ACC Votes to Accept Louisville

[blazindw]

ESPN is starting to report that the ACC has voted to accept Louisville in all sports. Focus all discussion of Louisville joining the conference here.

[davekay1971]

ESPN is starting to report that the ACC has voted to accept Louisville in all sports. Focus all discussion of Louisville joining the conference here.

This is a step up from Maryland in every way, except TV market (assuming that DC fans actually tune in to watch Maryland suck).

[bjornolf]

This is a step up from Maryland in every way...

Darn, beat me to it. Wow, who ever thought that K and Pitino would be in the same conference?

[rthomas]

7th Big East Team to the ACC. The Big East is truly dead. Long live the Big East.

[Mike Corey]

This is a step up from Maryland in every way, except TV market (assuming that DC fans actually tune in to watch Maryland suck).

While I share your enthusiasm for the improvement in the two major sports, I respectfully disagree.

This is a step down in many areas: the Olympic sports, in academic rankings, in research, in prestige, and as you mentioned, in TV market. Maryland's not coming back, but I will still lament the lack of tradition and geographic sense that this move makes, as well. And now I can stop whining. :)

I will take a more optimistic approach: Louisville is improving. And since it's now a fellow ACC-er, I'll absolutely root for the Cardinal to rise along with the rest of the conference.

While I think this was the ACC's only play, and that it's a very good thing to add Rick Pitino and Charlie Strong to our coaching ranks--along with Louisville's tradition in basketball--this move is not the same as adding Pitt or Syracuse, both of which were a natural fit to the ACC's university profile (strong academics, research and athletics).

But if this helps to save the ACC, then it's a move that's worth it.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

While I understand there was an academic concession made, I MUCH prefer this to the seeming alternative of UCONN.

If this saves the conference, it is brilliant. If it is simply a delay tactic, at least basketball looks to be solid for the interim.

Good luck Cards, and welcome to the fold.

GO DUKE

[freedevil]

While I understand there was an academic concession made, I MUCH prefer this to the seeming alternative of UCONN.

Agreed.

[Wander]

This is a step down in many areas: the Olympic sports, in academic rankings, in research, in prestige, and as you mentioned, in TV market.


I'll ask again: why should we care about the overall academic/research ranking of a university for a sports conference, as long as the university meets some reasonable and respectable level in its academics (which nearly all Division 1 colleges do)? I've never gotten a good answer to this question.

To me, all that should matter is similarity in the athletics program (both in power level and how the university views/runs/pays for it etc) and geography. Louisville seems to have comparable programs to other ACC schools and is closer to Tobacco Road than FSU, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse, and Boston College (though farther than Maryland).

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Notre Dame, BC, Miami, FSU. This is not the ACC I knew as a young man. But I'll adapt. :cool:

As long as I can still yell GO TO HELL carolina! GO TO HELL! and it means something, I'm happy! http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

[Dukeblue91]

I don't know quite what to think about this.
Even though I thought this was mostly about football, the implications it has to our traditional basketball hierarchy will be huge.
This will shift the Mens BB standings in the ACC in a huge way, the games between Duke, UNC, Syracuse and Louisville will be huge battles every year and it won't be easy to dominate the ACC ever again for any one or 2 teams.
There will be major epic games with some of the best coaches in the game.
I have to say that I never thought to see Rick Pitino in the ACC short of taking the job at NC State.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I like it. Excellent programs in football, men and women's basketball. Their baseball and soccer teams will be challenging for ACC championships. The women bring a lacrosse team, so that replaces Maryland's. (Although I don't see a men's team.) I'm sure they will well compliment the conference in their other non-revenue sports as well.

[ForkFondler]

Soooo, Indiana is a contiguous ACC state, Maryland isn't.

[diveonthefloor]

I'm not an expert in TV markets by any stretch, but exactly how will the loss of Md affect the DC/northern Va market share? Isn't UVa-Charlottesville a strong play in that market?
And won't Louisville capture both the Kentucky, southern Indiana, and southern Ohio markets?

[johnb]

Louisville may be a concession to Florida State and Clemson (+/- Others) to bring in a southern school best known for its sports. As a New Yorker, I was hoping for a local school (UConn now and Rutgers until recently), but it makes sense.

The academic discussion is interesting, but I wonder if it's as much about social cache and elitism than about actual research rank (few of the fans and players are involved in the research enterprise, and through most of the football-watching country, actual research is viewed with anti-intellectual wariness).

One issue is that the ACC doesn't have the flagship state U in the states we share with the SEC (Florida, KY, Georgia), which detracts a bit from eyeball count.

Nevertheless, it'll be good to have new people weigh in on the barbecue debate...

[sagegrouse]

Louisville may be a concession to Florida State and Clemson to bring in a southern school best known for its sports. As a New Yorker, I was hoping for a local school (UConn now and Rutgers until recently), but it makes sense.

The academic discussion is interesting, but I wonder if it's as much about social cache and elitism than about actual research rank (few of the fans and players are involved in the research enterprise, and through most of the football-watching country, actual research is viewed with anti-intellectual wariness).

One issue is that the ACC doesn't have the flagship state U in the states we share with the SEC (Florida, KY, Georgia), which detracts a bit from eyeball count.

Nevertheless, it'll be good to have new people weigh in on the barbecue debate...

Yeah but Georgia Tech would argue that academically it is far superior to Georgia.

sage

[BD80]

... I MUCH prefer this to the seeming alternative of UCONN. ...

Amen. And now we have picked the BigEast clean of its top basketball programs except for GTown.

The ACC has to be the top basketball conference now, which can only help recruiting. Maybe we'll start winning the ACC/BigWhatever Challenge

[johnb]

Yeah but Georgia Tech would argue that academically it is far superior to Georgia.

sage

And I'd agree, but it's not the school that the average state resident follows regardless of where they did or didn't go to college.

[Channing]

hopefully L'ville can hold onto Charlie Strong ... but I'm not counting on it.

[Mike Corey]

The bottom line for me is that the ACC is weaker today than it was a month ago. You trade the DC-Baltimore TV market for the Louisville-(Cincinnati?) market, and you have a net loss on the one issue that's driving this game of musical chairs.

This seemingly stabilizes things. I am excited about that.

Now let's hold on to UNC and UVa and get back to being able to focus on the games these young men and women play.

As to why academics matter--under one rubric, they don't. But under that rubric, why not abandon all sports save for the ones that generate money altogether?

Academics matter because Duke is currently in a conference that values academics and athletics. It values its student-athletes. It promotes them. Being an All-Academic athlete in this conference means a great deal, and I'm as proud of the fact that our chief rival is an academic standout as I am that our chief rival is an athletic standout.

If that makes me an elitist, so be it. But I want Duke to be a part of a conference that values excellence and striving toward it, no matter the task.

If you need a dollars-and-sense answer, I suppose it would be that the schools producing graduates--Lousville's only graduating half of its students--are the ones producing alums that can feed into all the marketing and TV dollars that seem to matter so much.

That said, Louisville's athletic department is producing an awful lot of revenue right now...more than anyone else in the ACC. But those dollars are a pittance compared to the TV dollars driving all this and keeping things stable for the Big 10 and keeping things uneasy for the Big East.

Where does the ACC stand after today? Hopefully on stronger footing. Let's hope we can continue to withstand these winds of change and continue to move forward even though our core is no more.

[COYS]

I'm not an expert in TV markets by any stretch, but exactly how will the loss of Md affect the DC/northern Va market share? Isn't UVa-Charlottesville a strong play in that market?
And won't Louisville capture both the Kentucky, southern Indiana, and southern Ohio markets?

Since the general realignment thread is now closed, I thought I might post this here. This is an excellent (imho) article (http://www.casualhoya.com/2012/11/27/3698576/big-east-tulane-east-carolina-big-ten-big-12-pac-10-acc-maryland-rutgers-ncaa-realignment) that analyzes what the author sees as the folly of conference realignment. In summary, the author makes the point that demand for advertising placement for sporting events is slowly dwindling as more and more people scale back or eliminate cable, use their DVRs, or watch the games using other methods like online streaming. The author also speculates with reason that online viewership is likely to increase substantially over the next few years, ultimately changing the game entirely for the TV ad world. While big games will always draw people to a TV so that they can watch in real time (and therefore, leaving some demand for ads during sporting events), the author questions whether networks like the B1G Network will actually live up to their projected value as consumers of cable programming become less and less willing to pay an extra $3-$5 per month to get a network that shows second-fourth tier sporting events involving colleges that are possibly as far as 1,000 miles away. The valuations for the B1G Network and comparable conference TV deals is creating a bubble that will eventually burst.

So, to answer the question about market share in the DC area, it is possible that in the end both the ACC and Maryland will lose out on market share in the long run. Maryland may lose out because DC-area residents who may have been interested in watching Maryland play the ACC big names like Duke and UNC or regional foes like UVA might be less likely to tune in for games against Northwestern or Minnesota in any sport. Meanwhile, the ACC also loses these games. At the same time, the B1G Network will probably receive a smaller and smaller boost to its revenue assuming that the demand for ad time for third tier B1G games dwindles over the next decade. I think it likely that Maryland ends up gaining virtually nothing for its troubles while the ACC is also stung a bit by the loss of some of its traditional fans.

Anyway, I don't think we can really expect the ACC to pull in as much of the DC market as it once did. Similarly, I'm not sure that adding Louisville will bring in that much revenue, either. In my opinion, both the B1G and the ACC will be hurt in the long term. My hope, however, is that the ACC will remain stable enough so that it can survive this wave of realignment, which I truly believe will pass eventually once it becomes obvious that there really isn't too much long term financial gain for most of the schools that are jumping ship.

[Wander]

As to why academics matter--under one rubric, they don't. But under that rubric, why not abandon all sports save for the ones that generate money altogether?

Academics matter because Duke is currently in a conference that values academics and athletics. It values its student-athletes. It promotes them. Being an All-Academic athlete in this conference means a great deal, and I'm as proud of the fact that our chief rival is an academic standout as I am that our chief rival is an athletic standout.

If that makes me an elitist, so be it. But I want Duke to be a part of a conference that values excellence and striving toward it, no matter the task.

I am not suggesting that academics shouldn't matter. I am saying that I don't understand why the overall research and academic ranking of a university matters to a sports conference.

Which university is more reputable in its overall academics and research - UNC or Butler?
Which university values academics more in its athletics department - UNC or Butler?

That's the distinction I'm trying to point out. We are in agreement that we'd like Duke to be part of a conference that values academics in its student-athletes.

[OldSchool]

To me, the most logical arrangement would be for the major schools to completely divorce football from a school's normal athletic conference.

I don't see why it makes sense for our student-athletes on the other teams to traipse all over the continent to play conference opponents that are selected only for reasons of football revenue.

For football, let the major schools organize the conferences however they like to maximize dollar revenue. These conferences need have no relation to the normal conference a school is in for all other sports. Maximizing revenue from football would help support the other athletic programs.

Under my idea, for schools like Duke or UNC, their normal (non-football) conference would be the mid-atlantic geographic area, something like the old ACC. We would not be sending our other sports teams during the school year off to Boston or Louisville or Pittsburgh.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The bottom line for me is that the ACC is weaker today than it was a month ago.

The ACC does now boast 4 of the 8 top winningest active NCAA basketball coaches... that's not too shabby for realignment all driven by football. At the end of the day, if our conference is still standing, we will have an astonishing amount of firepower for basketball. For most folks on this board, that's far and away the most important issue. Football playoffs be damned, our conference basketball tournaments will be like nothing we've ever seen.

[TruBlu]

Or more accurately, welcome LadyBirds. (One of the few pleasant memories of the Final Four in Dallas '86 was sharing the same swimming pool with the '86 LadyBirds.)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhOPWDSVNem

[ForkFondler]

Under my idea, for schools like Duke or UNC, their normal (non-football) conference would be the mid-atlantic geographic area, something like the old ACC. We would not be sending our other sports teams during the school year off to Boston or Louisville or Pittsburgh.

Pitt and Louisville are both about the same distance as GT.

[Mike Corey]

The ACC does now boast 4 of the 8 top winningest active NCAA basketball coaches... that's not too shabby for realignment all driven by football. At the end of the day, if our conference is still standing, we will have an astonishing amount of firepower for basketball. For most folks on this board, that's far and away the most important issue. Football playoffs be damned, our conference basketball tournaments will be like nothing we've ever seen.

That's absolutely right. Again, I'm thrilled that we're getting Pitino's program here (and Charlie Strong's).

I just want the league to last.

And basketball prowess alone won't make a conference survive. Just ask the Big East.

[cspan37421]

Seems like a stay of execution to me. What does the ACC do if UNC (and maybe UVA) head to the Big 10?

I keep hearing that the coalescing of four 16-team conferences might be followed by the 64 of them telling the NCAA to take a hike. Do you know any schools mentioned above who might really like to do that right about now?

If I were FSU or VT I'd sure as heck not want either UNC or UVA to beat me to the Big 10.

This is all so crazy.

[johnb]

Seems like a stay of execution to me. What does the ACC do if UNC (and maybe UVA) head to the Big 10?

I keep hearing that the coalescing of four 16-team conferences might be followed by the 64 of them telling the NCAA to take a hike. Do you know any schools mentioned above who might really like to do that right about now?

If I were FSU or VT I'd sure as heck not want either UNC or UVA to beat me to the Big 10.

This is all so crazy.

My mood has completely gone optimistic with the recurrent votes of confidence by the university presidents. If UNC or UVa were about to bolt, I really think there'd be some winding down of the apparent solidarity.

I'm also unconvinced that Maryland will be able to afford the $50m exit fee. That would leave them stuck with us. We add either Cincy or UConn, and we get to be the best bball conference and arguably a football conference that is on par w(or better) than the Big 12 and Pac Whatever.

Unlike some people, however, I really don't want to seethe Big East fold--I hope the ACC isn't motivated by that aim.

The goal of 16x4 is very symmetric, but the colleges can bolt with other numbers of teams and conferences. The elite programs should want to be inclusive of the greatest numbers of fans (think they want to lose the casual fans whose interest is piqued by watching their own alma mater on tv occasionally, not to mention the need to televise lots of games--Notre Dame and Oklahoma can only play so many times a week), of the greatest numbers of patsies to puff up their records (think Tennessee or Texas Tech wants to be 3-9 every year?), and of grist for the machinery to maximize their own profits. Why kick out a Duke or even a Wake Forest if you can always control how the coffers are divided?

[Turtleboy]

Or more accurately, welcome LadyBirds. (One of the few pleasant memories of the Final Four in Dallas '86 was sharing the same swimming pool with the '86 LadyBirds.)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhOPWDSVNemThe link is to an unavailable video.

[mayrer]

In addition to its citizens being stuck with the athletic programs of its state university in a dying conference, Connecticut residents have the burden of having Richard Blumenthal, an amoral, grandstanding egocentric, represent them in the US Senate. Rather than just comment on Boston College blocking UConn from the ACC, perhaps a bit of history will help here.

When BC was leaving the Big East, I believe the state of Connecticut sued BC to prevent the move, on some spurious grounds, while Blumenthal was Attorney General. It may have sued the ACC too.

Officials with titles like attorney general are charged with limiting or eliminating frivilous lawsuits like this, yet, lured by the chance for a press conference and TV time, along comes Blumenthal.

It's nice to see BC and the ACC have long memories about this sort of thing; without these memories, the irresponsible acts of "public servants" like Blumenthal would have no consequences.

Let's stand with BC and make it clear - no UCONN forever!

While I hate to see Maryland leave, let's welcome Louisville too.

[OldSchool]

Pitt and Louisville are both about the same distance as GT.

It's not about distance as the crow flies. A natural geographic region for ordinary (non-football) sports teams for Duke would be something along the lines of the original ACC: DC to SC east of the continental divide. Extending that to Atlanta would not be unnatural. Pitt or Louisville would be an unnatural geographic extension, notwithstanding distance as the crow files.

[Nosbleuatu]

To me, the most logical arrangement would be for the major schools to completely divorce football from a school's normal athletic conference.

I don't see why it makes sense for our student-athletes on the other teams to traipse all over the continent to play conference opponents that are selected only for reasons of football revenue.

For football, let the major schools organize the conferences however they like to maximize dollar revenue. These conferences need have no relation to the normal conference a school is in for all other sports. Maximizing revenue from football would help support the other athletic programs.

Under my idea, for schools like Duke or UNC, their normal (non-football) conference would be the mid-atlantic geographic area, something like the old ACC. We would not be sending our other sports teams during the school year off to Boston or Louisville or Pittsburgh.

I had a similar comment in the 14th member discussion (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?29690-14th-Member-Replacement-Discussion&p=605133#post605133). If the basketball revenue really isn't an issue for the conference realignments, then I think it makes a lot of sense for football conferences to be separated from the Olympic sports. This might be a problem for schools like Duke that would (recent optimism aside) likely be left out of the more competitive groupings. But maybe that's fair. Duke doesn't rely on football as a revenue stream anyways...

[throatybeard]

I'll ask again: why should we care about the overall academic/research ranking of a university for a sports conference, as long as the university meets some reasonable and respectable level in its academics (which nearly all Division 1 colleges do)? I've never gotten a good answer to this question.

Because Duke fans enjoy being snotty and ignoring every measure of institutional quality except undergraduate admission rejection rate. It's incredibly petty.

[ice-9]

Since the general realignment thread is now closed, I thought I might post this here. This is an excellent (imho) article (http://www.casualhoya.com/2012/11/27/3698576/big-east-tulane-east-carolina-big-ten-big-12-pac-10-acc-maryland-rutgers-ncaa-realignment) that analyzes what the author sees as the folly of conference realignment. In summary, the author makes the point that demand for advertising placement for sporting events is slowly dwindling as more and more people scale back or eliminate cable, use their DVRs, or watch the games using other methods like online streaming. The author also speculates with reason that online viewership is likely to increase substantially over the next few years, ultimately changing the game entirely for the TV ad world. While big games will always draw people to a TV so that they can watch in real time (and therefore, leaving some demand for ads during sporting events), the author questions whether networks like the B1G Network will actually live up to their projected value as consumers of cable programming become less and less willing to pay an extra $3-$5 per month to get a network that shows second-fourth tier sporting events involving colleges that are possibly as far as 1,000 miles away. The valuations for the B1G Network and comparable conference TV deals is creating a bubble that will eventually burst.

The net effect of everything going digital is lower importance of media distribution and more on the product itself.

If B1G football continues to be great, they'll find a way to capitalize on it.

If ACC football continues to suck, in the end it won't matter what kind of media rights we have.

From that perspective, Louisville is a decent addition because they put forward a good product in the two sports that matter in this money game: men's football and basketball.

[OldSchool]

I had a similar comment in the 14th member discussion (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?29690-14th-Member-Replacement-Discussion&p=605133#post605133). If the basketball revenue really isn't an issue for the conference realignments, then I think it makes a lot of sense for football conferences to be separated from the Olympic sports. This might be a problem for schools like Duke that would (recent optimism aside) likely be left out of the more competitive groupings. But maybe that's fair. Duke doesn't rely on football as a revenue stream anyways...

And even for basketball a smaller natural geographic region-based conference would have advantages. If Duke only had to play, say, 14 regular season games in an eight-school conference, that would leave more scheduling opportunities of nonconference schools to achieve strength-of-schedule goals and to fit in interesting mini-rivalries over multiple seasons with schools such as St. Johns or Georgetown or which would appeal to the broadcasters.

[-bdbd]

I'm with Ozzie - this ain't your grandfather's ACC... (but that is by no means an argument against expansion). Expansion in the current environment is a neccessary evil for the ACC. It is "Expand or die."

I'm genuinely surprised that they chose to add L'ville over U-con. I am most definately NOT a U-con fan, but their higher academic ranking - which I really thought helped the case for adding Pitt and Syracuse - and proximity to NY, as will as their "geographic fit" in the league (especially near to long-traveling BC, Syr and Pitt) seemed to outweigh their lack of FB strength/tradition. I guess not. I just hope that this isn't perceived as a knee-jerk act of desperation for the ACC following the Maryland defection. BTW, anyone aware of how large L'ville's endowment is? That was part of the argument Cincy was using to further their ACC-candidate cause.


The bottom line for me is that the ACC is weaker today than it was a month ago. You trade the DC-Baltimore TV market for the Louisville-(Cincinnati?) market, and you have a net loss on the one issue that's driving this game of musical chairs.
This seemingly stabilizes things. I am excited about that.
Now let's hold on to UNC and UVa and get back to being able to focus on the games these young men and women play.
As to why academics matter--under one rubric, they don't. But under that rubric, why not abandon all sports save for the ones that generate money altogether?
Academics matter because Duke is currently in a conference that values academics and athletics. It values its student-athletes. It promotes them. Being an All-Academic athlete in this conference means a great deal, and I'm as proud of the fact that our chief rival is an academic standout as I am that our chief rival is an athletic standout.
If that makes me an elitist, so be it. But I want Duke to be a part of a conference that values excellence and striving toward it, no matter the task.
If you need a dollars-and-sense answer, I suppose it would be that the schools producing graduates--Lousville's only graduating half of its students--are the ones producing alums that can feed into all the marketing and TV dollars that seem to matter so much.
That said, Louisville's athletic department is producing an awful lot of revenue right now...more than anyone else in the ACC. But those dollars are a pittance compared to the TV dollars driving all this and keeping things stable for the Big 10 and keeping things uneasy for the Big East.
Where does the ACC stand after today? Hopefully on stronger footing. Let's hope we can continue to withstand these winds of change and continue to move forward even though our core is no more.

I agree that the ACC is weaker as an institution than it was a month ago, but that is, simply, Maryland's (unilateral, selfish) fault. The ACC seems to be making the best of an untenable situation, so I hardly blame them for this move. Though what I DO blame Swofford, et al, for is failing to negotiate a better TV revenue stream and/or, to some extent, not working more effectively to placate and retain MD - e.g. too much NC-centric decision-making.

As for the academics question: Why are they important? I agree that in the last few years their importance has dwindled in the face of the full-on rush for eye-balls and TV subsciber $$$. But make no mistake that superior academics does have a prestige impact for leagues, and even here in DC I've seen a lot of MD-to-the-Big10-supporters make a concerted effort (rather ineffectively I'd say) to justify their move to the Big10 on academic grounds. It doesn't affect the TV money directly, but it does impact things indirectly in terms of attracting better/more recruits and more fans (e.g. part of Notre Dame's allure for many fans is their strong academics). Maybe not as important as in-state allegiances, etc., certainly, but people do notice academics. And I think it helps the member universities in attracting students in general, and better faculty, money, etc. (I realize that this may not be a universal view, but I do recall at least a couple of ACC additions over the last 20 years stating that superior academic stature was part of what attracted them to the ACC originally, and how that stature would help their schools as a whole.)


hopefully L'ville can hold onto Charlie Strong ... but I'm not counting on it.

This move certainly helps in that regard. L'ville has better status today, a better schedule coming, and more money to use to keep top-flight coaches.


I'm not an expert in TV markets by any stretch, but exactly how will the loss of Md affect the DC/northern Va market share? Isn't UVa-Charlottesville a strong play in that market?
And won't Louisville capture both the Kentucky, southern Indiana, and southern Ohio markets?

That is the key. I'm in DC. The ACC's share of the DC/Baltimore TV market has been diluted - MD was the strongest player - but certainly there is a lot of VPI and UVA support here, to say nothing of general ACC support/history that won't go away overnight. My point is, for those neutral fans not aligned specifically with MD or VPI/UVA, who grew up following the ACC, that allegiance will not disappear overnight, even if the strongest school in the market has switched. (Not a lot of pre-existing Big10 support here - maybe just a few PSU fans.) Funny that the DC market has long seemed a split between the ACC (MD, VPI, UVA) and Big East (Georgetown).... now it'll still be split, but between Big10 and ACC.

So, net-net, you could certainly make the argument that the ACC just gained a couple million viewers in KY, southern OH and Indiana -- without losing the DC market (just diluting it some). Certainly FB quality improved in this "trade," and BB certainly didn't suffer any.

While I'm not a huge fan of expansion, I see the need for the ACC to respond like this. I lament the degradation of academic standings - not that MD was upper-half in the ACC either, though - but L'ville DOES have lots of BB tradition (and a first-rate, brand-new (Yum!) BB facillity), and has been very, um, Strong in football - consistent top-25 - in recent years. I hope that this works. :rolleyes:

[captmojo]

For geographics and academics and athletics...

#15-The United States Military Academy
#16- The United States Naval Academy

And the strength of what's currently in membership will make these institutions appear more attractive to potential recruits, possibly causing them to return to the high level of competitiveness and prominence they used to enjoy.

...or maybe Baba O'Reilly.

[75Crazie]

I'm with Ozzie - this ain't your grandfather's ACC...
Then let's start calling it something else. Historic ACC records, alliances, etc. are meaningless now. The ACC is dead, long live the ???

[ForkFondler]

For geographics and academics and athletics...

#15-The United States Military Academy
#16- The United States Naval Academy



Notre Dame plus the Navy/G'town hybrid would be much better.

[Wander]

It doesn't affect the TV money directly, but it does impact things indirectly in terms of attracting better/more recruits and more fans (e.g. part of Notre Dame's allure for many fans is their strong academics). Maybe not as important as in-state allegiances, etc., certainly, but people do notice academics. And I think it helps the member universities in attracting students in general, and better faculty, money, etc. (I realize that this may not be a universal view, but I do recall at least a couple of ACC additions over the last 20 years stating that superior academic stature was part of what attracted them to the ACC originally, and how that stature would help their schools as a whole.)

Academic rankings matter for a school. And I care about Duke's academic reputation a lot. But no one's going to say "you know, I would think Vanderbilt would be a great academic university, but they're in the SEC and not the ACC which has a better average academic and research ranking, so they can't be that great."

Academic rankings of universities matter in attracting students and faculty and money. So could sports conferences, I guess, to a lesser degree. But the average academic reputation of sports conferences? No way. You really think a scientist/historian/engineer/literary expert/etc is more likely or less likely to accept a job offer from Duke because the ACC now has Louisville instead of Maryland?

[WiJoe]

Cincinnati has a hard time drawing in football (which makes the world go 'around [barf]), but I would MUCH rather have the Bearcats in the ACC than the " 'ville". Cincinnati is a much better city, and the school is, too - slightly - as are some of the numbers that apparently don't matter.


http://www.accsports.com/blogs/david-glenn/2012112714123/acc-will-vote-on-expansion-wednesday-morning.php

[uh_no]

Then let's start calling it something else. Historic ACC records, alliances, etc. are meaningless now. The ACC is dead, long live the ???

Big East Coast Conference.

[Mal]

Because Duke fans enjoy being snotty and ignoring every measure of institutional quality except undergraduate admission rejection rate. It's incredibly petty.

That's a little strong, no? If, as alums of a great university, we prefer our student athletes to be affiliated with a conference mostly containing other academic institutions of strong reputation, we're incredibly petty and snobs? There may be some psychoanalyzing to be done on why we think it reflects well on Duke that Duke has been in arguably the conference with the strongest academic institutions overall, but many people think it does. And people aren't down on Louisville as an academic institution based solely on its undergrad admissions rate. That rate is reflective of other things. Louisville is, simply put, not even in the academic zip code of the current "weaker" ACC schools, like Clemson, NC State and FSU, all of which produce significantly more leading and relevant scholarship than does the University of Louisville. To say this does not mean it is worthless and doesn't fulfill an important set of goals, and isn't intended to denigrate those universities that aren't UVa, Duke or UNC. But facts are facts, and Louisville is not even playing the same game academically. Half its students don't graduate; its endowment is like a tenth of ours; over 3/4 of its students are from in-state.

[kingboozer]

I'm happy with this move, UL will bring good programs in the top 2 sports and hopefully (fingers crossed) stabilize the league for the time being. As a basketball fan, the thought of having 3 Hall of Fame coaches in the league is amazing, and Pitino is simply a matter of time before he gets in. As far as this not being my grandad's ACC, in his own words, that ship sailed when South Carolina left and Georgia Tech and FSU came in.

[TruBlu]

The link is to an unavailable video.

Sorry about that. Correct link is:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhOPWDSVNeM

Mods, please edit my original post.

[killerleft]

One thing I have noticed is the almost-unanimous pride and happiness that Louisville folks are showing at being the newest member of the ACC. This is really big for them. That's refreshing, and good enough for me. Let the Terps go and rail at another conference about not being appreciated (and you can count on that!).

Maybe it was harder to see until it happened, but Louisville appears to be a great addition to the athletic side of the ACC. Since the ACC is an organization of member schools competing for championships in different sports, I have no trouble with them being only marginally better than UNC as an academic institution:p.

[Class of '94]

Personally, I wanted the ACC to make a bolder move and get Uconn and Louisville now to counteract any further moves by the BIG and BIG 12. In hindsight, if we had picked Rutgers earlier, we probably would've blocked the BIG's move for MD and their encroachment onto the east coast. That said, I get why Rutgers wasn't picked earlier; and if I had to pick between Louisville and UConn, I would've chosen UConn to cement the ACC's presence in the NYC market. In addition, UConn is a better fit academically and geographically. However, I understand why Louisville was chosen and of the two, Louisville is stronger in the two sports that bring in the most revenue for schools.

I'm encouraged for the stability of the league by the unity the ACC presidents have shown in holding MD to the exit fee and selecting Louisville. More importantly, I love the reports that are coming out about the schools agreeing to let the others know if and when they are approached by other conferences (hopefully, they'll honor that agreement); and I like the news (courtesy of re-tweets from accsports) that the ACC is looking into the possibility of starting a sports channel in conjunction with espn, along with some other possibilities. Whether or not this comes to fruition remains to be seen; but at least they're looking into new revenue streams.

I am down about the ACC losing the supposed DC/Baltimore market with the loss of MD; and I was intrigued by the idea of adding Navy to get those markets and footprint back; but I get now is most likely not the time. However, I think Navy (along with Uconn) might be a good pick-up as a full member 16th or 17th school to potentially get that market back I'm not keen on a hybrid of Georgetown and Navy if Georgetown doesn't develop a DIV 1 football school because part of the Big East problems imo was having non-football playing schools with football playing schools. I think the ACC needs to choose schools with DIV 1 football and basketball programs.

[OldSchool]

Big East Coast Conference.

Here's an idea, we divide the new Big East Coast Conference into two divisions:

Division One:
Virginia
Wake
Duke
UNC
State
Clemson
Ga Tech

Division Two:
Boston College
Syracuse
Pitt
Louisville
Va Tech
FSU
Miami

We could even call Division One "the ACC" and Division Two "the Big East". Wait a minute - is that my granddad's ACC?

The more things change...

[captmojo]

Notre Dame plus the Navy/G'town hybrid would be much better.

I can see Georgetown's addition. With Notre Dame out in football play, this would at least keep the participants on an even numbered basis.

But taking Navy and not Army...

[oldnavy]

Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Notre Dame, BC, Miami, FSU. This is not the ACC I knew as a young man. But I'll adapt. :cool:

As long as I can still yell GO TO HELL carolina! GO TO HELL! and it means something, I'm happy! http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

Tell it brother... I remember when I could name all the coaches and most if not all of the starting 5 for the basketball teams in the ACC, now I cant even name all the teams. Welcome to the family UofL.

[Olympic Fan]

Just one poin about TV markets ... I know that overall Louisville is a smaller market than Washington, D.C., -- and that matters when it comes to football money.

But by at least one measure, Louisville is THE BEST basketball market in the country and has been every single year that ESPN has done the survey.
Here's the ESPN survey of the top basketball markets for 2011-12:

Top 25 Markets for 2011-12

No. 1 Louisville: 4.5 rating
No. 2 Greensboro: 3.5 rating
No. 3 Kansas City: 2.8 rating
No. 4 Columbus: 2.7 rating
Raleigh-Durham 2.7 rating
No. 6 Charlotte: 2.3 rating
No. 7 Cincinnati: 2.1 rating
No. 8 Dayton: 2.0 rating
No. 9 Indianapolis: 1.8 rating
Knoxville: 1.8 rating
No. 11 Memphis: 1.6 rating
Nashville: 1.6 rating
No. 13 Greenville: 1.5 rating
No. 14 Cleveland: 1.4 rating
Birmingham: 1.4 rating
Las Vegas: 1.4 rating
No. 17 Norfolk: 1.2 rating
Hartford: 1.2 rating
St. Louis: 1.2 rating
No. 20 Fort Myers: 1.1 rating
Atlanta: 1.1 rating
Richmond: 1.1 rating
No. 23 Pittsburgh: 1.0 rating
Detroit: 1.0 rating
Oklahoma City: 1.0 rating
Jacksonville: 1.0 rating
Tulsa: 1.0 rating

Interesting that the ACC now has four of the top six basketball markets in the country ... of course, this essentially measures basketball passion, not raw viewing numbers (not sure what the rating for the New York or LA market are, but even and 0.2 or something, that might be more raw numbers than a 4.5 in Louisville).

Still, interesting ....

[kingboozer]

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/feed/2012-08/firstand10/story/college-football-realignment-maryland-acc-50-million-buyout-sec-big-ten-pac-12

Duke and UNC seen as crown jewels? Been chased by the SEC for 3 years now? I'm on the fence if anything like this could happen, basketball would be fine but our football would be a serious challenge.

[rthomas]

One thing I have noticed is the almost-unanimous pride and happiness that Louisville folks are showing at being the newest member of the ACC. This is really big for them. That's refreshing, and good enough for me. Let the Terps go and rail at another conference about not being appreciated (and you can count on that!).

Maybe it was harder to see until it happened, but Louisville appears to be a great addition to the athletic side of the ACC. Since the ACC is an organization of member schools competing for championships in different sports, I have no trouble with them being only marginally better than UNC as an academic institution:p.

Rats have the biggest smile when they jump off the sinking ship!!!

[FerryFor50]

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/feed/2012-08/firstand10/story/college-football-realignment-maryland-acc-50-million-buyout-sec-big-ten-pac-12

Duke and UNC seen as crown jewels? Been chased by the SEC for 3 years now? I'm on the fence if anything like this could happen, basketball would be fine but our football would be a serious challenge.

Overlooked from that article:


4. Expectations are everywhere

Just when you thought it was safe to apply for a job, NC State athletic director Debbie Yow publicly explained her expectations for the next coach in Raleigh.

She’s looking for—wait for it—a coach who can bring in “Alabama-type talent.”

Yeah, Deb. You and every other AD outside Tuscaloosa.

[johnb]

Excellent realignment maps, from deadspin:

http://deadspin.com/5963928/the-big-10-is-on-the-move-updating-our-conference-realignment-maps

[TexHawk]

Just one poin about TV markets ... I know that overall Louisville is a smaller market than Washington, D.C., -- and that matters when it comes to football money.

But by at least one measure, Louisville is THE BEST basketball market in the country and has been every single year that ESPN has done the survey.


Probably because more than half are Kentucky fans. ;)

[burnspbesq]

I like it. Excellent programs in football, men and women's basketball. Their baseball and soccer teams will be challenging for ACC championships. The women bring a lacrosse team, so that replaces Maryland's. (Although I don't see a men's team.) I'm sure they will well compliment the conference in their other non-revenue sports as well.

I said over at CollegeCrosse.com that if adding men's lax wasn't part of the deal for Louisvillie, I'm burning John Swofford in effigy in my back yard. The crosstown rivalry between UL and Bellarmine would be something to see.:cool:

[Dukeblue91]

Probably because more than half are Kentucky fans. ;)

Yeah but you have to agree it is quite funny that UK and their fans now have to content with the ACC in their backyard.
I mean short of Duke moving to Kentucky how much better can it get :D

[senkiri]

I'm happy with this move, UL will bring good programs in the top 2 sports and hopefully (fingers crossed) stabilize the league for the time being. As a basketball fan, the thought of having 3 Hall of Fame coaches in the league is amazing, and Pitino is simply a matter of time before he gets in. As far as this not being my grandad's ACC, in his own words, that ship sailed when South Carolina left and Georgia Tech and FSU came in.

I agree that Louisville was the best school that could be added, but am hesitant to think that it stabilizes the league. Until the ACC adopts a grant of media rights (which the Big10, Big12 and Pac12 all have and the SEC is strong enough not to need), all of our schools are sitting ducks the second another conference -- especially the Big10 or SEC -- makes a move. Talk and statements of solidarity and support for the conference from ACC presidents are meaningless next to that. If the ACC had a grant of rights, no school would be leaving and everyone (including other conference commissioners) would know that.

The current configuration of 3 14-team leagues, 1 12-team league and 1 10-team league (which adds up to the magical 64 teams we would have in a 4 league world of 16 teams each) could definitely stabilize. But the ACC becoming "raid-proof" is the only way to get that stabilization for the current configuration -- and the grant of rights seems like the only way to do that. Since the ACC schools are going to be making roughly comparable money to the Big12 once Notre Dame's admission is accounted for in the media contract ($18M compared with $20M), it seems highly unlikely that a current ACC school would leave for the Big12 for similar money and increased travel costs, unless the league was collapsing. So the conferences that could destabilize the ACC are the Big10 and SEC. The latter seems content and is almost done negotiating its media contracts under its current composition. The Big10 however seems to be trying to get to 16 teams and thus 16 markets before its media contract is renegotiated in the next 3-5 years. With their money, even the ACC's full $50M buyout seems surmountable (although less so if Maryland is forced to pay the full amount instead of negotiating it down).

The ACC seems to be in the precarious position the Big12 was in not long ago. The Pac12 was a constant threat to raid them, with the quartet of Texas, TT, OU and OSU nearly leaving several times. Only with the league staring into that abyss (and of course Texas deciding there was more money if it could keep the Longhorn Network which it could only do in the Big12) did they all agree to the grant of rights. Now there is no talk of the Big12 collapsing. Seems like it might be a tough sell to some of the ACC schools, especially FSU, to agree to a grant of rights for the lowest amount per school of any of the big 5 conferences. So Swofford needs to find some creative new revenue stream on top of the current deal, be it an ACC Network or something else, to dangle as a carrot to get the grant of rights.

As an aside, I still don't understand why the ACC Network seems to be disregarded as not feasible. I get that football drives these things, but the BTN shows a few crappy football games each week during football season and has minimal other programming the rest of the year and is hugely profitable. An ACC Network would have a plethora of hugely successful Olympic sports programming to show year-round and I would imagine would be in decently high demand from Virginia (including Northern VA which gets the DC market) to Georgia/Florida. Seems like if the actual product is worthwhile -- and a network that showed ACC soccer, lacrosse & tennis games and some ACC golf seems like a more compelling product than the currently mediocre stuff offered by the BTN -- there should be at least some new revenue in it.

[A-Tex Devil]

This was really the ACC's only move other than standing pat. UConn is a non-starter and the non-football Big East schools turn the ACC into the Big East more than it already is. I still hate the ND non-football add. They are laughing to the bank in South Bend.

That said, anyone that thinks this is an upgrade over Maryland are kidding themselves. The only thing Louisville has on Maryland is facilities. I'd still rather have had Maryland stay than let them leave and add Louisville.

[dukeofcalabash]

Here's an idea, we divide the new Big East Coast Conference into two divisions:

Division One:
Virginia
Wake
Duke
UNC
State
Clemson
Ga Tech

Division Two:
Boston College
Syracuse
Pitt
Louisville
Va Tech
FSU
Miami

We could even call Division One "the ACC" and Division Two "the Big East". Wait a minute - is that my granddad's ACC?

The more things change...

Works for me and I am a granddad! :D

[opossum]

This was really the ACC's only move other than standing pat. UConn is a non-starter and the non-football Big East schools turn the ACC into the Big East more than it already is. I still hate the ND non-football add. They are laughing to the bank in South Bend.

That said, anyone that thinks this is an upgrade over Maryland are kidding themselves. The only thing Louisville has on Maryland is facilities. I'd still rather have had Maryland stay than let them leave and add Louisville.

I know I'm in the minority, but I think ND joins full time in the next few years if everything else remains calm. They need to ease in, and convince their boosters and fans. This year will help -- one more win by Kansas State and they'd have been out of the title game. They know that. Would a zero or one-loss ACC champion Notre Dame be left out of the four-team playoff? Never.

I think a few weeks ago the plan was likely to stay at 14 until ND agreed to add 2 or three games to become a full football member, then shoot the moon for #16 -- Penn State, Florida, etc. Settle for a combination of Navy (so the one football game Notre Dame is going to play anyway is a conference game, making it an easier sell for them) and a non-football northeast school (Villanova or St. Johns). Or Louisville/Cincy/Uconn as a full member. The Maryland move ended that, as the Big Ten intended. Now, we've added Louisville (the ACC's second school that thinks birds have teeth) for #14. I think Notre Dame is still our #15. Our most likely #16 is a Navy/Georgetown combo, which would have been impossible with Maryland still around.

I love Maryland, Lefty, and all that. I'll miss them terribly and will hate to watch their inevitable decline in the Big Ten. But they chose to leave us, and Navy for football and Georgetown for other sports keeps us around DC (on top of VT, which owns DC if you go by bumper stickers) and would be a fine consolation.

If we add UConn or Cincinatti at this point we're admitting Notre Dame will never join as a full football member. Notre Dame shouldn't be allowed to play basketball in our conference unless full football membership is on the table. I understand they have some work to do bringing everyone they need to around on that, but if push comes to shove (like if anyone else leaves the ACC), they can go back to the Big East as far as I'm concerned.

[kingboozer]

I'm all for Navy coming in but not football only, they need to come all into the ACC. ND was a special situation and opportunity and no one else should be given the sweet deal they got from Swofford. Partial membership is what ultimately doomed the Big East.

[opossum]

I'm all for Navy coming in but not football only, they need to come all into the ACC. ND was a special situation and opportunity and no one else should be given the sweet deal they got from Swofford. Partial membership is what ultimately doomed the Big East.

I think having a teetering near-majority that did not play football in FBS at all is a far cry from going a few years with Notre Dame as a 5/8 football member and down the road having one football only member out of 16 and one non-football member out of 16. 16 out of 17 members would be FBS schools.

The Big East combined all-sports members and all-but-football members on a roughly equal basis. They only reintroduced football only membership after the Pitt/Syracuse departures. The ACC would be pairing one football only school with one non-football school. It would stop there. I don't see the instability.

I'd love Navy as the 16th member of the ACC in all sports after #15 Notre Dame, if that's what Navy and the ACC wanted. I thought there were some physical limits on Navy cadets that caused them to choose to compete at the Division I-AA level for other sports. If I'm wrong, then welcome aboard, Navy! (as soon as Notre Dame joins fully).

[uh_no]

I think having a teetering near-majority that did not play football in FBS at all is a far cry from going a few years with Notre Dame as a 5/8 football member and down the road having one football only member out of 16 and one non-football member out of 16. 16 out of 17 members would be FBS schools.

The Big East combined all-sports members and all-but-football members on a roughly equal basis. They only reintroduced football only membership after the Pitt/Syracuse departures. The ACC would be pairing one football only school with one non-football school. It would stop there. I don't see the instability.

I think the concern is that people are suggesting schools such as Georgetown...which is certianly leading down the big east road.

ND might be okay, but the thought that they will eventually join in football I think is a long shot, especially after making the title game this year.

Having a 50/50 split doomed the big east because they couldn't really add more football markets. Right now we have 14 football members, plus the ND mix, so I think we're alright. while I don't think ND will join a conference (which means we'll stay at the same membership), we won't make any moves except to replace teams that leave, and as of now, the only possibility I can see is FSU or clemson to the Big 12. But if ND were to join the Big 10 full time, I think we'd add 2 more (cinci and uconn) and if ND were to join the ACC full time, I think we'd add one of the aforementioned full time....,either way, if ND joins a conference, I think that is the impetus to push us to 16.

[opossum]

I think the concern is that people are suggesting schools such as Georgetown...which is certianly leading down the big east road.

ND might be okay, but the thought that they will eventually join in football I think is a long shot, especially after making the title game this year.

Having a 50/50 split doomed the big east because they couldn't really add more football markets. Right now we have 14 football members, plus the ND mix, so I think we're alright. while I don't think ND will join a conference (which means we'll stay at the same membership), we won't make any moves except to replace teams that leave, and as of now, the only possibility I can see is FSU or clemson to the Big 12. But if ND were to join the Big 10 full time, I think we'd add 2 more (cinci and uconn) and if ND were to join the ACC full time, I think we'd add one of the aforementioned full time....,either way, if ND joins a conference, I think that is the impetus to push us to 16.

I think I was misunderstood. Georgetown/Navy only happens when Notre Dame joins the ACC as a full member.

[A-Tex Devil]

I know I'm in the minority, but I think ND joins full time in the next few years if everything else remains calm. They need to ease in, and convince their boosters and fans. This year will help -- one more win by Kansas State and they'd have been out of the title game. They know that. Would a zero or one-loss ACC champion Notre Dame be left out of the four-team playoff? Never.



Even if Notre Dame got left out of the title game, they would have been in the BCS, which paid $17MM last year. $17 all to one's self beats $17MM split among 14 or 16 teams all day long. So long as the football team has the NBC contract and can stand alone, I can't imagine them sharing that money.

Even if they missed the BCS and went to the Gator Bowl, for instance, they get $2.7MM which is still more than if they split the BCS Championship money.

I just don't see any inventive at all so long as the 4 team playoff doesn't require conference champions, or give conference champions an advantage. It doesn't right now.

[Dev11]

I think I was misunderstood. Georgetown/Navy only happens when Notre Dame joins the ACC as a full member.

The only way Notre Dame joins as a full member is if we get to 4 leagues, one of them being the ACC, and the 4-team playoff being seeded with only conference champions. Until then, they have no incentive to do so, and I would put that scenario at low odds and many years off.

[bjornolf]

The bottom line for me is that the ACC is weaker today than it was a month ago. You trade the DC-Baltimore TV market for the Louisville-(Cincinnati?) market, and you have a net loss on the one issue that's driving this game of musical chairs.

This seemingly stabilizes things. I am excited about that.

Now let's hold on to UNC and UVa and get back to being able to focus on the games these young men and women play.

As to why academics matter--under one rubric, they don't. But under that rubric, why not abandon all sports save for the ones that generate money altogether?

Academics matter because Duke is currently in a conference that values academics and athletics. It values its student-athletes. It promotes them. Being an All-Academic athlete in this conference means a great deal, and I'm as proud of the fact that our chief rival is an academic standout as I am that our chief rival is an athletic standout.

If that makes me an elitist, so be it. But I want Duke to be a part of a conference that values excellence and striving toward it, no matter the task.

If you need a dollars-and-sense answer, I suppose it would be that the schools producing graduates--Lousville's only graduating half of its students--are the ones producing alums that can feed into all the marketing and TV dollars that seem to matter so much.

That said, Louisville's athletic department is producing an awful lot of revenue right now...more than anyone else in the ACC. But those dollars are a pittance compared to the TV dollars driving all this and keeping things stable for the Big 10 and keeping things uneasy for the Big East.

Where does the ACC stand after today? Hopefully on stronger footing. Let's hope we can continue to withstand these winds of change and continue to move forward even though our core is no more.

Are we losing the DC market? UVA and VT have TONS of alums in the area. I see as many of those games televised here as I do Maryland games.

[bjornolf]

Here's an idea, we divide the new Big East Coast Conference into two divisions:

Division One:
Virginia
Wake
Duke
UNC
State
Clemson
Ga Tech

Division Two:
Boston College
Syracuse
Pitt
Louisville
Va Tech
FSU
Miami

We could even call Division One "the ACC" and Division Two "the Big East". Wait a minute - is that my granddad's ACC?

The more things change...

To be geographically fair to the schools and players, you'd have to do a North and South division split. Move Wake and UVA to the North for FSU and Miami. Either that, or do a football and basketball division. ;)

[ForkFondler]

As an aside, I still don't understand why the ACC Network seems to be disregarded as not feasible. I get that football drives these things, but the BTN shows a few crappy football games each week during football season and has minimal other programming the rest of the year and is hugely profitable. An ACC Network would have a plethora of hugely successful Olympic sports programming to show year-round and I would imagine would be in decently high demand from Virginia (including Northern VA which gets the DC market) to Georgia/Florida. Seems like if the actual product is worthwhile -- and a network that showed ACC soccer, lacrosse & tennis games and some ACC golf seems like a more compelling product than the currently mediocre stuff offered by the BTN -- there should be at least some new revenue in it.

The de facto ACC network is ESPNU. Lots of ACC Olympic Sports on there. No new revenue though because ESPN already owns it under the current contract.

[-bdbd]

I agree with the point of this article, that the Louisville move was done - oh novelty of novelties! - primarily to improve the ACC's poor football product. It wasn't done for the new TV market, or for academics, or even for geography. But it DOES improve our FB product on the field, and as a solid side "bene" also improves the BB one too. In terms of the "trade" of Louisville for MD "products on the field" (plus facillities behind them), I'd take L'ville over MD ALL DAY! That's not to say that we won't miss MD's history, traditions and/or be hurt by the loss of some DC/Baltimore TV sets...

But I think Swofford is finally listening, that the realignment is all about football. and maybe a smidge of basketball. And I am betting that FSU and maybe Clemson and VPI urged the ACC to focus on adding FB quality. Look for the ACC to continue to do things to improve its FOOTBALL product going forward.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/stewart_mandel/11/28/louisville-acc-conference-realignment/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a13&eref=sihp

[mapei]

Are we losing the DC market? UVA and VT have TONS of alums in the area. I see as many of those games televised here as I do Maryland games.

But the media coverage (TV, radio, newspaper, social media) of Maryland is greater than that of all other schools combined. It's annoying as hell (particularly as a Georgetown fan, when the Hoyas have been consistently better than MD for most of a decade), but it's a fact. The local media openly root for the Terps, not ever for anyone else unless it's a Cinderella year for a George Mason or GW. VT does get football coverage, but they never get more than the base level - no commentary.

[BD80]

I'm all for Navy coming in but not football only, they need to come all into the ACC. ND was a special situation and opportunity and no one else should be given the sweet deal they got from Swofford. Partial membership is what ultimately doomed the Big East.

Does Navy have a full slate of women's programs?

[kingboozer]

Does Navy have a full slate of women's programs?

10 according to their athletics website, all the basic sports are covered it would appear on the women's side of things
http://www.navysports.com/index-main.html

[Kedsy]

I thought there were some physical limits on Navy cadets that caused them to choose to compete at the Division I-AA level for other sports. If I'm wrong, then welcome aboard, Navy! (as soon as Notre Dame joins fully).

Is there such a thing as I-AA for other sports? I thought it was for football only.

[kingboozer]

Is there such a thing as I-AA for other sports? I thought it was for football only.

I-AA (or FCS) is only football just like FBS-BCS is just football

[ForkFondler]

Most Navy teams would not be at all competitive in the ACC. Navy basketball, in particular. Navy Lax would be a good pickup though.

Georgetown football plays in the Patriot league, but their other programs play in the Big East.. Most Navy programs compete in the Patriot league, but football is currently Independent and has plans to join the Big East. So, they are already essentially splitting a spot in the Patriot league. They could do the reverse split with the ACC.

[ForkFondler]

I agree with the point of this article, that the Louisville move was done - oh novelty of novelties! - primarily to improve the ACC's poor football product. It wasn't done for the new TV market, or for academics, or even for geography. But it DOES improve our FB product on the field, and as a solid side "bene" also improves the BB one too. In terms of the "trade" of Louisville for MD "products on the field" (plus facillities behind them), I'd take L'ville over MD ALL DAY! That's not to say that we won't miss MD's history, traditions and/or be hurt by the loss of some DC/Baltimore TV sets...

But I think Swofford is finally listening, that the realignment is all about football. and maybe a smidge of basketball. And I am betting that FSU and maybe Clemson and VPI urged the ACC to focus on adding FB quality. Look for the ACC to continue to do things to improve its FOOTBALL product going forward.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/stewart_mandel/11/28/louisville-acc-conference-realignment/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a13&eref=sihp

Definitely about football AND basketball. Also, it's about fans. Louisville has football fans; more than UConn and lots more than Maryland.

[alteran]

Louisville fans-- any enemy of Kentucky is a friend of mine. Welcome to the ACC-- and of course, a far better kind of 'que!

[johnb]

I agree with the point of this article, that the Louisville move was done - oh novelty of novelties! - primarily to improve the ACC's poor football product. ......


I'd hesitate to say we have a poor product. The top half dozen teams--year in and year out--are competitive with the top half dozen teams in the Pac 12 and Big 12, though not at the level of the SEC or B1G; that's pretty good.

My concern is actually the blurring of academic boundaries that takes place in trying to recruit several dozen of the very best football players. The teams that are on or will soon be on probation are a testament to that.

And the Maryland financial fiasco is a testament to what happens when teams and administrators don't perform at at a high level; punishment is severe (except, somehow, for Kay Yow, but that's a different story).

Louisville is actually the best poised to honestly recruit athletes in the whole conference. It's a somehow-prosperous commuter school that has a mandate to accept and educate a broad array of students, ranging from students who could fit in comfortably at Duke to students who are marginal academically and drop out after a semester or two. My guess is that their football players aren't academically noteworthy on campus. At a Duke, a student with 1000 SAT's is very likely to be on the FB/BB team; if so, they are great athletes who have significant discipline and resolve and--from my perspective--belong, and they almost always graduate. Nevertheless, their SAT might be 500 points lower than the average person in their math class. They're not just bigger than their classmates, they're academic outliers. For a Duke (or a Carolina or Virginia, etc), there is legitimate room for conversation about whether they SHOULD compete in Div 1 football and basketball if they can't recruit kids who'd stand a good chance of getting accepted if their extracurricular was photography or the school newspaper rather than football. And no one, aside possibly from Stanford and Notre Dame, really does have enough of those recruits to field a competitive team (eg, http://www.suntimes.com/sports/15682410-419/notre-dame-stanford-tops-in-football-academics.html). I think Duke's compromise is reasonable, and I do like FB and BB, and the players have shown themselves to be deserving, but I can see alternative routes (eg, Georgetown, which seems to say, "ok, BB is 10 guys, but football is 85, so we'll just not do it at a top level).

[roywhite]

Reading some speculation about Georgia Tech jumping to the B1G.

The Atlanta TV market is certainly a big prize in the modern shuffle.

[Wander]

I'd hesitate to say we have a poor product. The top half dozen teams--year in and year out--are competitive with the top half dozen teams in the Pac 12 and Big 12, though not at the level of the SEC or B1G; that's pretty good.


I'm not sure why you think this. First of all, the Pac 12 and Big 12 are both better than the B1G. This year alone, Oregon, Stanford, Kansas State and Oklahoma would beat any ACC team, and USC, Oregon State, UCLA, Texas, Oklahoma State, would crush any non-FSU/Clemson team. And honestly, that might be generous to the ACC in my selection of teams. When was the last time the ACC won a big bowl game against a non Big East opponent? ACC football is far below that of the Pac 12 and Big 12.

[dukejim1]

Louisville becomes second ACC team in BCS, congrats Cards. Now they must keep Strong

[formerdukeathlete]

I'd hesitate to say we have a poor product. The top half dozen teams--year in and year out--are competitive with the top half dozen teams in the Pac 12 and Big 12, though not at the level of the SEC or B1G; that's pretty good.

My concern is actually the blurring of academic boundaries that takes place in trying to recruit several dozen of the very best football players. The teams that are on or will soon be on probation are a testament to that.

And the Maryland financial fiasco is a testament to what happens when teams and administrators don't perform at at a high level; punishment is severe (except, somehow, for Kay Yow, but that's a different story).

Louisville is actually the best poised to honestly recruit athletes in the whole conference. It's a somehow-prosperous commuter school that has a mandate to accept and educate a broad array of students, ranging from students who could fit in comfortably at Duke to students who are marginal academically and drop out after a semester or two. My guess is that their football players aren't academically noteworthy on campus. At a Duke, a student with 1000 SAT's is very likely to be on the FB/BB team; if so, they are great athletes who have significant discipline and resolve and--from my perspective--belong, and they almost always graduate. Nevertheless, their SAT might be 500 points lower than the average person in their math class. They're not just bigger than their classmates, they're academic outliers. For a Duke (or a Carolina or Virginia, etc), there is legitimate room for conversation about whether they SHOULD compete in Div 1 football and basketball if they can't recruit kids who'd stand a good chance of getting accepted if their extracurricular was photography or the school newspaper rather than football. And no one, aside possibly from Stanford and Notre Dame, really does have enough of those recruits to field a competitive team (eg, http://www.suntimes.com/sports/15682410-419/notre-dame-stanford-tops-in-football-academics.html). I think Duke's compromise is reasonable, and I do like FB and BB, and the players have shown themselves to be deserving, but I can see alternative routes (eg, Georgetown, which seems to say, "ok, BB is 10 guys, but football is 85, so we'll just not do it at a top level).



I agree there is legitimate room for the conversation you suggest. I might offer the following for additional perspective.

At the Ivies, few Football or Basketball recruits would be admitted were their speciality the latest in digital photography, rather than Football or Basketball. The Ivy League miniumum is about a combination of a 3.3 GPA with a 1070 math verbal and a school may take just one or two Football players at that level each year, out of 30 preferred admits. The SAT averages on Ivy teams are 1300 math verbal plus, still maybe less than half of the preferred Football admits would have a shot in admissions without some other preference. Based on information one can gather on line, the math verbal SAT average on Stanford's Football team is into the 1200s. I dont think Notre Dame is close to that, though it does seem that Notre Dame is recruiting a better student student athlete these days. For example, when the NCAA passed Proposition 48 in 1986, an article in the NYT pointed out that in the prior 5 years 32 Football players were admitted to Notre Dame with academics below the newly established NCAA minimums. http://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/09/sports/views-of-sport-looking-behnd-the-proposition-48-image.html And, in 1997, the last year the NCAA released SAT information by school,

Table 1 - SAT scores and Graduation Rates (Div. I-A Top 10 and others)

Rank School Football Ave. SAT Football Grad. %
1 Stanford 1108 94%
2 Northwestern 1102 92%
3 Rice 1083 48%
4 Duke 1068 86%
5 Vanderbilt 1049 86%
6 Purdue 1005 43%
7 UCLA 1002 63%
8 Tulsa 1002 41%
9 Missouri 994 60%
10 Indiana 990 65%

The rest of the Pac-10…

Rank School Football Ave. SAT Football Grad. %
24 Oregon 958 57%
26 Washington 955 59%
30 U$C 953 59%
37 Arizona State 947 39%
61 Washington State 915 41%
70 Cal 877 44%
73 Arizona 873 65%
73 Oregon State 873 63%

Some other Notables…

Rank School Football Ave. SAT Football Grad. %
12 Ohio State 984 29%
16 Texas 970 56%
21 Penn State 960 71%
25 Syracuse 957 67%
27 Iowa 954 61%
29 North Carolina 953 48%
35 Colorado 948 53%
46 Michigan 929 38%
49 Virginia 927 80%
51 Notre Dame 925 87%
65 BYU 900 48%
69 Florida 883 53%
72 Wisconsin 876 63%
73 San Jose State 873 ???
81 Rutgers 864 38%
84 Nebraska 860 63%
88 Tennessee 847 25%
100 Florida State 827 71%
101 Hawaii 826 64%
106 Michigan State 798 44%
107 Utah 795 22%
108 Southern Mississippi 785 60%

** Source: 1997 NCAA Division I Graduation-Rates Report [SAT Data: 1993-1996 entering freshmen classes; Graduation Rates from 1990-91 entering classes of those exhausting eligibility].

http://stanford.scout.com/3/1997_SAT_Analysis.html

Stanford's academic criteria have improved since this data was released, though the SAT was recurved after 1993 whereby what was an 1100 math verbal became about a 1200 - both roughly 80th percentile. Notre Dame was below North Carolina at the time.

Because of the numbers of players involved, your Georgetown example, Basketball is 10 or 12 guys. Truly elite players may be here a couple of years. They will play right away. But, Football is a different story. We have 85 scholarship players, the largest squad on campus, plus preferred walk-ons. For the very most part, they know they will be here for 4 or more years. They need to be credible students and want to be at Duke academically.

[COYS]

Reading some speculation about Georgia Tech jumping to the B1G.

The Atlanta TV market is certainly a big prize in the modern shuffle.

This is an honest question. How big is GaTech's market share in Atlanta? I grew up just outside of ATL. While GaTech does have some followers, the state is owned by UGA. Most Tech fans actually went to Tech, which is a smaller school than UGA. Virtually everyone else in the state has adopted UGA, even if they didn't actually attend the school. The Atlanta area is also populated by fans of other SEC schools who probably outnumber GaTech fans, as well. Would GaTech really bring in a significant portion of the Atlanta market? A GaTech football game against Minnesota would be an afterthought to most Atlantans who are otherwise watching SEC clashes. It's true that a GaTech football game against Boston College is probably not much better, but at least Tech will play FSU, Clemson and the Carolina schools, which also have a lot of fans in the Atlanta area. If GaTech joined the B1G, I would imagine that interest in Tech's games in the Atlanta area would actually dwindle as the lack of regional opponents would cause fans of schools like Clemson, FSU, Duke, UNC, and NCState to stop tuning in.

[YmoBeThere]

This is an honest question. How big is GaTech's market share in Atlanta? I grew up just outside of ATL. While GaTech does have some followers, the state is owned by UGA. Most Tech fans actually went to Tech, which is a smaller school than UGA. Virtually everyone else in the state has adopted UGA, even if they didn't actually attend the school. The Atlanta area is also populated by fans of other SEC schools who probably outnumber GaTech fans, as well. Would GaTech really bring in a significant portion of the Atlanta market? A GaTech football game against Minnesota would be an afterthought to most Atlantans who are otherwise watching SEC clashes. It's true that a GaTech football game against Boston College is probably not much better, but at least Tech will play FSU, Clemson and the Carolina schools, which also have a lot of fans in the Atlanta area. If GaTech joined the B1G, I would imagine that interest in Tech's games in the Atlanta area would actually dwindle as the lack of regional opponents would cause fans of schools like Clemson, FSU, Duke, UNC, and NCState to stop tuning in.

Keep in mind this appears to be about getting included in a channel programming tier to collect X.XX per month per person who has that tier. So, getting GaTech even if the ratings aren't great works out fine. Are you going to insist they take away your "Sports" tier, which would potentially get rid of you Fox regional sports network that would carry ACC programming so that you wouldn't have to watch GaTech? The key to all this changing is ala carte pricing which died a couple years ago but could be revived at any time. FWIW, there is some variant of the Big10 network that I get here in San Antonio(never watched it so can't tell you what it actually is). I would get rid of it if I could but I want the other programming in that tier.

[throatybeard]

UL may be losing their football coach:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8710353/sources-charlie-strong-louisville-cardinals-front-runner-tennessee-volunteers-coaching-job

[Duvall]

So I was reading this article (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/9022342/notre-dame-fighting-irish-join-acc-summer-school-negotiate-big-east-exit-according-sources) on ESPN.

It stated:



This doesn't make sense to me. If MD is leaving this summer, and Syracuse and Pitt are coming aboard, wouldn't the ACC have unbalanced divisions UNLESS Louisville comes in this summer? I just assumed we were getting them next year.

Color me confused, or am I forgetting something?


Edited to add -- same with Big Ten? Unless Maryland isn't leaving until after 2013-2014 season?

Maryland (and Rutgers) will be joining the Big Ten after the 2013-2014 season. Louisville can't come until Maryland leaves.

I suppose it's theoretically possible for Maryland and Rutgers to leave after the 2012-2013 season and have Louisville join the ACC then, but I don't think anyone really wants to do that.

[A-Tex Devil]

Maryland (and Rutgers) will be joining the Big Ten after the 2013-2014 season. Louisville can't come until Maryland leaves.

I suppose it's theoretically possible for Maryland and Rutgers to leave after the 2012-2013 season and have Louisville join the ACC then, but I don't think anyone really wants to do that.

Thanks. I deleted my post as I answered my question. I had it in my head that this was the last year Duke was playing Maryland. Maybe it was just the last game at Comcast if Duke doesn't have home and home with MD next year.

[wilson]

Apropos of this, the ACC is reportedly amenable to adding Notre Dame a year early should the Irish find that avenue possible amid the Big East's ever-swirling uncertainty.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/9022342/notre-dame-fighting-irish-join-acc-summer-school-negotiate-big-east-exit-according-sources

[Henderson]

Is there an antitrust or other impediment to the NCAA agreeing collectively to a package of broadcast rights for all the D1 schools, with some formula for revenue sharing? That way the schools could develop conferences that actually make sense from a sports point of view. I'm pretty tired of hearing that East Coast University is joining the 38 team Hawaiian Athletic Conference because it can get more $$ that way.

Or is it just the financial self-interest of the bigs that propels this insanity and prevents a more sensible solution?

[DukeAlumBS]

My friends,

I agree with Mike Corey and have made many comments on other forums about why we are bringing in Syracuse and Louisville to the ACC.
You can google and see what their goals are. It is not the student at all. The past 2 years of Syracuse basketball has not been about the student. This has been obvious.
The 2 are not Research or Academic Institutions as well. As Duke,Wake Forest , UNC CH or UVA as well which have 4 year graduation rates of 100 percent.
It bothers me this happened and will show in time just like 2 big coaches that were guided out the past 2-3 years because of this very issue . One from the ACC.
I think a very sad state, that upsets me a great deal.

Hve nice day my friends,

Jimmy

[jimsumner]

Maryland (and Rutgers) will be joining the Big Ten after the 2013-2014 season. Louisville can't come until Maryland leaves.

I suppose it's theoretically possible for Maryland and Rutgers to leave after the 2012-2013 season and have Louisville join the ACC then, but I don't think anyone really wants to do that.

With the football schedules in place, I'm not even sure it's theoretically possible.

[Nugget]

Is there an antitrust or other impediment to the NCAA agreeing collectively to a package of broadcast rights for all the D1 schools, with some formula for revenue sharing? That way the schools could develop conferences that actually make sense from a sports point of view. I'm pretty tired of hearing that East Coast University is joining the 38 team Hawaiian Athletic Conference because it can get more $$ that way.

It appears that the NCAA tried that, or something close to that (albeit for a different asserted justification -- to try to protect the live attendance/ticket sales, rather than to discourage conference jumping) and the Supreme Court found it an antitrust violation.

It is somewhat ironic that the result of this decision was to move the tv contracting power for football from the NCAA to the conferences -- that, of course, is what leads to the stratification between leagues based on their individual football-driven contracts and the incentive to jump/poach leagues. What makes this all football/conference driven is that while the major $ value in basketball is rights to the NCAA tournament (controlled by the NCAA not the conferences), there is no NCAA football playoff -- so the BCS and other football post-season revenue is controlled by the conferences not the NCAA. The NCAA could actually get back much of the power if it wanted to by authorizing an 8 or 16 team playoff, for which it would control the tv rights and it could do the same kind of revenue sharing it does for the NCAA basketball tournament, because a playoff that large would to some degree overshadow (and devalue) the regular season rights controlled by the conferences.

Here's the Supreme Court's summary (which I've modified a bit into plainer english) of that decision, NCAA v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIV. OF OKLA., 468 U.S. 85 (1984).

“In 1981, [the NCAA adopted a plan to protect attendance at games by limiting the total number of televised games and the number of times any one member could appear on television each year.] The NCAA has separate agreements with [ABC and CBS . . . ]. Each network agreed to pay a specified "minimum aggregate compensation" to the participating NCAA members, and was authorized to negotiate directly with the members for the right to televise their games. [Certain of the NCAA member schools – the major football playing schools except the Big 10 and Pac 10] . . . claimed that they should have a greater voice in the formulation of football television policy than they had in the NCAA. The CFA [contracted with NBC for more coverage/money for CFA members]. . . . [T]he NCAA announced it would take disciplinary action against any CFA member that complied with the CFA-NBC contract. [The CFA schools sued and the trial court found that] the controls exercised by the NCAA over the televising of college football games violated [antitrust law]. The court found that competition in the relevant market - defined as "live college football television" - had been restrained in three ways: (1) the NCAA fixed the price for particular telecasts; (2) its exclusive network contracts were tantamount to a group boycott of all other potential broadcasters and its threat of sanctions against its members constituted a threatened boycott of potential competitors; and (3) its plan placed an artificial limit on the production of televised college football. . . .

Held: The NCAA's television plan violates section 1 of the Sherman Act.

(a) [The Supreme Court noted that, although price fixing and output limitations between competitors are “ordinarily . . . ‘illegal per se,’”, that rule does not apply to this case because the nature of the product (football games) requires some restraints on competition between the members for the product to be supplied at all. Therefore, the question is whether the particular restraints are reasonable – which is judged by “whether or not [they] enhance competition”.]

(b) The NCAA television plan [restrains] . . . operation of a free market, and the District Court's findings establish that the plan has operated to raise price and reduce output (i.e., there would be more televised football, at a lower per game price, absent the restraints). . . [So, the burden shifts to the NCAA to prove that its television plan enhanced competition] . . .

(c) The record does not support the NCAA's [argument that is plan is] a cooperative "joint venture" which assists in the marketing of broadcast rights and hence is procompetitive. [this is how the pro leagues are viewed]

(d) [The plan does not protect live attendance because it allows games to be televised during all hours that other games are played. And, even if it did protect live ticket sales, doing it this way on the assumption that a game between A and B is “insufficiently attractive to draw live attendance” against a televised game between C and D is not a legitimate justification under the Sherman Act].

(e) The [NCAA’s asserted] interest in maintaining competitive balance . . . is not related to any neutral standard or to any readily identifiable group of competitors [nor] . . . tailored to serve such an interest. It does not regulate the amount of money that any college may spend on its football program or the way the colleges may use football revenues, but simply imposes a restriction on one source of revenue that is more important to some colleges than to others. There is no evidence that such restriction produces any greater measure of equality throughout the NCAA than would a restriction on alumni donations, tuition rates, or any other revenue-producing activity. Moreover, the District Court's well-supported finding that many more games would be televised in a free market than under the NCAA plan, is a compelling demonstration that the plan's controls do not serve any legitimate procompetitive purpose.

[Dev11]

I see on Twitter that Louisville will be serving beer for a dollar at their spring game. I welcome this important addition to ACC country.

[Duvall]

With the football schedules in place, I'm not even sure it's theoretically possible.

And my dream of getting a Maryland-free world a year early is crushed.

[JasonEvans]

I had it in my head that this was the last year Duke was playing Maryland. Maybe it was just the last game at Comcast if Duke doesn't have home and home with MD next year.

While we do not know what Maryland's home slate will be next season, many folks seem to think that Duke and UNC, the two marquee opponents in the ACC around whom ticket packages can be built and sold, will not play at Maryland next season as a way of punishing the Terps for leaving the conference. Many seem to think Maryland will get a home slate of that includes BC, Wake, Ga Tech, Va Tech, Virginia, and Clemson... plus a couple other teams.

I have one friend who suggested that Maryland might be given only 5 or 6 ACC home games and the rest would be road games. If the Terps don't like it, we merely put it to a vote of the rest of the conference as to whether they agree with this plan ;)

-Jason "I truly cannot wait for those low-lifes to leave the conference and enjoy sending their field hockey team on 1000+ mile field trips" Evans

[Henderson]

While we do not know what Maryland's home slate will be next season, many folks seem to think that Duke and UNC, the two marquee opponents in the ACC around whom ticket packages can be built and sold, will not play at Maryland next season as a way of punishing the Terps for leaving the conference. Many seem to think Maryland will get a home slate of that includes BC, Wake, Ga Tech, Va Tech, Virginia, and Clemson... plus a couple other teams.


That's an assumption I've heard too. With all the tough ACC teams away. I hope that doesn't happen. As much as I dislike the Terps, vindictive scheduling seems kind of low brow. Like torching your own town after a win. The "punishment" comes in the form of an exit fee. I hope the ACC leaves it at that.

[jimsumner]

While we do not know what Maryland's home slate will be next season, many folks seem to think that Duke and UNC, the two marquee opponents in the ACC around whom ticket packages can be built and sold, will not play at Maryland next season as a way of punishing the Terps for leaving the conference. Many seem to think Maryland will get a home slate of that includes BC, Wake, Ga Tech, Va Tech, Virginia, and Clemson... plus a couple other teams.

I have one friend who suggested that Maryland might be given only 5 or 6 ACC home games and the rest would be road games. If the Terps don't like it, we merely put it to a vote of the rest of the conference as to whether they agree with this plan ;)

-Jason "I truly cannot wait for those low-lifes to leave the conference and enjoy sending their field hockey team on 1000+ mile field trips" Evans

I can see the ACC tweaking the schedule so that Maryland gets few if any marquee games at home. But I cannot imagine Maryland getting less than the requisite number of home games. It would make the ACC seem petulant and vindictive. Maybe this part of the thread is in jest.

I would add that I haven't talked to anyone who thinks the ACC-Big Ten Challenge will be renewed.

[-bdbd]

While we do not know what Maryland's home slate will be next season, many folks seem to think that Duke and UNC, the two marquee opponents in the ACC around whom ticket packages can be built and sold, will not play at Maryland next season as a way of punishing the Terps for leaving the conference. Many seem to think Maryland will get a home slate of that includes BC, Wake, Ga Tech, Va Tech, Virginia, and Clemson... plus a couple other teams.

I have one friend who suggested that Maryland might be given only 5 or 6 ACC home games and the rest would be road games. If the Terps don't like it, we merely put it to a vote of the rest of the conference as to whether they agree with this plan ;)

-Jason "I truly cannot wait for those low-lifes to leave the conference and enjoy sending their field hockey team on 1000+ mile field trips" Evans

Around the time of the Duke game in College Park there were several stories in the Washington Post, as well as local TV Sports shows (and radio) making the assumption - I'd call it almost an assertion of feit accompli - that MD will NOT get a home game in BB versus Duke or UNC next year. I don't have a problem with that, as those are sometimes the only sell-outs they get at Comcast, and the administration there DOES advertize those games in pushing season ticket plans. But it would seem mean-spirited (and I wonder if it'd get brought up in the courtroom re. the Exit-Fee lawsuit -- "See, they already made us pay...") to take away some home games entirely. Giving them home match-ups with just Clemson, BC, Pitt, Wake, GT, etc, and not giving them well-attended ones with Duke, NC, UVA, etc. could always be chalked up to "(poor) luck of the draw." Not so with removing some home games entirely.

That all said, I actually am hoping for a Duke game in CP, if only to leave them with a really bad taste in their mouths for eternity.
:mad:

[msdukie]

And my dream of getting a Maryland-free world a year early is crushed.

Yet, tonight they will be your favorite team.

[Class of '94]

Apropos of this, the ACC is reportedly amenable to adding Notre Dame a year early should the Irish find that avenue possible amid the Big East's ever-swirling uncertainty.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/9022342/notre-dame-fighting-irish-join-acc-summer-school-negotiate-big-east-exit-according-sources

This article mentioned that neither Louisville or Rutgers can leave for their respective new leagues this summer b/c neither leagues are prepared to take them due to unbalanced football divisions and scheduling that would occur.

A question for anyone who may have thoughts on this: Could the ACC negotiate with MD from a position of strength to allow them to leave this summer in order to bring Louisville in to replace them while not losing posture with any supposed schools in the ACC that might be open to leaving the conference? I know "everyone" is watching to see if and how well the 50 million dollar exit feel holds up against MD's antitrust claims; but could the ACC, the BIG and MD work out a deal in which MD would still pay a substantial exit fee (well over 20 million) while preventing the 50 million exit fee from being challenged in court? With the Catholic 7 forming a new Big East and separating this summer, an new unforeseen situation has been created that has caught a lot of people off guard. Could the ACC use this situation to spin it pubilicly that they negotiated with MD solely because of this unique situation and the ACC benefitted by being able to bring in Louisville a year early to replace MD.

In the end, it may be best for the ACC to stand pat and bring Louisville into the league next summer; but who knows, maybe MD is itching to leave the ACC sooner than later and not have to go through another season as a lame duck.

[TruBlu]

Yet, tonight they will be your favorite team.

Speaking for myself, I hate Maryland and want them to go away. I hate unc and want them to stay around for entertainment, and to beat them like a drum.