Maryland and rivalries

[-bdbd]

Not a major point, but other than Duke and Wake, are there any stadiums in the ACC that are not larger than MD's?

Actually, this whole issue of filling up their FB stadium at Byrd was part of the rationale that you hear from MD fans in terms of justifying the move. Recall that the MD athletic department was in financial crisis beore the decision to bail on the ACC. A big part of it was the decision, several years ago, to greatly expand Byrd (and to borrow tens of millions to build the expansion), an expansion which included a large number of luxury boxes. As of last season a large number of those luxury boxes were still sitting empty for home games, as well as wide swaths of regular stadium seats. I want to say that they expanded it up to about 62.5K (??), which doesn't sound huge, but it does include quite a bunch of those pricey box seats, and they FULLY expect to fill them with teams like Michigan and OSU coming to town.

[Here is a Turtle]

Byrd is 54k.

[Class of '94]

Actually, this whole issue of filling up their FB stadium at Byrd was part of the rationale that you hear from MD fans in terms of justifying the move. Recall that the MD athletic department was in financial crisis beore the decision to bail on the ACC. A big part of it was the decision, several years ago, to greatly expand Byrd (and to borrow tens of millions to build the expansion), an expansion which included a large number of luxury boxes. As of last season a large number of those luxury boxes were still sitting empty for home games, as well as wide swaths of regular stadium seats. I want to say that they expanded it up to about 62.5K (??), which doesn't sound huge, but it does include quite a bunch of those pricey box seats, and they FULLY expect to fill them with teams like Michigan and OSU coming to town.

Great...so Byrd stadium feels up a couple times every other year. I wonder how profitable that will end up being. Sorry, that was a shot; but seriously, if you analyze the BIG 10, there are only 6-7 true power teams in that conference (Mich, Mich St, OSU, Penn St, Wis, Iowa and Nebraska); and of those 6, thankfully 4 are in their division, so they will be guaranteed to play them at home once every other year. The are only guranteed to play the other 2 once every 4 years; which means MD may only play those teams at home once every 8 years. I just don't see MD fans feeling up the Byrd (in the long term; maybe the first couple of years because everything is new) for teams like Indiana, Minn, Ill, Rutgers, Purdue, etc. on a regular basis. Thus, I still question how profitable home games will be for MD. Luckily for them, the Big 10 also has a yearly attendance subsidy for schools with below average attendance. So I guess in the end MD does make out when you factor in the travel subsidy that MD is getting and the attendance subsidy that they most likely will qualify for as well.

[Mal]

Actually, this whole issue of filling up their FB stadium at Byrd was part of the rationale that you hear from MD fans in terms of justifying the move. Recall that the MD athletic department was in financial crisis beore the decision to bail on the ACC. A big part of it was the decision, several years ago, to greatly expand Byrd (and to borrow tens of millions to build the expansion), an expansion which included a large number of luxury boxes. As of last season a large number of those luxury boxes were still sitting empty for home games, as well as wide swaths of regular stadium seats. I want to say that they expanded it up to about 62.5K (??), which doesn't sound huge, but it does include quite a bunch of those pricey box seats, and they FULLY expect to fill them with teams like Michigan and OSU coming to town.

Sounds like fool's gold to me. We'll see, but they only get one of those two teams every year, and then the rest of the slate is something like Rutgers, Michigan State, and Illinois or Northwestern in the average year. The rest of those strike me as exciting to Maryland fans in the same way Georgia Tech and BC would have been, but with greater potential for a loss. Either that or they're seeing Wisconsin or Nebraska show up and send fans home at halftime up 20 points. Penn State might draw and develop into a real rivalry that puts seats in the seats, too, I guess. But Virginia or someone else could/should have filled that role in the ACC. Maybe they'll draw more opposing fans, too, at least at first, by being close to D.C., but they're not going to get drivers there consistently, being 8+ hours from Ann Arbor. The worst possible result, which seems not terribly unlikely, is that the football culture at Maryland ends up sort of like the football culture at Indiana.

[DukeandMdFan]

Actually, this whole issue of filling up their FB stadium at Byrd was part of the rationale that you hear from MD fans in terms of justifying the move. Recall that the MD athletic department was in financial crisis beore the decision to bail on the ACC. A big part of it was the decision, several years ago, to greatly expand Byrd (and to borrow tens of millions to build the expansion), an expansion which included a large number of luxury boxes. As of last season a large number of those luxury boxes were still sitting empty for home games, as well as wide swaths of regular stadium seats. I want to say that they expanded it up to about 62.5K (??), which doesn't sound huge, but it does include quite a bunch of those pricey box seats, and they FULLY expect to fill them with teams like Michigan and OSU coming to town.

In hindsight, expanding Byrd was a very poor decision. It seemed risky at the time, but there were reasons why some believed that it would work. Maryland had achieved some recent football success. The ACC had already sold out its great basketball tradition in hopes of become a football conference. We were a BCS conference and added Miami, Virginia Tech, and Boston College. The economy was strong and housing prices in the DC area were very high - a lot of people felt "rich" and perhaps willing to buy expensive season tickets. A lot of companies in the DC area were doing well and might be willing to buy suites.

But, Maryland football, ACC football, and the economy have not performed as well as was expected.

[OldPhiKap]

In hindsight, expanding Byrd was a very poor decision. It seemed risky at the time, but there were reasons why some believed that it would work. Maryland had achieved some recent football success. The ACC had already sold out its great basketball tradition in hopes of become a football conference. We were a BCS conference and added Miami, Virginia Tech, and Boston College. The economy was strong and housing prices in the DC area were very high - a lot of people felt "rich" and perhaps willing to buy expensive season tickets. A lot of companies in the DC area were doing well and might be willing to buy suites.

But, Maryland football, ACC football, and the economy have not performed as well as was expected.

Excellent points, Duke/Md. Legalized gambling, gone wrong.

Football money has distorted college sports to an unholy degree. Maryland bought in at the absolute worst time, it turns out. Then sate money dried up, and they need the supposed lifeboat of the B##.

[Buckeye Devil]

I haven' t talked to too many Big 10/whatever it should be called fans that are that thrilled with adding Maryland to the league let alone Rutgers. I wasn't even too happy when they added Penn St. 20 years ago. I think to most residents in Big 10 land, the logical extension of the league has always been "Go West, Young Man" but not too far west-Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and of course the foray towards Texas several years ago. I for one am not happy about grafting in thuggish Terp fans into the mix. Maybe they can balance out the awful Wisconsin fans further west.

[devildeac]

I haven' t talked to too many Big 10/whatever it should be called fans that are that thrilled with adding Maryland to the league let alone Rutgers. I wasn't even too happy when they added Penn St. 20 years ago. I think to most residents in Big 10 land, the logical extension of the league has always been "Go West, Young Man" but not too far west-Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and of course the foray towards Texas several years ago. I for one am not happy about grafting in thuggish Terp fans into the mix. Maybe they can balance out the awful Wisconsin fans further west.

I just can't imagine what devastating effects it will have when the hooligans from College Park print up their first bunch of t-shirts denouncing one of their new "rivals" and we see 500-1000 new garments in gack mustard/gold and/or red saying "Muck Fichigan" on them.

[davekay1971]

I just can't imagine what devastating effects it will have when the hooligans from College Park print up their first bunch of t-shirts denouncing one of their new "rivals" and we see 500-1000 new garments in gack mustard/gold and/or red saying "Muck Fichigan" on them.

Somewhere out there is a Twerp fan drooling over the prospect of buying, and proudly wearing (probably to a family restaurant with plenty of kids around), his first "Buck the &uckeyes" shirt. I mean, it'll be so kewl to be able to exchange the first letters like in the classic and creative Duck Fook shirts, but this time it'll still actually have a naughty word in it!

Twerptastic!!!

And here we were thinking the Maryland fans wouldn't get much out of their conference change.

[DukeandMdFan]

I just can't imagine what devastating effects it will have when the hooligans from College Park print up their first bunch of t-shirts denouncing one of their new "rivals" and we see 500-1000 new garments in gack mustard/gold and/or red saying "Muck Fichigan" on them.

I agree that those "_uck Fooever" shirts stopped being funny or clever a long time ago. Apparently, there is a new crop of freshman who must buy them every year. As has been noted on this board, some Duke fans have some anti-UNC cheers which they no longer find particularly funny or clever.

[DukeandMdFan]

I haven' t talked to too many Big 10/whatever it should be called fans that are that thrilled with adding Maryland to the league let alone Rutgers. I wasn't even too happy when they added Penn St. 20 years ago. I think to most residents in Big 10 land, the logical extension of the league has always been "Go West, Young Man" but not too far west-Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and of course the foray towards Texas several years ago. I for one am not happy about grafting in thuggish Terp fans into the mix. Maybe they can balance out the awful Wisconsin fans further west.

I think most Maryland fans are realistic that the other B1G schools aren't excited about Maryland joining their league and most of the ACC fans outside of the DC area won't particularly miss Maryland. Other than Maryand fans, the only people who will care are the fans of the other schools who live in the DC area who now will/will not have the opportunity to root for their teams who visit College Park. Other than that, the only significance to Maryland leaving is that it is another sign of the demise of the ACC. But, the days of listening to Bones McKinney, with Holly Farm commercials, and the Sail with the Pilot jingle have long past.

One side effect of the huge success of March Madness is that the rest of the college basketball season seems far less important than it used to be. Even getting tickets to the ACC tournament isn't a big dieal anymore. Or, maybe I'm just old...

[dpslaw]

As the red-headed stepchildren of the B1G, Maryland and Rutgers could establish quite a rivalry.

[J.Blink]

I think most Maryland fans are realistic that the other B1G schools aren't excited about Maryland joining their league and most of the ACC fans outside of the DC area won't particularly miss Maryland.

You lost me at "Maryland fans" and "realistic."

In all seriousness, I can't say I'll really miss MD (other than, as you say, perhaps the last nail in the coffin of the "old ACC"); however, I don't agree with those who think leaving the ACC is necessarily a terrible move for MD.

[Class of '94]

I think most Maryland fans are realistic that the other B1G schools aren't excited about Maryland joining their league and most of the ACC fans outside of the DC area won't particularly miss Maryland. Other than Maryand fans, the only people who will care are the fans of the other schools who live in the DC area who now will/will not have the opportunity to root for their teams who visit College Park. Other than that, the only significance to Maryland leaving is that it is another sign of the demise of the ACC. But, the days of listening to Bones McKinney, with Holly Farm commercials, and the Sail with the Pilot jingle have long past.

One side effect of the huge success of March Madness is that the rest of the college basketball season seems far less important than it used to be. Even getting tickets to the ACC tournament isn't a big dieal anymore. Or, maybe I'm just old...

But I care about MD leaving and I'm an ACC fan that is not in the DC area. That said, I respectfully doubt that the MD leaving signifies the demise of the ACC. When you make s statement like that, I think it furthers the perception of MD fans having an over-inflated view of how important MD is to the ACC. Don't get me wrong, as a founding member, MD has been important to the ACC; but to say that MD leaving signals the demise of the ACC is blowing it out of proportion imo. I'm going to miss MD as I've stated many times; but it would've been far more crippling to the ACC had any combination of UNC, UVA and GT left for the BIG. That would've far more likely signaled the demise of the ACC than MD leaving. And let's be completely real and honest, the reason that the BIG wanted MD and Rutgers was for their respective TV markets; and not for their athletic programs or academic accomplishments.

As far as the ACCT is concerned, I think with the additions of Syracuse, ND, Pitt and Louisville (in 2014), the ACCT will be a very big deal again. I think MD fans will get a taste of renewed intensity and desirability of the ACCT next season as they walk out the door. Living in BIG country, I can tell you that the atmosphere (and desirability to attend) at the BIG tournament is not as good as the current ACCT (prior to influx of new schools). This past season was unusual in that it was the first time in the years that the tournament was sold out; and when Mich and Mich St bowed out early, there was plenty of empty seats in the United Center for the championship game on Sunday.

For me, it all goes back to this: If MD wants to leave, then leave; but don't talk crap about the conference (the ACC) on the way out; and don't make statements about why you're leaving that aren't true in order to mask the fact that the reason you're leaving is because you need the money. MD will face the same challenges and supposed lack of rivalries in the BIG that they had in the ACC. The only difference is that they'll supposedly make more money dealing with those challenges; and apparently that was ok with MD's administrators and AD.

[Class of '94]

You lost me at "Maryland fans" and "realistic."

In all seriousness, I can't say I'll really miss MD (other than, as you say, perhaps the last nail in the coffin of the "old ACC"); however, I don't agree with those who think leaving the ACC is necessarily a terrible move for MD.

I don't think it's a bad move for MD to go the BIG financially. If MD desperately needs money for their athletic department, I think the move to the BIG made sense based on the financial projections the BIG are giving them.

I don't think it was necessarily the best move for their non-revenue and Olympic sports teams from a travel and geographic perspective; but again it was never about these concerns. It has always been about getting additional money to hopefully get out the red.

As far as the old ACC vs the new ACC, I've never really been caught up in all that because change is inevitable in life and no conference today is the same as it was 30-40yrs ago. Heck, the BIG is not like it used to be; and the additions of Nebraska, Penn St, MD and Rutgers is changing the BIG's culture in much the same way teams like VT, Miami, BC, FLA St, and now Syracuse, Pitt, ND and Louisville have imo.

[howardlander]

As far as the old ACC vs the new ACC, I've never really been caught up in all that because change is inevitable in life and no conference today is the same as it was 30-40yrs ago. Heck, the BIG is not like it used to be; and the additions of Nebraska, Penn St, MD and Rutgers is changing the BIG's culture in much the same way teams like VT, Miami, BC, FLA St, and now Syracuse, Pitt, ND and Louisville have imo.

All true, but I think for myself and probably other folks, we miss the old 8 or 9 team ACC with the double round robin basketball regular season. Sacrificed for football that a lot of us don't really care about...

Howard

[Class of '94]

All true, but I think for myself and probably other folks, we miss the old 8 or 9 team ACC with the double round robin basketball regular season. Sacrificed for football that a lot of us don't really care about...

Howard

I hear you; and agree. I was Born and raised in Durham, and grew up in the old ACC (when it was just 8 schools) with the round-robin basketball schedule; and loved it. I too miss it now; but similar to the front page article on Swofford, I get why the Acc has changed. I don't want to see the ACC destroyed or made irrelevalant; even it means having to sacrifice some of the ACC's traditional formats like the round-robin schedule. Don't get me wrong....I hate that it had to happen; and I know that I too sound like I sold out to the whims of football; but I think the changes that the ACC made had to happen to keep it sustainable in this country's college sports landscape.

I personally wished MD had made the choice to stay and work it out with the ACC to stay. Ironically, MD was one of the main schools consistently voting for expansion (unlike Duke and UNC) which lead to the changes within the ACC; and now they're leaving. Interestingly enough, it looks like MD leaving helped to galvanize the remaining schools to the point that allowed the GOR agreement to occur and stabilize the ACC. It might not have happened had MD stayed. That said, I am extremely interested to see the integration of the new schools that are coming. I think this second wave of expansion is actually a better fit for the league; and it will balance out the football needs with increased basketball strength (along with gains in various non-revenue Olympic sports).

[Duvall]

Maryland money misery maintained.

Maryland wanted to leave the ACC for the rarified air of the Big Ten, the Congressional Country Club of conferences – exclusive and pricy. The ACC responded by saying sure, see ya, but first pay the $52 million exit fee. Maryland said no, not surprisingly, given that it doesn’t have $52 million. The ACC responded by withholding Maryland’s share of ACC revenues – about $15 million during the last academic year – as the litigation rolls on through the courts.

Even when Maryland is finally a full Big Ten member, it’s not going to rain money in College Park. For instance, Maryland doesn’t become a full equity partner in the Big Ten Network until July 1, 2020. Because potential TV viewers were what made Maryland attractive to the Big Ten in the first place, that seems onerous, although Rutgers and Nebraska face the same wait.

[opossum]

I think part of what drove Maryland over the edge was academic prestige. In the ACC, deservedly or not (and I'd say not), Maryland was at the "dumb kids' table," being compared unfavorably to UVA, UNC, and Tech among the public schools. The Big Ten is more egalitarian, with a bunch of decent big public universities with good STEM programs and fine medical schools kind of in big muddle with only Michigan and maybe Wisconsin standing out as any brainier than the rest, and only one elite private school in Northwestern. Maryland fits in well with that Big Ten muddle of decent-to-good state schools, and might benefit better among non-athlete prospects from associations with Illinois or Rutgers than by their previous associations with UVA and UNC.

I do find it kind of ironic that we added three schools north of "Alaska," (BC doesn't seem to count) bringing the Terps closer to the geographic center, right before they left. The icing on the cake would be if Penn State joined the ACC anyway.

[Duvall]

I think part of what drove Maryland over the edge was academic prestige. In the ACC, deservedly or not (and I'd say not), Maryland was at the "dumb kids' table," being compared unfavorably to UVA, UNC, and Tech among the public schools. The Big Ten is more egalitarian, with a bunch of decent big public universities with good STEM programs and fine medical schools kind of in big muddle with only Michigan and maybe Wisconsin standing out as any brainier than the rest, and only one elite private school in Northwestern. Maryland fits in well with that Big Ten muddle of decent-to-good state schools, and might benefit better among non-athlete prospects from associations with Illinois or Rutgers than by their previous associations with UVA and UNC.

I do find it kind of ironic that we added three schools north of "Alaska," (BC doesn't seem to count) bringing the Terps closer to the geographic center, right before they left. The icing on the cake would be if Penn State joined the ACC anyway.

Penn State is the only school excited about adding Rutgers to the Big Ten. Now that they are no longer the Big Ten's eastern frontier they'll never leave.