Endless Slime At Louisville

[JasonEvans]

When someone asks me now why I am so disgusted with collegiate athletics, I will point him/her to this discussion. The argument that Virginia Tech is not an ACC school, and that anything to the contrary is idiotic, exposes so much that is so wrong with modern college sports. I guess I should change my moniker to Pollyanna.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you implying that VT should be an automatic ACC school? Can you expand on why you believe that? What is it about VT that makes them more of an ACC school than Maryland or West Virginia or UGA or South Carolina? I'd be very interested in why you think VT is such an obvious choice for the league so please tell us more.

The argument against them is largely financial. The long term health and viability of the league is predicated on ensuring good TV markets and VT does little toward that end because the conference already has Virginia.

[53n206]

Probably.

[75Crazie]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you implying that VT should be an automatic ACC school? Can you expand on why you believe that? What is it about VT that makes them more of an ACC school than Maryland or West Virginia or UGA or South Carolina? I'd be very interested in why you think VT is such an obvious choice for the league so please tell us more.

The argument against them is largely financial. The long term health and viability of the league is predicated on ensuring good TV markets and VT does little toward that end because the conference already has Virginia.

The highlighted bit above is primarily what I am reacting to; you (and the majority, evidently) see financial considerations as the primary, even maybe sole, decision point on expansion. I think geography and school academic standing should ideally be much, much higher factors than they obviously are now, and in both categories VT is a slam dunk.

And I am puzzled by your comparison points. Maryland was in the conference at the time VT was added; UGA will never be allowed to leave the SEC; SC left the ACC and I assume there are passions on both sides that will not allow their consideration; West Virginia, please gawd amighty NO (as bad as the Maryland fan base was/is, ...).

[arnie]

The highlighted bit above is primarily what I am reacting to; you (and the majority, evidently) see financial considerations as the primary, even maybe sole, decision point on expansion. I think geography and school academic standing should ideally be much, much higher factors than they obviously are now, and in both categories VT is a slam dunk.

And I am puzzled by your comparison points. Maryland was in the conference at the time VT was added; UGA will never be allowed to leave the SEC; SC left the ACC and I assume there are passions on both sides that will not allow their consideration; West Virginia, please gawd amighty NO (as bad as the Maryland fan base was/is, ...).

And FWIW, VaT and SC provide very similar arguments regarding ACC status. Share state fan bases with one other large school, relatively close proximity to Big 4, don’t add much to TV market since UVA/Clemson already pull in that area and academic reps are similar. VaT obviously has had more success in football field since Cocks have had none.

[JasonEvans]

The highlighted bit above is primarily what I am reacting to; you (and the majority, evidently) see financial considerations as the primary, even maybe sole, decision point on expansion. I think geography and school academic standing should ideally be much, much higher factors than they obviously are now, and in both categories VT is a slam dunk.

And I am puzzled by your comparison points. Maryland was in the conference at the time VT was added; UGA will never be allowed to leave the SEC; SC left the ACC and I assume there are passions on both sides that will not allow their consideration; West Virginia, please gawd amighty NO (as bad as the Maryland fan base was/is, ...).

Gotcha... and I hear your arguments. I too wish conference membership was more related to geography and competitive factors more than finances. That would be great... but that is not the reality of big time college athletics these days. ACC programs all generate $70+ mil in revenues and have similar kind of expenses. You have to feed the beast that is salaries and facilities and the such or you cannot compete.

College athletics ain't going back to what it was in the 60s or 70s... it just ain't happening.

[75Crazie]

College athletics ain't going back to what it was in the 60s or 70s... it just ain't happening.

Agreed ... and more's the pity. I do not mind tilting at windmills, as long as the cause is just, which I feel it is because Big Business and college athletics do not have any rational reason to be in bed together. And here's me, arguing that fandom should be rational.

[sagegrouse]

The highlighted bit above is primarily what I am reacting to; you (and the majority, evidently) see financial considerations as the primary, even maybe sole, decision point on expansion. I think geography and school academic standing should ideally be much, much higher factors than they obviously are now, and in both categories VT is a slam dunk.

And I am puzzled by your comparison points. Maryland was in the conference at the time VT was added; UGA will never be allowed to leave the SEC; SC left the ACC and I assume there are passions on both sides that will not allow their consideration; West Virginia, please gawd amighty NO (as bad as the Maryland fan base was/is, ...).

I don't see "financial considerations" as paramount -- I see "survival" as paramount, and the last convulsions in college sports alignments -- if handled badly -- could have threatened the existence of the ACC and likely some of its athletic programs. Swofford did a pretty good job, and the ACC ended up in a stronger position than the Big 12 (8, 9, 10 ... it'll get there eventually). ACC schools are totally locked in for, basically, forever.

[TheDevilMadeMeDoIt]

Agreed ... and more's the pity. I do not mind tilting at windmills, as long as the cause is just, which I feel it is because Big Business and college athletics do not have any rational reason to be in bed together. And here's me, arguing that fandom should be rational.

I agree wholeheartedly with your point. But going even farther back, universities should never have gotten into big time sports. So in the perfect world Duke would have club sports for students, not a factory for the NBA and the NFL. Mine is probably a very unpopular position on this board. I also admit I am a hypocrite because I watch as much Duke basketball and football as any other fan.

[jimsumner]

I agree wholeheartedly with your point. But going even farther back, universities should never have gotten into big time sports. So in the perfect world Duke would have club sports for students, not a factory for the NBA and the NFL. Mine is probably a very unpopular position on this board. I also admit I am a hypocrite because I watch as much Duke basketball and football as any other fan.

You may not be as much of an outlier as you think. It's always been a Faustian bargain.

[tommy]

Agreed ... and more's the pity. I do not mind tilting at windmills, as long as the cause is just, which I feel it is because Big Business and college athletics do not have any rational reason to be in bed together. And here's me, arguing that fandom should be rational.

They don't? Obviously they don't see it that way, and each has its own (financial) reasons to have either pushed or allowed the system to be created and shaped as it has been. Many universities and many businesses are of course making huge money off of these arrangements, so to them it's extremely rational.

[DevilYouKnow]

I recall rumors of Dino canoodling with undergraduate women at WFU.

And his extortion threat is a joke.

He's just a sleaze.

[sagegrouse]

Agreed ... and more's the pity. I do not mind tilting at windmills, as long as the cause is just, which I feel it is because Big Business and college athletics do not have any rational reason to be in bed together. And here's me, arguing that fandom should be rational.

Really, do politicians turn down voters because they may have fundamental disagreements? Why should universities turn down support from "Big Business," with whom it does not have fundamental disagreements. Big Business provides jobs to a lot of graduates and funds for research, and its employees and managers send their sons and daughters to good Ol' Siwash U? Moreover, college athletics is a good training ground, it is said, for becoming a leader in life's pursuits, including Big Business.

It is odd that the U.S., alone among countries, provides pre-professional sports at colleges and universities, instead of in sporting clubs, government-run academies or amateur leagues. Well, as usual, you can blame football. Here's one example: the four big athletic heroes of the 1920's were Babe Ruth, Jack Dempsey, Bobby Jones and Red Grange of the Fighting Illini.

[Billy Dat]

The Gaudio/Mack extortion transcript is entertaining/riveting/very sad

https://www.si.com/college/2021/08/2...ting-extortion

[uh_no]

The Gaudio/Mack extortion transcript is entertaining/riveting/very sad

https://www.si.com/college/2021/08/2...ting-extortion

wow. I don't think I'm a huge chris mack fan by any means, but DG is a bottom tier human being, it seems.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

wow. I don't think I'm a huge chris mack fan by any means, but DG is a bottom tier human being, it seems.

I recently learned of the term douche canoe. I think that applies here quite well.

[MartyClark]

I recently learned of the term douche canoe. I think that applies here quite well.

I can't even bring myself to Google that phrase. I'm afraid of what I would learn.