The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

If they were looking to break the Big East, which they were, and take the best remaining programs in the footprint that weren’t in the SEC, which they were, than yes.

The "Atlantic" Coast Conference added Louisville and chose them over Connecticut. And if they wanted Miami badly enough and Miami wanted Northern friends, the ACC would certainly have tried to accommodate.

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

I wonder if the Big Ten will ever go past 10.

No question.

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Is this a serious question?

Utah, Arizona, and Colorado do not boarder the Pacific Coast.
14 and 16 are not 10
10 is not 12
Most of Mizzou is not Southeastern
What would a name have to do with anything?

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

The Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic is it not?

Incidentally:

“A number of names were proposed for the new conference including Dixie, Tobacco, Blue-Gray, and the Southern Seven. Duke’s Eddie Cameron ultimately suggested the name that stuck: the Atlantic Coast Conference.”
https://www.ncdcr.gov/blog/2017/05/08/bi...nce-1953-0

Any conference named Dixie or Tobacco would have been changed in the 1970's. There were only four geographical features that could be selected as a naming convention - Piedmont, Tidewater, Chesapeake, and Atlantic.

The name itself meant nothing - it was Jim Crow in Virginia, Western NC, and South Carolina that actually mattered to the Pitt's, Penn State's, Penn, and Princeton's of the world.

My money would have been on Big Tobacco because the Reynolds family supported WF and NC State. Duke of course was supported by the Duke Family.

(09-10-2022 02:38 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

The Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic is it not?

Incidentally:

“A number of names were proposed for the new conference including Dixie, Tobacco, Blue-Gray, and the Southern Seven. Duke’s Eddie Cameron ultimately suggested the name that stuck: the Atlantic Coast Conference.”
https://www.ncdcr.gov/blog/2017/05/08/bi...nce-1953-0

Any conference named Dixie or Tobacco would have been changed in the 1970's. There were only four geographical features that could be selected as a naming convention - Piedmont, Tidewater, Chesapeake, and Atlantic.

The name itself meant nothing - it was Jim Crow in Virginia, Western NC, and South Carolina that actually mattered to the Pitt's, Penn State's, Penn, and Princeton's of the world.

My money would have been on Big Tobacco because the Reynolds family supported WF and NC State. Duke of course was supported by the Duke Family.

I would of named it the TRC. It would of stuck. I’d name the new PAC The THC conference

(09-10-2022 02:38 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

The Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic is it not?

Incidentally:

“A number of names were proposed for the new conference including Dixie, Tobacco, Blue-Gray, and the Southern Seven. Duke’s Eddie Cameron ultimately suggested the name that stuck: the Atlantic Coast Conference.”
https://www.ncdcr.gov/blog/2017/05/08/bi...nce-1953-0

Any conference named Dixie or Tobacco would have been changed in the 1970's. There were only four geographical features that could be selected as a naming convention - Piedmont, Tidewater, Chesapeake, and Atlantic.

The name itself meant nothing - it was Jim Crow in Virginia, Western NC, and South Carolina that actually mattered to the Pitt's, Penn State's, Penn, and Princeton's of the world.

My money would have been on Big Tobacco because the Reynolds family supported WF and NC State. Duke of course was supported by the Duke Family.

Tobacco paid a lot of bills, put a lot of food on the table, put a lot of children through college in NC, SC, Va, Ga and Md. The Bright Leaf Conference would have been a good name. I don't see why tobacco would be a no go in the 1970s to present. It's historical, not an endorsement of smoking.

(09-10-2022 04:19 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 02:38 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

The Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic is it not?

Incidentally:

“A number of names were proposed for the new conference including Dixie, Tobacco, Blue-Gray, and the Southern Seven. Duke’s Eddie Cameron ultimately suggested the name that stuck: the Atlantic Coast Conference.”
https://www.ncdcr.gov/blog/2017/05/08/bi...nce-1953-0

Any conference named Dixie or Tobacco would have been changed in the 1970's. There were only four geographical features that could be selected as a naming convention - Piedmont, Tidewater, Chesapeake, and Atlantic.

The name itself meant nothing - it was Jim Crow in Virginia, Western NC, and South Carolina that actually mattered to the Pitt's, Penn State's, Penn, and Princeton's of the world.

My money would have been on Big Tobacco because the Reynolds family supported WF and NC State. Duke of course was supported by the Duke Family.

Tobacco paid a lot of bills, put a lot of food on the table, put a lot of children through college in NC, SC, Va, Ga and Md. The Bright Leaf Conference would have been a good name. I don't see why tobacco would be a no go in the 1970s to present. It's historical, not an endorsement of smoking.

I think it would have become bad optics at UVa, UNC, and Duke medical centers. It would have been made a political issue in MD, but maybe it would have lasted into the 80's.

Yes that conference would have expanded into the North and changed its name to......Atlantic Coast Conference.

(09-10-2022 02:38 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

The Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic is it not?

Incidentally:

“A number of names were proposed for the new conference including Dixie, Tobacco, Blue-Gray, and the Southern Seven. Duke’s Eddie Cameron ultimately suggested the name that stuck: the Atlantic Coast Conference.”
https://www.ncdcr.gov/blog/2017/05/08/bi...nce-1953-0

Any conference named Dixie or Tobacco would have been changed in the 1970's. There were only four geographical features that could be selected as a naming convention - Piedmont, Tidewater, Chesapeake, and Atlantic.

The name itself meant nothing - it was Jim Crow in Virginia, Western NC, and South Carolina that actually mattered to the Pitt's, Penn State's, Penn, and Princeton's of the world.

My money would have been on Big Tobacco because the Reynolds family supported WF and NC State. Duke of course was supported by the Duke Family.

1)But it doesn't flow into the Atlantic Coast until it goes around the Florida Straits.

2) There was a fifth feature but the Fall Line Conference would be even more awkward

14 going on 16 schools in the Big Ten.
10 schools in the Big 12.
Missouri in the Southeastern Conference.
Colorado in the Pacific 12.
Creighton in the Big East.
Hawaii in the Mountain West.

Conference names are just brands at this point and no longer need to be geographically or numerically accurate.

I would speculate that the Atlantic Coast Conference name intentionally mimicked the name of the Pacific Coast Conference.

(09-10-2022 02:38 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

The Gulf of Mexico is part of the Atlantic is it not?

Incidentally:

“A number of names were proposed for the new conference including Dixie, Tobacco, Blue-Gray, and the Southern Seven. Duke’s Eddie Cameron ultimately suggested the name that stuck: the Atlantic Coast Conference.”
https://www.ncdcr.gov/blog/2017/05/08/bi...nce-1953-0

Any conference named Dixie or Tobacco would have been changed in the 1970's. There were only four geographical features that could be selected as a naming convention - Piedmont, Tidewater, Chesapeake, and Atlantic.

The name itself meant nothing - it was Jim Crow in Virginia, Western NC, and South Carolina that actually mattered to the Pitt's, Penn State's, Penn, and Princeton's of the world.

My money would have been on Big Tobacco because the Reynolds family supported WF and NC State. Duke of course was supported by the Duke Family.

if those were the only options, IMO they made the right choice with ACC

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

Georgia Tech in Atlanta has been in the ACC since 1978. Atlanta's Chattahoochee River ultimately empties into the Gulf as well, not into the Atlantic Coast.

(09-10-2022 09:18 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:39 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(09-10-2022 01:23 PM)Poster Wrote:  The ACC took the generic sounding name “Atlantic Coast Conference” in 1952 because the names Southern Conference and Southeastern Cknfetence had already been taken. (Really, they could more accurately have been called Southeastern than the SEC, which had a school in Louisiana and later had a school in Arkansas.)


So what if the ACC had been called either the Southern Conference or the Southeastern Conference when it was founded? Would they later have added Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?

Considering they added two schools along a river that dumps into the Gulf of Mexico and not the Atlantic Coast in Louisville and Pitt, they would have probably have still done so.

Georgia Tech in Atlanta has been in the ACC since 1978. Atlanta's Chattahoochee River ultimately empties into the Gulf as well, not into the Atlantic Coast.

Dang fellows. Everyone seems to be a bit OCD about this one. Look at a map of the United States. Each member is located generally speaking, along the Atlantic Coast. The fact that some of them aren't in states that physically touch the Atlantic ocean is of no importance, that others might have rivers near them that run to the Gulf of Mexico, even less.