http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2013-02-20/big-ten-expansion-north-carolina-virginia-georgia-tech-acc
It's not the bleecher report, not sure how credible this is, but this would be interesting
We've been hearing whispers about this happening. I'll say it again...it's very interesting that the fourth best football conference...located in the dying Rust Belt...is able to call all the shots and hold all the power.
If UNC bolts.......Duke to C7?
Quote from: MUlegends on February 20, 2013, 11:04:33 AM
If UNC bolts.......Duke to C7?
I wish, but they do have football.
Quote from: MUlegends on February 20, 2013, 11:04:33 AM
If UNC bolts.......Duke to C7?
Not unless they drop football.
The C7 provides MU and its other members a comfortable buffer from all this nonsense.
Edit: As a side note, there are many, many reasons not to jump the gun on this, perhaps most prominently the status of the litigation against Maryland. If the ACC wins that, methinks the people of North Carolina and Virginia might hesitate just a bit about having to ante up $50 million apiece so their universities can change conferences.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 20, 2013, 11:07:25 AM
Duke has Football.
Duke has an atrocious football team. Not that it would ever happen, but they'd be better off torpedoing their football than getting stuck in CUSA just to keep the football team alive.
Despite their struggles the last couple years, the Big Ten is still an incredibily powerful conference with two/three of the biggest 'brands' in the sport. So...the fact they can call the shots over the ACC from a football standpoint should not surprise you. The SEC and Big Ten are the two most powerful conferences out there. Period.
The ACC football-wise, has two things compared to the B10 and SEC: Jack and shite
Whether these rumors are true at the moment or not, this action is going to happen sooner or later. The ACC will not survive as is, and I suspect the rumblings around some sort of alignment/merger with the Big 12 is the most likely long-term scenario.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 11:02:50 AM
We've been hearing whispers about this happening. I'll say it again...it's very interesting that the fourth best football conference...located in the dying Rust Belt...is able to call all the shots and hold all the power.
And then people will keep replying to you that it is more importantly (sadly) the richest conference. No one gives a crap about the results on the field; all that matters is money (sadly). When you understand that it will no longer be interesting to you at all, just sad.
Quote from: Niv Berkowitz on February 20, 2013, 11:09:56 AM
Despite their struggles the last couple years, the Big Ten is still an incredibily powerful conference with two/three of the biggest 'brands' in the sport. So...the fact they can call the shots over the ACC from a football standpoint should not surprise you. The SEC and Big Ten are the two most powerful conferences out there. Period.
The ACC football-wise, has two things compared to the B10 and SEC: Jack and crape
By "struggles" I assume you don't mean monetarily.
Pac-12 and B1G > SEC. The academic advantages they provide to their schools are so far beyond anything the SEC can match. SEC is powerful. . .in one sport.
You guys need to get over yourselves. Duke is never going to be in the C7.
Quote from: Warriors10 on February 20, 2013, 11:16:07 AM
You guys need to get over yourselves. Duke is never going to be in the C7.
I agree with that.
I also want to make the larger point that I think that it's better to have a strong basketball team and no football at all than it is to have a strong basketball team and a terrible football team that none of the BCS conferences want.
I say this because UCONN is on the outside looking in. If they scuttled their football and asked to join the C7 would we take them? Yes. However, because they're scrambling for BCS money, a team that has been on the premier basketball programs (including women's) in the nation is stuck in CUSA 2.0. Cincy, though somewhat removed from Oscar Robertson or Huggins era greatness, and with a marginally better football program than UCONN, is in essentially the same boat.
Without being forced to find a home for bad football, schools have the freedom to create a great basketball league.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 11:02:50 AM
We've been hearing whispers about this happening. I'll say it again...it's very interesting that the fourth best football conference...located in the dying Rust Belt...is able to call all the shots and hold all the power.
Picking off teams from the #5 and #6 football conferences, doesn't necessarily mean they are calling all the shots. While great schools and strong brands, UNC, UVA, and GT are not great football programs (GT is probably the best of the group, and they are only a BCS-bowl caliber team every half-decade or so). Similarly neither Rutgers or Maryland are top flight programs. None of those teams would be likely targets for the SEC (who could instead try to pick up a FSU or Clemson). So, for those programs the B1G is probably the best shot for them to move up in the football world--even if "#4", B1G is still a better football conference than the ACC or Big East are, plus has way more resources.
If the B1G was truly "calling all the shots", then I think we'd see them convincing ND to join in football. Instead, they are making the most out of their situation and picking off the strongest brands (overall, not just in football) that they can acquire.
Quote from: Aughnanure on February 20, 2013, 11:15:25 AM
By "struggles" I assume you don't mean monetarily.
Pac-12 and B1G > SEC. The academic advantages they provide to their schools are so far beyond anything the SEC can match. SEC is powerful. . .in one sport.
In the last 20 years, the SEC has won six men's basketball championships. The Big 10 has won one.
The SEC has won five women's basketball championships. The Big 10 has one.
The SEC has seven baseball championships. The Big 10 has zero.
The SEC has four golf championships. The Big 10 has one.
The SEC has eight swimming championships. The Big 10 has one.
The SEC has 12 women's gymnastics championships. The Big 10 has zero.
But the Big 10 has been far stronger in men's soccer and women's volleyball, and each have one softball championship.
So, er, way to go Big 10!
UNC, VA, GT are flagship state schools with large alumni bases and high academic profiles.
Perfect for Big???.
Still doesn't explain Northwestern.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 11:02:50 AM
We've been hearing whispers about this happening. I'll say it again...it's very interesting that the fourth best football conference...located in the dying Rust Belt...is able to call all the shots and hold all the power.
Because the midwest isn't dying, isn't entirely the "rust belt," has a ton of people, and has a bunch of schools with enormous alumni bases.
Quote from: INDYWarrior on February 20, 2013, 11:08:25 AM
Drop the program
They've got the best punter in the nation though.
Quote from: MUlegends on February 20, 2013, 11:04:33 AM
If UNC bolts.......Duke to C7?
No ND to C7 ... renamed the C8
I sure hope the ACC schools saved the first (and perhaps only) installment of their $3.6B contract.
http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:arc:video:southparkstudios.com:1989758a-ed01-11e0-aca6-0026b9414f30
Duke did go to a bowl game this season.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 11:33:14 AM
In the last 20 years, the SEC has won six men's basketball championships. The Big 10 has won one.
You think the SEC is a better basketball conference than the Big Ten?
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 11:02:50 AM
We've been hearing whispers about this happening. I'll say it again...it's very interesting that the fourth best football conference...located in the dying Rust Belt...is able to call all the shots and hold all the power.
4th best but richest by far, largest alumni base and best tv ratings.
Duke had a decent football team and played well in a bowl game but lost (IIRC). I think they find themselves in aslightly precarious position being weak in football though. I am not sure the ACC football schools are good enough to matter long term.
I hate the idea of the Big 10 going to 16 teams but if they did UVA and UNC would be great fits. Still scratching my head on Rutgers - except for the TV market.
Quote from: TinyTim on February 20, 2013, 11:49:27 AM
Because the midwest isn't dying, isn't entirely the "rust belt," has a ton of people, and has a bunch of schools with enormous alumni bases.
The Rust Belt isn't dying and has a ton of people? Really? I think you mean the Midwest has plenty of people who weigh a ton.
Quote from: bradley center bat on February 20, 2013, 12:06:13 PM
Duke did go to a bowl game this season.
Congratulations on being one of the top 50% of all programs. /sarcasm.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 11:02:50 AM
We've been hearing whispers about this happening. I'll say it again...it's very interesting that the fourth best football conference...located in the dying Rust Belt...is able to call all the shots and hold all the power.
Because the B1G had the foresight and strategy to start the Big Ten Network (BTN). They understood with 4 million alumni (read that number again) that support their schools (read "donate money"), the BTN would work. Because it did, the B1G generates more money than any other conference.
Because money drives every single decision and the B1G has more money than anyone else, they are at the top of the heap and EVERYONE wants in (except ND because the B1G will only take them if they include football, which ND will not relent on).
Quote from: bradley center bat on February 20, 2013, 12:06:13 PM
Duke did go to a bowl game this season.
They still needed to use their enormous football budget to put out commercials with those craptacular local ad production values begging people to go to the games. Quite funny given how unbecoming of Duke they are, but that's Duke football.
Saying the Big Ten is "struggling" is silly.
So is saying that UNC and UVa don't have good football programs.
On the first point, the Big Ten is practically printing money. The fact that it hasn't won mythical national titles or many bowl games at all means nothing. It is the diametric opposite of struggling in the only mea$ure that matters.
On the second point, there is no reason that, given proper leadership, UNC or UVa can't produce excellent football programs. UNC won big just a few years ago. Perhaps the money the B1G would provide would increase their chances.
Both would be great additions to the very Un-struggling Big Ten.
And the exodus of UNC, should it happen, would be the beginning of the end for the ACC.
Quote from: LAZER on February 20, 2013, 12:07:32 PM
You think the SEC is a better basketball conference than the Big Ten?
Hold on there guy. Big Ten hoops has been not-good for most of the last ten years. They are superior this year by far, but it's been a while since they held the mantle as "best conference" in back-to-back years.
And when I mentioned the Big Ten was down, you are right, I wasn't saying "moneywise". It was more about perceived "goodness" on the playing (football) field. They are down right now.
IIRC UNC can't go anywhere without NC State
Quote from: Niv Berkowitz on February 20, 2013, 12:21:41 PM
And when I mentioned the Big Ten was down, you are right, I wasn't saying "moneywise". It was more about perceived "goodness" on the playing (football) field. They are down right now.
Yeah, I mean there's a reason people talk about the Rose Bowl no one talks about "who's going from the Big?" they say "who's going to lose to the Pac-10/12? champion this year"
The question to me is:
If the ACC does in fact break up will the new conference for football even be allowed to participate with the big boys? Or will the big boys from a football standpiont just include 64 or 80 teams in their new "NCAA" and cut the others out? Teams like Duke and UCONN could really be left hold a bag full of %^&( in the end...
The big ten is struggling...on the field, and from a "perceived toughness" standpoint. Certainly not financially. If you think the big ten hasn't been struggling the last four years on the field, you haven't been paying attention. Things are certainly looking up, now.
UNC was really good for a couple years, you're right. And then what happened? Oh yeah, they had to blow up the program because of Butch Davis' cheating/scandal.
They've been saying for months in many Big Ten-affiliated newspapers that UNC and/or UVA would be the next shoes to drop, especially UVA because of it's strong ties (from its leaders) to the Big Ten (Michigan and OSU ties, I think).
Quote from: MU82 on February 20, 2013, 12:18:39 PM
Saying the Big Ten is "struggling" is silly.
So is saying that UNC and UVa don't have good football programs.
On the first point, the Big Ten is practically printing money. The fact that it hasn't won mythical national titles or many bowl games at all means nothing. It is the diametric opposite of struggling in the only mea$ure that matters.
On the second point, there is no reason that, given proper leadership, UNC or UVa can't produce excellent football programs. UNC won big just a few years ago. Perhaps the money the B1G would provide would increase their chances.
Both would be great additions to the very Un-struggling Big Ten.
And the exodus of UNC, should it happen, would be the beginning of the end for the ACC.
Actually, UNC won nothing a few years ago; all that got taken away.
Also, I love the fact we are having a B1G v. SEC argument on our boards.
Quote from: Red Stripe on February 20, 2013, 12:23:33 PM
IIRC UNC can't go anywhere without NC State
As long as NC State has a safe landing spot (SEC) they can.
Quote from: MU82 on February 20, 2013, 12:18:39 PM
Saying the Big Ten is "struggling" is silly.
So is saying that UNC and UVa don't have good football programs.
On the first point, the Big Ten is practically printing money. The fact that it hasn't won mythical national titles or many bowl games at all means nothing. It is the diametric opposite of struggling in the only mea$ure that matters.
On the second point, there is no reason that, given proper leadership, UNC or UVa can't produce excellent football programs. UNC won big just a few years ago. Perhaps the money the B1G would provide would increase their chances.
Both would be great additions to the very Un-struggling Big Ten.
And the exodus of UNC, should it happen, would be the beginning of the end for the ACC.
So money is all that matters...and the on-field product is a complete afterthought? Good to know.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 20, 2013, 12:09:03 PM
4th best but richest by far, largest alumni base and best tv ratings.
Its all about the eyeballs and UNC and GTech/UVA get a lot of eyeballs and new locations not covered by the Big10.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 12:30:18 PM
So money is all that matters...and the on-field product is a complete afterthought? Good to know.
According to the ratings, it's a reasonable conclusion to reach
Quote from: MU82 on February 20, 2013, 12:18:39 PM
On the first point, the Big Ten is practically printing money. The fact that it hasn't won mythical national titles or many bowl games at all means nothing. It is the diametric opposite of struggling in the only mea$ure that matters.
I think you're getting a bit carried away here. Actually, a lot carried away. Sure, money is hugely important, and it's better to be turning big profits than not.
But I doubt you'll find many Iowa fans crowing over the football team's revenues.
Purdue fans aren't consoling themselves over the team's 12-14 record with the knowledge that the Big 10 Network is making money.
Illinois donors aren't so thrilled with the conference's bottom line that they're tripping over one another to donate to their alma mater.
Nobody will ever buy a T-shirt declaring their chosen team "NCAA Sports Revenue Champions."
Nobody will ever buy season tickets to see the athletic department bean counters go over revenue figures.
No, money is not the only measure that matters.
QuoteOn the second point, there is no reason that, given proper leadership, UNC or UVa can't produce excellent football programs. UNC won big just a few years ago. Perhaps the money the B1G would provide would increase their chances.
Which of UNC's recent 8-5 seasons is the one in which they "won big?"
And was that big eight-win season (and trip to the esteemed Meincke Car Care Bowl) worth landing on probation?
Quote from: M@RQUETTEW@RRIORS on February 20, 2013, 12:26:31 PM
The question to me is:
If the ACC does in fact break up will the new conference for football even be allowed to participate with the big boys? Or will the big boys from a football standpiont just include 64 or 80 teams in their new "NCAA" and cut the others out? Teams like Duke and UCONN could really be left hold a bag full of %^&( in the end...
This won't ever happen because the NCAA has tax-exempt status that means a lot of dollars saved for universities. IF they tried to create a break away organization there is NO WAY they can that exemption and then it no longer makes financial sense.
This is why even though Emmert has turned the NCAA into a complete clusterf@#k (in his defense it wasn't good before he got there, he has just accelerated the clusterf@#kiness)....the members will help the system limp along instead of blowing it up. The exemption is worth hundreds of millions if not more.
Quote from: Niv Berkowitz on February 20, 2013, 12:21:41 PM
Hold on there guy. Big Ten hoops has been not-good for most of the last ten years. They are superior this year by far, but it's been a while since they held the mantle as "best conference" in back-to-back years.
And when I mentioned the Big Ten was down, you are right, I wasn't saying "moneywise". It was more about perceived "goodness" on the playing (football) field. They are down right now.
I asked that question in response to Pakuni's comparison on B10/SEC Championships. I'm wasn't sure if that's what he was implying.
Quote from: mu03eng on February 20, 2013, 12:34:13 PM
This won't ever happen because the NCAA has tax-exempt status that means a lot of dollars saved for universities. IF they tried to create a break away organization there is NO WAY they can that exemption and then it no longer makes financial sense.
This is why even though Emmert has turned the NCAA into a complete clusterf@#k (in his defense it wasn't good before he got there, he has just accelerated the clusterf@#kiness)....the members will help the system limp along instead of blowing it up. The exemption is worth hundreds of millions if not more.
If it happened before, why cant they form a new association with the same exemptions...
Quote from: Aughnanure on February 20, 2013, 12:29:18 PM
As long as NC State has a safe landing spot (SEC) they can.
And the SEC wants NC State why?
There are about five ACC schools (Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Miami) that would be on the SEC's short list ahead of NC State.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 12:30:18 PM
So money is all that matters...and the on-field product is a complete afterthought? Good to know.
I still think there's a very solid argument to be made that the Big Ten is the 2nd best football conference.
Quote from: LAZER on February 20, 2013, 12:07:32 PM
You think the SEC is a better basketball conference than the Big Ten?
Top to bottom, no.
Top to top over the past decade? They're as good, yeah.
Regardless, I was replying to a post that stated the SEC, relative to the Big 10, is good only on one sport. That's clearly not true.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 12:35:44 PM
And the SEC wants NC State why?
There are about five ACC schools (Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Miami) that would be on the SEC's short list ahead of NC State.
Raleigh market. Does have a pro team. (NHL)
SEC doesn't want Clemson has South Carolina.
SEC doesn't want FSU or Miami, has Florida.
SEC doesn't want GT, has Georgia.
SEC would like VT.
Quote from: butchbadger on February 20, 2013, 12:09:10 PM
Still scratching my head on Rutgers - except for the TV market.
Contiguity. B1G requires contiguity for expansion
Quote from: LAZER on February 20, 2013, 12:38:36 PM
I still think there's a very solid argument to be made that the Big Ten is the 2nd best football conference.
Not if you're going by on-field performance. It's clearly the SEC on top...followed by the Big XII...and the Pac-12.
But as I've learned today, all that matters is cash. So the Big 10 is king. ::)
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on February 20, 2013, 11:37:57 AM
UNC, VA, GT are flagship state schools with large alumni bases and high academic profiles.
Perfect for Big???.
Still doesn't explain Northwestern.
NU replaced Chicago back in the day. I would have to look it up but Chicago is still some sort of member of the Big 10. Not likely they'll bring back their football program but they could field a nasty College Bowl squad.
Quote from: M@RQUETTEW@RRIORS on February 20, 2013, 12:35:13 PM
If it happened before, why cant they form a new association with the same exemptions...
Congress has to approve the tax exempt status.
Because the number of schools that would be left out and by extension their fanbases would be a significant number of people with congress on speed dial. These schools' alumni would include a bunch of Harvard, Georgetown, Yale, etc grads that are currently running our country and wouldn't want their schools left out.
Probably most importantly, once people realize how much money the government COULD be making if there was no exemption, that would become a huge talking point and kill any chance of it happening.
Quote from: bradley center bat on February 20, 2013, 12:42:36 PM
Raleigh market. Does have a pro team. (NHL)
SEC doesn't want Clemson has South Carolina.
SEC doesn't want FSU or Miami, has Florida.
SEC doesn't want GT, has Georgia.
SEC would like VT.
Is that you, Mike Slive?
So then will the SEC be booting Auburn (has Alabama), Vandy (has Tennessee) and Mississippi State (has Mississippi)?
The Miami market and the Florida market have little crossover. Ditto for Georgia and Tech.
The Raleigh market is deeply fractured.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 12:45:09 PM
Not if you're going by on-field performance. It's clearly the SEC on top...followed by the Big XII...and the Pac-12.
But as I've learned today, all that matters is cash. So the Big 10 is king. ::)
I still think the Big 10 is equal, if not better than the Big 12 and Pac on the field. They will definitely be better than the Big 12 moving forward.
Quote from: LAZER on February 20, 2013, 12:53:05 PM
I still think the Big 10 is equal, if not better than the Big 12 and Pac on the field. They will definitely be better than the Big 12 moving forward.
Because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland????
Quote from: bradley center bat on February 20, 2013, 12:06:13 PM
Duke did go to a bowl game this season.
Didn't just about every school?
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 01:03:57 PM
Because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland????
I was thinking more long term the effects of A&M, Mizzou, and Nebraska leaving will take a toll on the conference as a whole. But you do bring up a good point I didn't consider with Maryland and Rutgers (and possibly others) watering down the Big Ten.
Quote from: LAZER on February 20, 2013, 12:53:05 PM
I still think the Big 10 is equal, if not better than the Big 12 and Pac on the field. They will definitely be better than the Big 12 moving forward.
And I think the Big 10 is barely the fourth best football conference. Looks like we've reached a stalemate.
Can't we all just agree that the Big ? is just the worst thing to happen to college athletics?
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 01:17:02 PM
And I think the Big 10 is barely the fourth best football conference. Looks like we've reached a stalemate.
But someone has to win!
What does everyone think about picking up Wake if the ACC falls apart? Not Duke by a long shot but a basketball focus with a decent history.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on February 20, 2013, 01:25:48 PM
Can't we all just agree that the Big ? is just the worst thing to happen to college athletics?
That I can agree on.
Quote from: Niv Berkowitz on February 20, 2013, 12:26:55 PM
The big ten is struggling...on the field, and from a "perceived toughness" standpoint. Certainly not financially. If you think the big ten hasn't been struggling the last four years on the field, you haven't been paying attention. Things are certainly looking up, now.
UNC was really good for a couple years, you're right. And then what happened? Oh yeah, they had to blow up the program because of Butch Davis' cheating/scandal.
They've been saying for months in many Big Ten-affiliated newspapers that UNC and/or UVA would be the next shoes to drop, especially UVA because of it's strong ties (from its leaders) to the Big Ten (Michigan and OSU ties, I think).
Who is arguing against the points you made here? What we did say was that none of what you are saying matters, because all that matters is money and the Big Teen has more of it than anyone else.
Quote from: Groin_pull on February 20, 2013, 12:30:18 PM
So money is all that matters...and the on-field product is a complete afterthought? Good to know.
What in the last decade would lead you to believe otherwise?
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 12:33:08 PM
No, money is not the only measure that matters.
In terms of conference alignment, it is.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 12:50:36 PM
Is that you, Mike Slive?
So then will the SEC be booting Auburn (has Alabama), Vandy (has Tennessee) and Mississippi State (has Mississippi)?
The Miami market and the Florida market have little crossover. Ditto for Georgia and Tech.
The Raleigh market is deeply fractured.
That's what insiders from the SEC have said.
Georgia already has the Atlanta market. No need for GT.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on February 20, 2013, 01:25:48 PM
Can't we all just agree that the Big ? is just the worst thing to happen to college athletics?
The ACC started this mess. I would love to see them be the next victims of new mentality they created. UVa and UNC to the Big Ten would make a lot sense for those schools and the B1G but would suck for the ACC.
Quote from: TJ on February 20, 2013, 01:38:26 PM
In terms of conference alignment, it is.
Super, but that's not what he said.
Quote from: humanlung on February 20, 2013, 01:28:21 PM
What does everyone think about picking up Wake if the ACC falls apart? Not Duke by a long shot but a basketball focus with a decent history.
Other than they have to drop football first, I would take them.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 12:33:08 PM
I think you're getting a bit carried away here. Actually, a lot carried away. Sure, money is hugely important, and it's better to be turning big profits than not.
But I doubt you'll find many Iowa fans crowing over the football team's revenues.
Purdue fans aren't consoling themselves over the team's 12-14 record with the knowledge that the Big 10 Network is making money.
Illinois donors aren't so thrilled with the conference's bottom line that they're tripping over one another to donate to their alma mater.
Nobody will ever buy a T-shirt declaring their chosen team "NCAA Sports Revenue Champions."
Nobody will ever buy season tickets to see the athletic department bean counters go over revenue figures.
No, money is not the only measure that matters.
Which of UNC's recent 8-5 seasons is the one in which they "won big?"
And was that big eight-win season (and trip to the esteemed Meincke Car Care Bowl) worth landing on probation?
What Iowa or Purdue or Illinois fans think is irrelevant as far as the eventual formation of superconferences go. If there's one thing we've learned these last few years of conference-go-round hijinx it is this: IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!
As for UNC winning big, I misspoke. For some reason, I thought their double-digit-win seasons had been more recent but they were 96 and 97. Still, it's not unreasonable to believe that had Mack Brown stayed -- or had they followed him with better leadership -- they could have done more winning.
One of the fun things about sports is that bad programs can become good programs with the right leadership. I should have stated that point more clearly.
Every conference would love to have a university of UNC's caliber. There's a reason the B1G keeps going after them hard.
Quote from: MU82 on February 20, 2013, 02:02:38 PM
Still, it's not unreasonable to believe that had Mack Brown stayed -- or had they followed him with better leadership -- they could have done more winning.
A lot of Texas fans would be happy to give him back.
Quote from: Red Stripe on February 20, 2013, 12:23:33 PM
IIRC UNC can't go anywhere without NC State
That is not a legal matter though it may be political. The Virginia General Assembly threatened all sorts of mayhem if VT were not part of the move to the ACC. There is nothing legal linking UNC and NCSU conference affiliation but the politicians might be troublesome as they were in VA.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 01:03:57 PM
Because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland????
Because OSU and Michigan are back from their 4 years of averageness. Because of Meyer and Hoke. Because you have a Nebraska team that's also very solid.
The conference may not be as deep top to bottom, but it will be like the 70s/80s again over the next few years w/UM and OSU running the place.
Quote from: mu03eng on February 20, 2013, 12:45:32 PM
These schools' alumni would include a bunch of Harvard, Georgetown, Yale, etc grads that are currently running our country and wouldn't want their schools left out.
Why is Georgetown on this list? Other than Clinton there are not a lot of Georgetown grads "running this country." It is a fine school but will never be elite
Quote from: Niv Berkowitz on February 20, 2013, 02:19:40 PM
Because OSU and Michigan are back from their 4 years of averageness. Because of Meyer and Hoke. Because you have a Nebraska team that's also very solid.
The conference may not be as deep top to bottom, but it will be like the 70s/80s again over the next few years w/UM and OSU running the place.
So, the Big 12 is deeper "from top to bottom," but the Big 10 will be better because Ohio State and Michigan.
OK. I guess.
Wonder if MU fans would have bought an argument that went something like ...
"Sure, Big East is deeper top to bottom, but the ACC is better because Duke and North Carolina and the 80s/90s."
Quote from: keefe on February 20, 2013, 02:31:48 PM
Why is Georgetown on this list? Other than Clinton there are not a lot of Georgetown grads "running this country." It is a fine school but will never be elite
Seriously? Five percent of the U.S. Senate are Georgetown alums.
U.S. Sen. John Barrasso
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin
U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk
U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski
Quote from: mu03eng on February 20, 2013, 12:45:32 PM
Congress has to approve the tax exempt status.
People are mixing up things here. The individual schools are tax exempt because Congress has said that intercollegiate athletics are not an "unrelated business activity" and therefore are exempt from taxes because most universities are. The NCAA is tax-exempt because it is a membership organization. I mean, the NFL corporate is a tax exempt organization...although their teams are not.
So for the schools to break away, they would have to create a new membership association, join that association, and get the IRS to exempt that association (which without a change in law, should be an automatic). This will not impact the tax exempt status of the individual members in anyway.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 02:38:37 PM
Seriously? Five percent of the U.S. Senate are Georgetown alums.
U.S. Sen. John Barrasso
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin
U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk
U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski
Yes, G-Town has quite a few high-profile alums. Of course, location has helped a lot with that..... :)
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 02:38:37 PM
Seriously? Five percent of the U.S. Senate are Georgetown alums.
U.S. Sen. John Barrasso
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin
U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk
U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski
As I said, Georgetown is a fine school but not among the nation's elite. I would say in addition to the Ivies I would put schools such as Middlebury, Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Haverford, Connecticut College, Colgate, Hamilton, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Trinity, Vassar, Tufts, and Wesleyan in the elite category.
One thing you learn at an Ivy or Little Ivy is that much of the education is becoming socially competitive.
And I don't think that a politically mixed bag of senators who cannot agree on substantive issues are going to band together to drive legislation on something as trivial as Georgetown's athletic conference affiliation.
Quote from: keefe on February 20, 2013, 02:58:55 PM
As I said, Georgetown is a fine school but not among the nation's elite. I would say in addition to the Ivies I would put schools such as Middlebury, Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Haverford, Connecticut College, Colgate, Hamilton, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Trinity, Vassar, Tufts, and Wesleyan in the elite category.
One thing you learn at an Ivy or Little Ivy is that much of the education is becoming socially competitive.
And I don't think that a politically mixed bag of senators who cannot agree on substantive issues are going to band together to drive legislation on something as trivial as Georgetown's athletic conference affiliation.
Moving goalposts.
I was responding to your statement that "Other than Clinton there are not a lot of Georgetown grads "running this country." After I showed that G'town grads actually have quite a lot of influence on the running of this country, you made it an issue of "eliteness."
Debating whether Georgetown is more or less "elite" than Vassar or Middlebury or Amherst is so subjective it's pointless.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 03:07:23 PM
Debating whether Georgetown is more or less "elite" than Vassar or Middlebury or Amherst is so subjective it's pointless.
Sounds like the worthless airtime filler that ESPN typically engages in about QBs
Quote from: frozena pizza on February 20, 2013, 01:48:15 PM
The ACC started this mess. I would love to see them be the next victims of new mentality they created. UVa and UNC to the Big Ten would make a lot sense for those schools and the B1G but would suck for the ACC.
+1 - The only reason I would like to see it happen because it never had to happen where it not for the ACC.
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 20, 2013, 03:14:14 PM
+1 - The only reason I would like to see it happen because it never had to happen where it not for the ACC.
Seriously, that is a stupid argument. One could argue that the ACC saw what the future had in store and just was smart enough to do it first. All this would have happened even if the ACC did not raid the BE; BIG (or any conference for that matter) would have eventually realized more eyeballs = more revenue and this would have started another way.
Plus, Marquette doesn't get into the BE without the ACC raiding it so...
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 03:07:23 PM
Moving goalposts.
I was responding to your statement that "Other than Clinton there are not a lot of Georgetown grads "running this country." After I showed that G'town grads actually have quite a lot of influence on the running of this country, you made it an issue of "eliteness."
Debating whether Georgetown is more or less "elite" than Vassar or Middlebury or Amherst is so subjective it's pointless.
Moving goalposts.
In my original post I concluded with, "It (Georgetown) is a fine school but will never be elite." Because this is essentially a question of eliteness articulating as power. And there is empiricism to support the definition of elite status. There are Ivy clubs in the largest cities in the US and in major international locales. If you are an alum of any Ivy or Little Ivy you may get a day pass. In NYC, for instance, in the heart of Midtown you can book a small suite for less than $200; it is nicer than a similar accommodation at the Four Seasons that costs 4 times as much. A day pass gets you full use of the facilities - fitness, bar, restaurant, meeting rooms, library/reading room. The people you see eating, drinking, or talking in these clubs are the real power brokers in politics, business, the arts. And membership is restricted to graduates of the 8 Ivies, the 15 Little Ivies, MIT, and Stanford.
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 20, 2013, 03:14:14 PM
+1 - The only reason I would like to see it happen because it never had to happen where it not for the ACC.
Conference re-alignment has been going on a lot longer than the ACC's recent additions. And had it not been for the ACC's poaching of VPI, Miami and BC, we would prob still be in CUSA.
Oh, and in the BE, all but the charter members have been poached from other conferences. If Im following you correctly, its ok for the BE to poach teams but not okay for other conferences to do the same. It perfectly fine for MU to jump conferences, but not other schools... ::)
Quote from: Warriors10 on February 20, 2013, 03:33:47 PM
Seriously, that is a stupid argument. One could argue that the ACC saw what the future had in store and just was smart enough to do it first. All this would have happened even if the ACC did not raid the BE; BIG (or any conference for that matter) would have eventually realized more eyeballs = more revenue and this would have started another way.
Plus, Marquette doesn't get into the BE without the ACC raiding it so...
The good news is that the ACC is going to be pillaged and I intend to have a front row seat with a large buttered popcorn and jujubes. I cannot wait for ESPN to interview Coach K to get his reaction to the desiccation of his beloved ACC and hope the network has the proper sense of irony to replay his interview where he expresses his unbridled joy at the ACC's taking Pitt and Syracuse. I suspect his meltdown over Maryland's lack of honor and faith is but a teaser for what we will see in the near future.
WHO THE F*#$ MOVED THE DAMN GOALPOSTS AGAIN?!?!?
Quote from: keefe on February 20, 2013, 03:34:42 PM
Moving goalposts.
In my original post I concluded with, "It (Georgetown) is a fine school but will never be elite." Because this is essentially a question of eliteness articulating as power. And there is empiricism to support the definition of elite status. There are Ivy clubs in the largest cities in the US and in major international locales. If you are an alum of any Ivy or Little Ivy you may get a day pass. In NYC, for instance, in the heart of Midtown you can book a small suite for less than $200; it is nicer than a similar accommodation at the Four Seasons that costs 4 times as much. A day pass gets you full use of the facilities - fitness, bar, restaurant, meeting rooms, library/reading room. The people you see eating, drinking, or talking in these clubs are the real power brokers in politics, business, the arts. And membership is restricted to graduates of the 8 Ivies, the 15 Little Ivies, MIT, and Stanford.
So, Georgetown grads can occupy 1/20th of "the most elite club in the nation," aka the U.S. Senate, but they're ultimately powerless because they can't get a day pass to run on the treadmill at an "Ivy Club."
Duly noted.
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 03:49:23 PM
So, Georgetown grads can occupy 1/20th of "the most elite club in the nation," aka the U.S. Senate, but they're ultimately powerless because they can't get a day pass to run on the treadmill at an "Ivy Club."
Duly noted.
Meh. I'd rather run on a treadmill that isn't contaminated with the dried sweat of tens of thousands of d-bags. Though if you looked at the DNA profile of said perspiration samples, you'd swear only seven people had ever used that machine.
Quote from: Warriors10 on February 20, 2013, 03:33:47 PM
Seriously, that is a stupid argument. One could argue that the ACC saw what the future had in store and just was smart enough to do it first. All this would have happened even if the ACC did not raid the BE; BIG (or any conference for that matter) would have eventually realized more eyeballs = more revenue and this would have started another way.
Plus, Marquette doesn't get into the BE without the ACC raiding it so...
I think the ACC poaching Miami & VaTech was OK. While it hurt the relativly new Big East football brand badly, they at least they fit geographically with the rest of the ACC and provided rivalry to Florida St & UVA so that move was logical. Now BC to the ACC is just plain absurb as well as the later Pitt & Syracuse move. Miami & VaTech's departure was enough to get us and the others CUSA gang into the Big East.
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on February 20, 2013, 03:59:09 PM
I think the ACC poaching Miami & VaTech was OK. While it hurt the relativly new Big East football brand badly, they at least they fit geographically with the rest of the ACC and provided rivalry to Florida St & UVA so that move was logical. Now BC to the ACC is just plain absurb as well as the later Pitt & Syracuse move. Miami & VaTech's departure was enough to get us and the others CUSA gang into the Big East.
Im glad you straightened out what is acceptable and unacceptable in the world of conference realignment.
Quote from: keefe on February 20, 2013, 12:45:21 PM
NU replaced Chicago back in the day. I would have to look it up but Chicago is still some sort of member of the Big 10. Not likely they'll bring back their football program but they could field a nasty College Bowl squad.
I knew that, but they're an outlier to the current Big10 profile.
I think Big10-ACC should just merge.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on February 20, 2013, 04:14:06 PM
I knew that, but they're an outlier to the current Big10 profile.
I think Big10-ACC should just merge.
It worked for AOL/Time Warner
Quote from: Bocephys on February 20, 2013, 04:14:38 PM
It worked for AOL/Time Warner
That's why OfficeMax and Office Depot are doing it too!
So...did the leprechaun have any news?
(http://electricboom.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/south_park_imaginationland_.jpg)
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on February 20, 2013, 04:14:06 PM
I knew that, but they're an outlier to the current Big10 profile.
I think Big10-ACC should just merge.
Will it be an Exxon-Mobil or a Quaker-Snapple?
A Disney-Pixar or a Sprint-Nextel?
Quote from: Pakuni on February 20, 2013, 02:38:37 PM
Seriously? Five percent of the U.S. Senate are Georgetown alums.
U.S. Sen. John Barrasso
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin
U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk
U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski
What a group
Quote from: keefe on February 20, 2013, 02:58:55 PM
As I said, Georgetown is a fine school but not among the nation's elite. I would say in addition to the Ivies I would put schools such as Middlebury, Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Haverford, Connecticut College, Colgate, Hamilton, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Trinity, Vassar, Tufts, and Wesleyan in the elite category.
One thing you learn at an Ivy or Little Ivy is that much of the education is becoming socially competitive.
And I don't think that a politically mixed bag of senators who cannot agree on substantive issues are going to band together to drive legislation on something as trivial as Georgetown's athletic conference affiliation.
For clarification, are you saying that these are the
only schools in the elite category (plus MIT)? If no, I'd interested to hear your criteria--the necessary and sufficient conditions, as it were. If yes, I would be interested to hear why Chicago is not elite despite being better at literally everything than Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell.
Quote from: ElDonBDon on February 20, 2013, 06:23:15 PM
For clarification, are you saying that these are the only schools in the elite category (plus MIT)? If no, I'd interested to hear your criteria--the necessary and sufficient conditions, as it were. If yes, I would be interested to hear why Chicago is not elite despite being better at literally everything than Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell.
I never said that list was comprehensive. I offered it as prima facie evidence of colleges generally seen as elite. I would consider Chicago to be an elite university. (But my opinion is not relevant in this discussion.) It was over concerns about maintaining that perception of being elite that Chicago dropped out of major college athletics in 1946, even though there was no empiricism proving that playing competitive football in any detracted from the university's primary mission of education. Their president at the time felt that it did so he cancelled athletics and they dropped out of the Big 10. So obviously the leadership of Chicago saw itself as elite and took actions designed to preserve that reputation.
As I mentioned earlier, much of the value of attending an elite college is the social education. And to answer your question, the people who run the Ivy Clubs worldwide have, for whatever reason, set their membership criteria at those 25 colleges. I offered this as one indicator of elite status. Certainly there are others.
Is a kid at Oberlin, Reed, Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, Lafayette, Grinnell, et al not getting a great education? I am fairly certain they are. Their graduates go on to lead successful, rewarding lives and many make profound contributions in their worlds. But from a social perspective these schools are not seen in the same way as the 25 the Ivy Club recognizes.
My oldest is employed as a professor at Georgetown. He teaches at one of their campuses in Europe. He loves the University, respects the students in many ways, and has no interest in ever leaving. Our family has tremendous respect for Georgetown. A cousin of my father's served in the Kennedy administration and ended up staying in DC as a law professor at Georgetown. But it is not in the same category as the schools I mentioned. Even if its grads comprise 1/20th of the US Senate.