ask you a question.

Why did the Big Ten invite UMCP over Syracuse? Cuse is smaller but the state of New York is much bigger than Maryland. Was the AAU a real reason? Or the Big Ten just wanted to stick it to the ACC?

Lance would have been much happier if the Big Ten had taken Cuse instead of UMCP...

The B1G should have taken Pitt. Syracuse is actually a good athletic fit for the ACC. We would actually be much better off with BC, Syracuse and Maryland than what we currently have.

Joe Pa’s eastern conference would have: PSU, Pitt, Temple, BC, Cuse, Rutgers, WVU, UMCP, and potentially Army and Navy.

The Big Ten and the ACC split the most desirable six schools. Three biggest land grant schools including PSU, UMCP, and Rutgers went to the Big Ten while the ACC got smaller private or semi private schools including BC, Pitt, and Cuse.

Seems fair and appropriate to me.

(06-18-2021 04:29 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  The Big Ten and the ACC split the most desirable six schools. Three biggest land grant schools including PSU, UMCP, and Rutgers went to the Big Ten while the ACC got smaller private or semi private schools including BC, Pitt, and Cuse.

Seems fair and appropriate to me.

Pitt's a public school.

(06-18-2021 05:14 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(06-18-2021 04:29 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  The Big Ten and the ACC split the most desirable six schools. Three biggest land grant schools including PSU, UMCP, and Rutgers went to the Big Ten while the ACC got smaller private or semi private schools including BC, Pitt, and Cuse.

Seems fair and appropriate to me.

Pitt's a public school.

Not really. Only 12 of 36 BOT members are appointed by the Commonwealth of Pa.

Less than 10% of their budget is covered by the Commonwealth and the Commonwealth is not under a Constitutional obligation to fund Pitt. By contrast the State of NC supplies about a third of the annual budget to NC State and UNC. Employees of NC State and UNC are also State of NC employees covered by State of NC retirement system. Pitt is not public in the sense that Southern Universities and Western Universities are Public.

(06-12-2021 06:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  The B1G should have taken Pitt. Syracuse is actually a good athletic fit for the ACC. We would actually be much better off with BC, Syracuse and Maryland than what we currently have.

All you're saying is that Maryland is a more valuable athletic department than Pitt. That point is hard to dispute. The Big Ten agreed, and that is why Maryland is in the Big Ten.

(06-21-2021 02:11 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 06:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  The B1G should have taken Pitt. Syracuse is actually a good athletic fit for the ACC. We would actually be much better off with BC, Syracuse and Maryland than what we currently have.

All you're saying is that Maryland is a more valuable athletic department than Pitt. That point is hard to dispute. The Big Ten agreed, and that is why Maryland is in the Big Ten.

Yeah, it's hard to read, "The Big Ten should have taken Pitt, because the ACC would be better off with Maryland than with Pitt" in a way that flatters Pitt.

_____________________

(06-12-2021 07:14 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  Now let me ask you a question.

Why did the Big Ten invite UMCP over Syracuse? Cuse is smaller but the state of New York is much bigger than Maryland. Was the AAU a real reason? Or the Big Ten just wanted to stick it to the ACC?

That is a false dichotomy: (1) Yes, not just AAU but Maryland's status within the AAU is a real reason. But also, (2) the greater DC area is an area with a lot higher density of Big Ten alumni than upstate New York.

And (3) the "stick it to the ACC" motivation is likely to have been nil or negligible.