Was there ever a chance of RU going to the ACC?
- Thread starter DANTHEMAN
- Start date
I do not think so. If I remember correctly the AD at Boston College let it slip during an interview that the Pitt/Syracuse expansion was ESPN driven. Part of the motivation was basketball driven and part was to get back at the big east for the contract negotiations. They were taking basketball schools From the Big East. He later retracted his statements but they were carried by several outlets (not ESPN, what a coincidence). RU was never in the discussion.
They day after Pitt and Cuse were announced to the ACC, an NC paper had a rumor that Uconn and Rutgers were about to be announced as well. This was based upon the belief at the time that 4 Big 12 teams were about to go the PAC 12, and the ACC was looking at getting to 16 too. It also said the ACC was ready to stop chasing ND. A few days later, the deal for fell thru when Texas refused to give up the Longhorn network. With the PAC staying at 12, the ACC did not move. At the time, the SEC had added A&M and was also rumored to be ready to go to 16. The B1G had added Nebraska the year earlier and was very quiet. So for a brief time, RU to the ACC was out there.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
This post was edited on 3/6 10:36 PM by ruman
Posted from Rivals Mobile
This post was edited on 3/6 10:36 PM by ruman
Worst decision ACC made. Should have offered RU before Cuse and Pitt...and IMO should have taken Uconn to create a 16 team conference with north and south. Believe me, we would have been happy about it. Of course, it turned out much better for us.
People can trash the ACC all they want, but when we were in limbo looking like we were left holding the bag any of us would have taken the ACC in a heartbeat. We hit the conference lottery though, and I couldn't be happier.
Pretty much this. It was fairly well known that Rutgers was at the top of the list for B10 expansion, prior to Nebraska expressing interest. And it was fairly well known that Rutgers was at the top of the list for the next B10 expansion, which was expected to occur prior to the B10's television contract negotiations.
So had the ACC invited Rutgers, they pretty much knew that the B10 would extend a counter-invitation the next day. If Rutgers had ACC and B10 offers in hand, Rutgers would go to the B10. So the only purpose of the ACC extending an offer to Rutgers is it would have prompted the B10 to extend a counter-invitation sooner.
And while it may have seemed like an eternity for Rutgers to actually get that B10 invitation, in the scheme of things, it was really a short time span. Nebraska was invited to the B10 in June 2010. Pitt and Cuse were invited to the ACC in Sept 2011. And Rutgers and Maryland were invited to the B10 in Nov 2012.
There were also rumors back in 1991 that Cuse and RU would join the ACC. USA Today had a full page article on conference expansion back in 1991. It was after Arkansas was invited to join the SEC. Speculation was that F$U would be team #12 in the SEC.
As it turned out, ACC pulled a Coup de Main, and convinced F$U to join as #9. SEC then picked South Carolina (former ACC) as #12. F$U to ACC snuffed out the Cuse/RU move.
As it turned out, ACC pulled a Coup de Main, and convinced F$U to join as #9. SEC then picked South Carolina (former ACC) as #12. F$U to ACC snuffed out the Cuse/RU move.
Yes I remember that being a rumor, along with going to the ACC, becoming a mid-major when nobody wanted us, etc. Rumors fly around here as much as the wind blows, and I don't know who is 'in the know' about a particular subject and who is not. It's easy to sit here now and say it was a foregone conclusion but those were anxious times as an RU fan, and not one I ever care to relive.
B1G was always the destination and nothing else...it was just a waiting game and was known for years before the actual invite
It is also interesting to look at how the Eastern schools have fared after the re-alignment, BC has become truly mediocre and an after thought in the ACC, Pitt and Sorrycuse, basically have neither enhanced the brand (ACC) or been enhanced by the affiliation, and appear to headed toward BC level of conference mediocrity. RU and Maryland to the BIG seems to have been mutually beneficial for both schools, Both schools have a ways to go to truly add to the BIG, and I suspect once the money is there both schools will make the journey. Rutgers is a much better fit in BIG than it would have been in the ACC and there would is a strong possibility that RU would have ended up in a similar situation to other three eastern schools in the ACC. The RU culture and footprint fits better in the BIG than it would have in the ACC, we just need to continue to build our teams to the level of the BIG's other schools.
My understanding of this situation is that the ACC's selection committee headed up by Miami and UNC decided RU did not have the ethical requirements necessary for admission. They were particularly concerned with our graduation stats which just baffled them.
I very clearly remember the announcement of Pitt and SU going to the ACC in September 2011. It seemed to come out of nowhere and hadn't really been preceded by the usual rumors. I remember it so well because I was at a conference at KU, in Lawrence, at the time, and, while walking around campus with a Rutgers shirt on the day prior to the meetings, ended up discussing with some people out there the real possibility that KU would be joining us in the BE. That of course assumed that the B12 would collapse, which as noted above was a real possibility at that point.
While I got a real bad feeling in my gut when the Pitt-SU announcement came out, as things turned out, it might have been their move that precipitated THE move that ultimately led to RU getting the B1G invite. While WVU moved very quickly - perhaps too quickly given the UMd change of conferences - THE move that mattered to RU was the decision by ND to pull out of the BE and partially align itself with the ACC. It was that decision that finally allowed the B1G to no longer have to wait on ND, permitting it to invite RU, as many were either expecting it to do or desperately hoping it would do. And that also precipitated the invitation to UMd, which was more surprising to most people who hadn't seen that coming.
My comment about WVU acting too quickly was based upon the fact that, in 2011, when WVU was desperately trying to get out of the BE, the ACC turned up their notes at the Mountaineers because of its less than stellar academics (this from a conference that already had FSU among its members). But just one year later, that same conference turned to Louisville, a university that I believe is ranked below WVU academically. Perhaps, had WVU not acted so quickly, it would have been the one to be invited to the ACC, where it wouldn't be so geographically isolated from all of its conference mates.
While I got a real bad feeling in my gut when the Pitt-SU announcement came out, as things turned out, it might have been their move that precipitated THE move that ultimately led to RU getting the B1G invite. While WVU moved very quickly - perhaps too quickly given the UMd change of conferences - THE move that mattered to RU was the decision by ND to pull out of the BE and partially align itself with the ACC. It was that decision that finally allowed the B1G to no longer have to wait on ND, permitting it to invite RU, as many were either expecting it to do or desperately hoping it would do. And that also precipitated the invitation to UMd, which was more surprising to most people who hadn't seen that coming.
My comment about WVU acting too quickly was based upon the fact that, in 2011, when WVU was desperately trying to get out of the BE, the ACC turned up their notes at the Mountaineers because of its less than stellar academics (this from a conference that already had FSU among its members). But just one year later, that same conference turned to Louisville, a university that I believe is ranked below WVU academically. Perhaps, had WVU not acted so quickly, it would have been the one to be invited to the ACC, where it wouldn't be so geographically isolated from all of its conference mates.
Actually before 1991 it was said that Syracuse, BC and Pitt looked into joining the ACC so their FB programs
could stop playing as independents and join a conference.
They knew the days of running a profitable Independent Football Program was coming to an end and wanted to join a conference that had the football side which the BE didn't.
To keep them from thinking about leaving the Big East started up their football side.
It was just the Providence Basketball Gang reacting to a threat and not having foresight to plan ahead .
This post was edited on 3/7 2:20 PM by MADHAT1
And there was the Super-Metro Conference. After PSU to Big Ten was announced there was also talk of most if not all of the Eastern independents joining the Metro Conference. At that time, F$U, L'ville, VTech and South Carolina (amongst others) were members. Add what beccame Big East football in 1991 to those four, and you have a solid football conference. What could have been.
I believe this is correct. Many felt it may be better to be in an east coast conference rather than a midwest one. I'm one that stated a preference for the ACC but looking at things now, I realize I was completely wrong and the best place for RU is in the B1G.
ACCs biggest mistake was taking BCU. Can you believe they actually favored BCU over VTech?? Go think about that one.
What the heck was that moron Shalala doing lobbying for them for? Did deFilippo have naked pictures her (may the gods help us if they ever get released)
Mediocre football with a fanbase that you need a microscope to find, an apathetic city, an absoultely awful stadium and basketaball program that I guess was OK but never exactly a powerhouse (and YES BCU FANS I'M AWARE OF HOW BAD WE ARE IN BBALL THANK YOU)
A real head scratcher, and an incredibly awful business decision.
What the heck was that moron Shalala doing lobbying for them for? Did deFilippo have naked pictures her (may the gods help us if they ever get released)
Mediocre football with a fanbase that you need a microscope to find, an apathetic city, an absoultely awful stadium and basketaball program that I guess was OK but never exactly a powerhouse (and YES BCU FANS I'M AWARE OF HOW BAD WE ARE IN BBALL THANK YOU)
A real head scratcher, and an incredibly awful business decision.
Vkj nails it right
Delany let it be known to the powers that be that Rutgers was coming as soon as Notre same figured out what it would do...it was always ndame and Rutgers or Maryland and Rutgers as 13 and 14
The only shake up out of it was we were supposed to be #12...and the big 12 destabilized and Delany had to take
Nebraska then and there or they weren't ever getting them...which happened in summer of 2010
What the risk was then was if ndame hung on for much longer...thAt the ru program would erode while in the water down big east and the invite would never come
Notice how fast we were invited with Maryland as soon as
Ndame announced it's deal with the acc
Delany let it be known to the powers that be that Rutgers was coming as soon as Notre same figured out what it would do...it was always ndame and Rutgers or Maryland and Rutgers as 13 and 14
The only shake up out of it was we were supposed to be #12...and the big 12 destabilized and Delany had to take
Nebraska then and there or they weren't ever getting them...which happened in summer of 2010
What the risk was then was if ndame hung on for much longer...thAt the ru program would erode while in the water down big east and the invite would never come
Notice how fast we were invited with Maryland as soon as
Ndame announced it's deal with the acc
It was definitely the fall of 1991, because I was in grad school at the time and letters from people who were still undergraduates (remember writing letters?) talked about it. Bob Reasso, especially, was extremely excited about the prospect of being in the ACC, and there were a lot of rumors of superconferences forming at the time. A common notion at the time was a 16-team ACC that would absorb the football-playing Big East schools.
The WAC was a disaster at 16 teams, but obviously TV money would never be a big deal for them. And in the early 1990s, nobody foresaw the explosion in rights fees that would come later, so the superconference wasn't quite as attractive. But the rumors were very real, and people at Rutgers were very excited.
The WAC was a disaster at 16 teams, but obviously TV money would never be a big deal for them. And in the early 1990s, nobody foresaw the explosion in rights fees that would come later, so the superconference wasn't quite as attractive. But the rumors were very real, and people at Rutgers were very excited.
Forget about basketball, you don't even have your facts correct about football. Boston College has finished in the top half of the ACC over the 10 hears it has been in the Conference (2005-2014) - and this despite enduring 4 years of the Spaz era which nearly wrecked the program.
BC sits in the #7 media market and has solid ratings whether you care to belive it or not. Games not televised through the networks or ESPN are showed on NESN - New England's premier cable network.
It always amazes me when I hear people say this stuff. The facts say otherwise.
Child, please.
Which big bowl game has BCU played in ever? That would be none. (and YES I know we haven't either thanks, this isn't a comparison of RU and BCU)
would you like me dig out the pictures of the attendance at the ACC CGs? Is it necessary? Or the pictures of the ACC fan day at Fenway? Or the bowl attendance figures?
and please tell me why you think anyone in Boston outside of the very few alums you have given a damn about BCU sports?
How does BCU get favored over Vtech? Until the state of VA put pressure on on the local gov't, VTech wasn't going anywhere and was going to be stuck in the BE. I remember being glad that the ACC was taking BCU over Tech because Tech actually looked like a bi. VTech fan base absolutely dwarfs BCUs and VTech had a much better football resume' at the time. Vtech bball was pretty bad although I seem to recall they had one very good year in the A10. BCU's bball was definitely good under Skinner but no world beater either.
Regardless of what you think about BCU (and obviously and admittedly I'm NOT a fan) you can't think that Swofford made a good business decision here.
Good Lord!
Really?? "Which big bowl game has BC played in, "ever"??" Well, how about the Orange and Sugar Bowls in the 1940's and the Cotton Bowl in 1985 (when it was one of the "big" NYD games). You did say, "ever" right? Now, please tell me which "big" bowl games Rutgers has played in "ever"?
You ridiculed attendance at the ACCCG's, yet you claimed BC has been mediocre in the Conference!? If so, then how did they manage to play in two frigging conference championship games???? Yeah, that sounds like the definition of mediocre !
Whether you choose to accept it or not, BC has finished in the top half of the Conference since it has been there. That's a fact!
BC has delivered ratings. Here are the ratings for 2013. Notice where BC ranked. Notice where Rutgers ranked:
http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/4/5173376/sec-college-football-tv-ratings-2014-texas-am-missouri
Look, I am not one to put blind faith in these rankings and there are lots of variables as to how teams sorted out the way they did, but rankings like this are roughly indicative and certainly refute your point. Notice where other teams who also played the Clemsons and Florida States ranked; so it is more than just opponents played that factored into BC's ranking.
BC to the ACC was a smart decision. They brought the # 7 market and competitive football. Simply put.
This post was edited on 3/7 5:39 PM by Eagle78
This post was edited on 3/7 5:47 PM by Eagle78
This post was edited on 3/7 5:49 PM by Eagle78
Really?? "Which big bowl game has BC played in, "ever"??" Well, how about the Orange and Sugar Bowls in the 1940's and the Cotton Bowl in 1985 (when it was one of the "big" NYD games). You did say, "ever" right? Now, please tell me which "big" bowl games Rutgers has played in "ever"?
You ridiculed attendance at the ACCCG's, yet you claimed BC has been mediocre in the Conference!? If so, then how did they manage to play in two frigging conference championship games???? Yeah, that sounds like the definition of mediocre !
Whether you choose to accept it or not, BC has finished in the top half of the Conference since it has been there. That's a fact!
BC has delivered ratings. Here are the ratings for 2013. Notice where BC ranked. Notice where Rutgers ranked:
http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/4/5173376/sec-college-football-tv-ratings-2014-texas-am-missouri
Look, I am not one to put blind faith in these rankings and there are lots of variables as to how teams sorted out the way they did, but rankings like this are roughly indicative and certainly refute your point. Notice where other teams who also played the Clemsons and Florida States ranked; so it is more than just opponents played that factored into BC's ranking.
BC to the ACC was a smart decision. They brought the # 7 market and competitive football. Simply put.
This post was edited on 3/7 5:39 PM by Eagle78
This post was edited on 3/7 5:47 PM by Eagle78
This post was edited on 3/7 5:49 PM by Eagle78
Patrick clearly said this isnt a comparison between BC and Rutgers yet.... you proceeded to desperately make this into a comparison between BC and Rutgers. Unreal...
That is reasonable.
BC is certainly competitive in the ACC, and that is good enough. Heck, even ending up in last place is good enough; someone has to be in last place.
As Rutgers fans ought to know, conference alignment isn't about how good a team is on the field or court. It is about fan following and markets.
My gut instinct says that BC doesn't have a strong following in the Boston market. But I'll readily admit that I really don't know what kind of ratings BC gets on Boston TV. I've heard enough fans of other schools erroneously say that no one in the NY market cares about Rutgers football, but I know that Rutgers football has a very strong following in the NY (and more fans in the NY market than Notre Dame, Penn St, and Syracuse combined). So just like those fans of other schools are ignorant about the strength of Rutgers' football fan following in the NY market, I'll admit my ignorance about BC's fan following and take your word that BC has a solid following in New England.
The AD at Rutgers talked opening about the entire timeline with the B1G. It was published on NJ.com If you want to Google it. Flood also mention that it started before he was 1st hire under GS. The school was told to be on standby soon after UND annouced it was moving its non football sports to the ACC. The Big Ten mived quickly to grab a partner for Rutgers. It was just a few days later that Rutgers was told it was in serious talks with another school. That school was never mention but we all know now that it was Maryland.
The ACC did consider us but too many basketball 1st schools were against it. We donge a bullet there.
The ACC did consider us but too many basketball 1st schools were against it. We donge a bullet there.
Nebraska to the B1G was never a big picture plan but rather something that fell in their lap . So of say Notre dame would have said yes to b1g at any time b1g expl
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Topdeck, cuse/ Pitt to the ACC was absolutely announced in September 2011, not 2012 (stone-cold fact not even up for debate). I also remember the BC article where their official mention ESPN telling them they identified the 2 candidates they wanted the ACC to go after (the article quickly vanished although other outlets picked up on it).
Joe P.
Joe P.
