http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/mens_basketball/articles/2011/10/09/power_move_by_acc/?page=1
While not the primary reason, it seems like it was most certainly the way they used to get Duke and UNC on board. Oh, and BC openly brags about keeping UConn out, since they were the ACC's original choice ahead of Pitt.
And this from Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal...ACC can reopen ESPN deal for two added teams at a time.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2011/09/26/Colleges/ACC.aspx
I think this pretty much shows that basketball was the primary reason. Despite the guy from BC saying otherwise, it all seems to stem from the ACC being upset at dropping down to fifth in the conference ratings, and the Big East kicking their collective asses with 11 bids. And the only way UNC and Duke would do it was if the focus was on basketball powerhouses.
Just like in the Big East, basketball is driving the bus in the ACC.
Well, I don't think it was the primary factor. As Dr. Blackheart's article says, they needed two to re-open their football contract. But the choice of schools was meant to passify the bball schools who were unhappy with the football-based choices of their last expansion.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on October 09, 2011, 01:17:15 PM
Well, I don't think it was the primary factor. As Dr. Blackheart's article says, they needed two to re-open their football contract. But the choice of schools was meant to passify the bball schools who were unhappy with the football-based choices of their last expansion.
On top of that, it seems like BC blocking UConn was actually a good thing for the ACC. UConn fball is too young and they dont even have rivalries in the BE yet. Pitt at least has a history of playing BC, Miami and VTech prior to 2003.
I find it interesting that the article states that ESPN told/advised them on what to do. There seems to be a considerable conflict of interest there.
They were negotiating for Big East television rights and their initial deal was turned down. So they go to the ACC and tell them to go after Big East teams to increase their TV deal. I'm not certain that such actions are illegal, but they certainly are unethical.
Quote from: forgetful on October 09, 2011, 02:11:10 PMI find it interesting that the article states that ESPN told/advised them on what to do. There seems to be a considerable conflict of interest there.
They were negotiating for Big East television rights and their initial deal was turned down. So they go to the ACC and tell them to go after Big East teams to increase their TV deal. I'm not certain that such actions are illegal, but they certainly are unethical.
I'd say it merits hiring a lawyer to find out. At the least, Pitt seems to have been the lead in those failed Big East/ESPN negotiations. Their tanking of that deal potentially robbed a billion dollars from the 14 remaining Big East members. That has to be some form of contract tampering and clearly is not negotiating in good faith.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 09, 2011, 02:20:37 PM
I'd say it merits hiring a lawyer to find out. At the least, Pitt seems to have been the lead in those failed Big East/ESPN negotiations. Their tanking of that deal potentially robbed a billion dollars from the 14 remaining Big East members. That has to be some form of contract tampering and clearly is not negotiating in good faith.
No one team can turn away a deal for an entire conference. WVU was against it also. GTown was against it. Seton Hall was against. ND was against it. Im not sure if Rutgers was against it or not but they sure seemed to be. Granted, Pitt's president provided the leadership...but who put him in charge of it? Did the schools vote to put him in that position? Furthermore, the commissioner kept talking about how turning down the deal was a good thing because the schools would get more money with a competitive offer. One could argue that the BE contract would have been more than the ACC's current deal (and maybe even their upcoming deal). Yet, they still left. With that said, maybe their move wasnt about the money. As I said, they can only cast one vote. What about Tagliabue? GTown voted it down...
TV is the best and worst thing to happen to college basketball with the shoe companies right along with them. Both influence a great deal of the negatives surrounding the sport while also having some positives.
Calls "Cuse and Pitt to the ACC "predatory" and says that BC blocked a UConn move to the ACC.
Talks about the "Catholic" conference.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/mens_basketball/articles/2011/10/09/power_move_by_acc/?p1=Well_MostPop_Emailed2
After the State of Connecticut helps ESPN out they in turn thank the state university by imploding the Big East?
http://www.governor.ct.gov/malloy/cwp/view.asp?Q=484086&A=4010