Faction in ACC favors adding UConn, Rutgers, but opposition remains for Huskies
by Andrew Porter on Sep 22, 2011 9:39 PM EDT
in UConn Huskies Football
Email
PrintWe're not sure exactly who (*cough* Duke *cough* Maryland), but UConn and Rutgers have some backers in the ACC who want to add the two schools to "further enhance the ACC's presence in the New York City area and the East Coast generally," according to a report from the Baltimore Sun (the majority is dedicated to Navy, scroll down for the UConn bits). The Sun's source -- an official of an ACC school -- said there was "preliminary opposition" to adding UConn, so their entry is not a slam dunk and no decision is imminent.
That's all quite interesting, but it's stuff we've either known or suspected for the past couple of days. To me, the most interesting part of the report is this paragraph that mentions UConn specifically:
The subject of Connecticut joining the Atlantic Coast Conference was raised in meetings with representatives of ACC schools prior to last Sunday's announcement that Pittsburgh and Syracuse were joining, according to an official of one of the member schools.
It's not a huge surprise that UConn was in talks with the ACC before Pittsburgh and Syracuse bolted -- we knew they were one of 10 schools that had at least reached out to the ACC -- but this is the first report I've seen that they were actually discussed that early in the process.
(H/T On The Banks)
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So, any guesses on the blocking schools?
BC and Florida State are the obvious two. Va. Tech and possibly some of the conference’s second tier might fall under FSU’s “We don’t want to dilute the conference” argument. I’d assume Miami is in there too, because fuck Miami.
The ACC needs to improve its football status to get better TV deals to ensure its teams can compete with other conferences
Adding UCONN and Rutgers does nothing for football and puts football schools in the ACC (FSU, Clemson, VT, Miami, GT) at a big disadvantage compared to football schools in other conferences (SEC). Schools like Kentucky and Indiana would be able to spend more money hiring coaches than the football schools in the ACC. Over time, the good football schools will be dragged down to the level of the other ACC schools.
If we add ND or Texas or someone who could enhance the ACC’s football resume significantly then we can at least negotiate a TV rights deal that would keep the football schools competitive with the other BCS conferences’ better football teams.
Controlling the northeast and New York markets doesn’t mean much when none of you guys watch/care about college football. Basketball does not get you as much money as football in the tv rights world. Also, we’d have to split whatever extra money we get by adding Cuse, Pitt, UConn, and Rutgers into 16 pieces. I don’t see how it would help the ACC at all in terms of improving the football tv rights deal.
Level of competition leads to TV deals, not the other way around.
“The ACC needs to improve its football status to get better TV deals to ensure its teams can compete with other conferences”
When Boise State beat Oregon/Oklahoma/Georgia/etc., it wasn’t because of their television deal. It was because they were coached better, had a better gameplan, and put a better product on the field. That, and not TV money, is what wins games. A Florida high school player isn’t going to go to UF over Florida State just because the SEC has a better television deal; thanks to the whole “amateurism” thing, that recruit isn’t going to get a dime of the TV money.
Any major conference, especially one with a championship game, is going to get a ridiculously lucrative TV deal. You can talk about adding Texas or ND to increase revenue, but remember, both of those teams are in conference limbo because they have pre-existing television deals.
As for the “New York market doesn’t matter” argument, read the “Top College Football TV Markets” table in this article. Only 14% of New Yorkers follow college football, but that still puts it ahead of any other city in the US. Further on in that article, it shows the breakdown of NYC college football fans. The 6 most popular teams in NYC are as follows: Rutgers, Notre Dame, Penn State, UConn, Michigan and Syracuse. All told, that’s around 800,000 college football fans in one city, in which none of the universities are located.
Yes, adding ND or Texas would be a better idea, but the ACC has little chance of adding either of those schools. Should ND jump into the AQ picture, they would more likely travel to the Big Ten. Texas looks to be fairly secure in the Big XII right now.
by hamdenhusky on Sep 22, 2011 11:16 PM EDT up reply actions
according to notre dame fans
the evidence actually points to them wanting the ACC over the B1G.
http://www.onefootdown.com/2011/9/19/2434588/realignment-superconferences-and-notre-dame
The comments section is interesting and surprising because I assumed the same thing that you’re arguing here. However, it would mean everything would have to go full Armageddon before this becomes a possibility.
"Over?! Did you say over?! Nothing is over until we decide it is!" John Blutarsky (John Belushi) in the movie 'Animal House'
by orangebookworm on Sep 23, 2011 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions
as someone who has a very good friend who went to ND, I think a lot of that is pride showing up. The Big 10 has always wanted ND, ND has always spurned them, and after the last time, there was a lot of talk out of the Big 10 that they didn’t want ND anymore, that the school had essentially denied them for the last time. Ultimately, it has always made the most sense for ND to play in the Big 10 and I think that will eventually happen. However, if you’re ND, and you value your football independence so much, why jump to a conference right now? They will only do that if/when it is their only option, and it isn’t like the Big 10 has expanded to the point to leave them out.
Actually, FSU regularly loses recruiting battles because kids want to play in the SEC instead of the ACC
Right now, the SEC make about $5 million more per school compared to the ACC. That means Vanderbilt can afford to pay its football coaches more than FSU can in the ACC. The best coaches would go for the higher salaries in the SEC and will be working with better facilities than available to ACC schools. They will be able to attract better players in the SEC with this extra money and better facilities.
You say any major conference will get a lucrative TV deal but the ACC is horrible about negotiating good TV deals with football. The PAC 12 has an insane $3 billion TV deal. Imagine what kind of deal the SEC is going to come up with in the next renegotiation after adding Texas A&M? I seriously doubt the ACC will be able to keep up with the other conferences with its mediocre football product.
The article you referenced is flawed. Read the comments underneath it.
In any case, I don’t see the immediate need for the ACC to fill the 15th and 16th slots with UCONN and Rutgers right now. It would not really help the conference imo and until ND/Texas say no to joining the ACC then they should keep trying to add one or both.
If no one cared about the New York market, no one would be talking about Rutgers. Rutgers football and basketball programs are subpar. You think the ACC was dying to get Boston College because of their “winning tradition” in anything? They wanted BC because they play in a highly populated area (Boston) that can bring eyeballs to the sets. Everyone keeps missing the point, looking at win/loss records when it comes to these decisions. What these conferences care about is television markets, fan bases, and money. That’s it. That’s why the ACC would love to have ND. Not because ND is walking out there in the next 10 years and battling for national titles. Those days are long gone. It’s because they have a rabid fandom, alot of whom are located in major media markets. Even with Uconn, you can talk about their obvious success in basketball and their rising football program, but the reason the ACC is talking about Uconn is because they can generate interest in New York and Boston markets. It’s about money, not wins and loses.
Big East football blows. ACC football blows a little less. Neither conference is really good at football so stop with these games. Let UConn in already so I can continue to hate Syracuse. This will also give me more reasons to hate Duke. See we already hate Duke. We won’t have to learn that.
:o)
We love you guys too.
"Over?! Did you say over?! Nothing is over until we decide it is!" John Blutarsky (John Belushi) in the movie 'Animal House'
by orangebookworm on Sep 23, 2011 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s not a huge surprise that UConn was in talks with the ACC before Pittsburgh and Syracuse bolted
“in talks” — don’t flatter yourselves. UConn was mentioned. No one said they were in talks withe ACC - Like it was a close call btw Pitt’Cuse-UConn.
UConn was not a part of the year-long negotiations.
Sources say that Herbst was in talks with ACC before the Pitt/'Cuse defection.
Of course, “sources say” is far from gospel, but there’s certainly a possibility that UConn had pre-emptive discussions with the ACC. I don’t see how it’s a big issue either way.
by hamdenhusky on Sep 23, 2011 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
UCONN in ACC
I’m mostly against RUTGERS joining the ACC, but If there was a way to trade UCONN for BC id be all for UCONN joining!!! But football is where the money is and we already have numerous bad football schools as you saw with NCST last night. The ACC needs to get better in football BAD!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
