Swofford may be an idiot | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Swofford may be an idiot

It's only a great move IF the league performs well, particularly in football. And the ACC is already hampered by a bad TV contract and small schools with pitiful fanbases.

Looking in the rearview mirror and seeing the Big East behind us shouldn't be our focus anymore or be a judgment as to how well a conference commissioner is doing. We need to look at what is in front of us and what it will take to get us on an even playing field with them.

Cheers,
Neil

The only way that the ACC can get fully on an equal playing field with the SEC and Big Ten in terms of TV money and prime exposure is to get ND to join. ND has the nation's largest TV fan base for football, and football is about 5 times more important than basketball. ND joining the ACC would double the value of ACC football, because it would guarantee prime national interest in the ACC regular season to determine whether ND gets to the Championship Game.

That means that giving ND what it needs to give up its football independence is absolutely necessary. That must be Swofford's main focus, one that has no remotely close second focus.
 
Certainly some interesting and good points spread throughout the thread. But here is another take..."I know the BE (substitute SEC) and the ACC is not one of them"...

In bringing 'Cuse and Pitt to the ACC, Swofford did as the conference wanted...two teams with basketball prowess and football history that may rise again. He took out the BE in such a way I do not expect it to either survive long and/or be a competitive league as is the ACC, SEC, B1g...etc.
Basketball was the reason that 'Cuse and Pitt (probably would have 'been 'Cuse and Uconn if BC wasnt such a Nancy--not counting that the Big 12 may have wanted to expand into PA)...so the ACC was driven more by strengthening basketball because that is what it was known for and it was being trumped by the BE...so take 'Cuse and Pitt and get back to #1.
As far as football is concerned, FSU and Miami are sitting there wanting to get better. If you recall, both teams were strong in the '80s and '90s. If they get back then the ACC becomes important again in football.

Swofford now has to find two schools to reach 16 that will bring football in as a top sport. Even Coach K said this. It was unfortunate that WVU did not have better academic standard as its all around sports and football capability would have been good for the ACC. If we look over the field and geography, there isnt even a few teams for the ACC to expand with that play good football and are academically strong. In fact, aside from ND, there probably isnt one hanging around right now...so Swofford would have to steal two teams if ND does not come to the ACC. And those teams may have to come from a conference and only teams to raid maybe Penn ST, Vandy, WVU (discussed above) and...damn, hope ND joins cause there isnt a whole lot of good academic and football playing schools left.

I believe Swofford is a pretty smart guy and everything he does is predicated on first strengthening the ACC and second fighting to get ND to join. Do any of us here believe that in the next five years any football team other than FSU or Miami can be a top 4 or top 6 team. I DO NOT. If that is the case, then support the four team playoff, endeavor to get closer to the SEC...something like B1G and PAC association and bide time. Eventually, ND is going to have to join somewhere as good teams will all be tied up in conferences and may not want to play ND because of tough schedules.

Lastly, Swofford must negotiate a very good TV package. He has several points in his favor...one demographics of the NE and SE corridor including Florida...one of only two regions really growing at this time and projected into the future...he has one of the two best basketball conferences...and ACC football is okay not great. If this is all about the money, and most of us think it is; than anything Swofford does must be to entice in whatever way that ND joins and no good football teams leave. I doubt that Swofford decided all by himself to support a four team playoff. Something tells me Presidents of Universities and ADs have a lot to say...and Swofford is following their direction and his beliefs.

What do you think?


ACC Presidents will defer to the Commissioner on matters like whether it is better to have only conference champs in a 4 team playoff. He will certainly hear what everybody has to say, but he will develop a plan and implement it.

Swofford has a long range plan to get ND to join, and part of it includes closer ties with the SEC. If, for example, we eventually get to something like the Pac-Big Ten deal to have every league team play 1 game annually against a team in the allied conference, then ND as an ACC member could use that to play in Texas (say in the Jerry Jones Dome against either A&M or Arkansas) or in St. Louis (against Mizzou) or in the Super Dome (against LSU or Bama).

UNC has wasted Top 10 talent in the Davis years - see all the NFL players produced. So if Fedora is like the young Mack Brown, whose final 2 UNC teams were Top 5, then UNC can se a big rise before long. Fedora inherits more talent than Mack did, and Fedora is more experienced as HC than Mack was when came to Chapel Hill. Clemson has had Top 10 talent many times the past 20 years and choked it away. If Dabo can learn from his mistakes, Clemson can be Top 10 this year. Beamer's teams tend to overachieve a little based on available talent, but blow 1 or 2 games it should have won every year. If the Hokies can stop losing games they should win and stop losing 1 big OOC game badly each year, VT can be a Top 5 team.

Pitt sits surrounded by talent. If ACC membership and new HC Chryst mean that Pitt starts recruiting PA and adjacent OH better, and if Chryst needs little time to learn on the job, Pitt can be a Top 10 team.

We are not that far off.
 
I find it hard to believe that WVU could be that different a school than Virginia Tech. Is WVU really that much further down the food chain academically than Tech is? Either way that is the one school the ACC could have easily taken if they really wanted to improve the level of their football.

--------------------------------

I love how it is assumed WVU is a football powerhouse.

Last year, last place SU won 49-23 on Oct 21.
UL won 38-35 on 11/5.

WVU beat Cinn 24-21 on 11/12.
WVU beat Pitt 21-20 on 11/25.
WVU beat USF 30-27 on 12/1.

Their last 3 conference games were won by 7 points: almost the definition of parity, in a conference assumed to be uncompetitive.

Their huge win over Clemson 70- 33 was a shocker; I guess that's what makes college football interesting.


------------------

The ACC selection of SU and Pitt wasn't about BB schools vs football schools.

It was a selection based on expanding the ACC market footprint in the northeast and selecting teams that have the potential to contribute; it was also about affinity: selecting a university the ACC schools want to be associated with.

Both Miami and FSU have top 10 Rivals ratings for recruits this year; with new coaches, I would be surprised if they don't return to playing at a higher competitive level.
 
Swofford has at least two immediate major challenges: to renegotiate the ACC TV contract with ESPN so the ACC has a payout comparable to the other major conferences and to make sure the ACC is best positioned to participate within the new playoff games, which includes revenue payout.

Although the ACC has a number of currently and historically strong teams, the rankings are heavily influenced by the assumption the SEC has the strongest teams, with the Big 10 and PAC 12 and Big 12 all having highly ranked teams in recent years.

It seems obvious the ACC would have the best chance of participating by supporting the proposal of including conference champions ranked in the top 6, and permitting participation of a top ranked "other" team only if there were not 4 top 6 ranked conference champions.

I'd love to have a condition in this agreement that throws out the preseason rankings. If they are still using the coaches poll then don't rank teams until the first Monday in October.
 
--------------------------------

I love how it is assumed WVU is a football powerhouse.

Last year, last place SU won 49-23 on Oct 21.
UL won 38-35 on 11/5.

WVU beat Cinn 24-21 on 11/12.
WVU beat Pitt 21-20 on 11/25.
WVU beat USF 30-27 on 12/1.

Their last 3 conference games were won by 7 points: almost the definition of parity, in a conference assumed to be uncompetitive.

Their huge win over Clemson 70- 33 was a shocker; I guess that's what makes college football interesting.


------------------

The ACC selection of SU and Pitt wasn't about BB schools vs football schools.

It was a selection based on expanding the ACC market footprint in the northeast and selecting teams that have the potential to contribute; it was also about affinity: selecting a university the ACC schools want to be associated with.

Both Miami and FSU have top 10 Rivals ratings for recruits this year; with new coaches, I would be surprised if they don't return to playing at a higher competitive level.

It is rather funny how WVU fans now see their school as a football all time juggernaut. Texas knows what it is doing: it is picking the desperately needy and the gullible to try to make the LHN network as profitable as possible, and it prefers teams it can own. Texas and OU will own WVU, which will learn that a lucky streak of 3 big bowl wins does not mean you can compete as an equal with the Big 12 South schools across entire seasons.

When the 2003 expansion was going down, FSU fans swore that adding Syracuse would be great for ACC football, and Clemson fans aped whatever FSU fans said. They both damned UNC and Dook for voting NO, saying we hated football and wanted them held down. Now the internet versions of those two fan bases say that adding Syracuse is about basketball only and thus going to drag down their football.

Amazing how self-contradictory people are, especially when they need a scapegoat for their decade or more of underachieving.
 
It is rather funny how WVU fans now see their school as a football all time juggernaut.

I love the latest WV theory. Not only do they believe that FSU and Clemson to the B12 is happening, but they also believe that if the ACC had taken WV instead of Pitt that FSU and Clemson would not have been interested in the B12 :crazy:. IF FSU and Clemson leave the ACC it is only because the ACC is getting a significant amount less for TV $ and is locked in for a long time. That would NOT have changed if WV were in the ACC and Pitt in the B12.
 
I love the latest WV theory. Not only do they believe that FSU and Clemson to the B12 is happening, but they also believe that if the ACC had taken WV instead of Pitt that FSU and Clemson would not have been interested in the B12 :crazy:. IF FSU and Clemson leave the ACC it is only because the ACC is getting a significant amount less for TV $ and is locked in for a long time. That would NOT have changed if WV were in the ACC and Pitt in the B12.

They believe that because they believe that there is an ACC football schools vote (led by FSU and Clemson, with Miami, GT, VT, and NCSU on board) that is cheated and tricked by the basketball schools vote (led 100% by UNC and Dook, with Maryland, Wake, UVA, and BC as blind followers - don't bother trying to make sense of UVA or BC as a basketball school, or asking how the ties are broken so that every major vote is unanimous or nearly so). In this view, FSU and Clemson bravely fought to get WVU into the ACC, seeing that as the only way to show that the ACC really cares about its football. Because the ACC failed to add WVU, the ACC has shown that it is only about basketball, and so FSU and Clemson are desperate to leave.
 
It is rather funny how WVU fans now see their school as a football all time juggernaut. Texas knows what it is doing: it is picking the desperately needy and the gullible to try to make the LHN network as profitable as possible, and it prefers teams it can own. Texas and OU will own WVU, which will learn that a lucky streak of 3 big bowl wins does not mean you can compete as an equal with the Big 12 South schools across entire seasons.

When the 2003 expansion was going down, FSU fans swore that adding Syracuse would be great for ACC football, and Clemson fans aped whatever FSU fans said. They both damned UNC and Dook for voting NO, saying we hated football and wanted them held down. Now the internet versions of those two fan bases say that adding Syracuse is about basketball only and thus going to drag down their football.

Amazing how self-contradictory people are, especially when they need a scapegoat for their decade or more of underachieving.

Sad but true. How soon people forget that Pasqualoni was fired because he was a little better than average his last few seasons. Gross made a mistake in Pasqualoni's replacement but has since corrected that mistake.
 
--------------------------------

I love how it is assumed WVU is a football powerhouse.

Where in my post do you see the word powerhouse?
 
West Virginia fans conveniently forget, that from 1991-2003 when the Big East had Miami and Virginia Tech, they were an also ran. Miami 12 years top 25 , 128 wins Tech 9 , 108 wins, Syr 7 , 101 wins WV 2 , 88 wins BC 4, 84 wins Pitt 1, 65 wins. Maybe if WV,BC and Pitt had been a little better Miami and Tech might have stayed.
 
Miami and FSU are programs that in any given year could win the National Championship. They will be back. Clemson, VT, GT, Syracuse, Pitt and NC are programs that in any year can crack the top 25 or better. The ACC is a very strong football conf. Not many conf have two teams that have a legit chance every year to win the National Championship and Miami and FSU do. As to basketball it is a sick conf. Best in the land in my opinion not even close top to bottom. Swofford knows what he is doing.
 
Neil,
Are the 2016 academic standards favorable to the ACC? Who would be the strongest 15th and 16th members?
If the ACC, SEC, BIG, PAC AND B12, CHOOSE TO LEAVE THE NCAA (W/ NO MONOPOLY) :
DO WE: KEEP ALL FOOTBALL AND BASKETBALL TOURAMENT REVENUE? (NONE TO LONG GONE NCAA)
WOULD THE ACC DO WELL IN THIS SENIORO W/ 8 PLAY TEAM FOOTBALL PLAY-OFFS AND 48 TEAM BASKETBALL TOURAMENT?
WOULD REVENUE SOAR?
 
Where in my post do you see the word powerhouse?

------------------------
Sorry, "powerhouse" was my word; meaning yes, WVU has a good football team but in my opinion the ACC made the right selection of SU and Pitt.

-------------------------------------

Last year, WVU lost to SU 49-23 on Oct 21.
UL won 38-35 on 11/5.

WVU beat Cinn 24-21 on 11/12.
WVU beat Pitt 21-20 on 11/25.
WVU beat USF 30-27 on 12/1.

Their last 3 conference games were won by 7 points: almost the definition of parity, in a conference assumed to be uncompetitive.

Their huge win over Clemson 70- 33 was a shocker; I guess that's what makes college football interesting.


------------------

The ACC selection of SU and Pitt wasn't about BB schools vs football schools.

It was a selection based on expanding the ACC market footprint in the northeast and selecting teams that have the potential to contribute; it was also about affinity: selecting a university the ACC schools want to be associated with.

--------------------
You stated:
"Either way that is the one school the ACC could have easily taken if they really wanted to improve the level of their football."
 
------------------------
Sorry, "powerhouse" was my word; meaning yes, WVU has a good football team but in my opinion the ACC made the right selection of SU and Pitt.

Only if the rumors of FSU and Clemson heading to the B12 prove false. If those turn out to be true and that the ACC could of appeased them by taking WVU instead of Pitt then a fair point could be made that the ACC screwed up. Academics aside (as I don't enough on this topic to have an opinion) they could have appeased the hoop schools by grabbing SU and the football schools by grabbing WVU. Instead they went for two hoops schools.

Guess we will know more when the dust settles and we see what is rumor and what is true in regards to FSU and Clemson.
 
Only if the rumors of FSU and Clemson heading to the B12 prove false. If those turn out to be true and that the ACC could of appeased them by taking WVU instead of Pitt then a fair point could be made that the ACC screwed up. Academics aside (as I don't enough on this topic to have an opinion) they could have appeased the hoop schools by grabbing SU and the football schools by grabbing WVU. Instead they went for two hoops schools.

Guess we will know more when the dust settles and we see what is rumor and what is true in regards to FSU and Clemson.

---------------

I have no idea what FSU is thinking, but if FSU ends up moving to the Big 12, it will be about the huge amount of money the Big 12 is making and not about WVU.


The timing of the current long term ACC contract and the payout may prove to be as damaging to the ACC as the long term Big East contract signed in 2003 with ESPN at the worst possible time.


Until the ACC - ESPN TV renegotiation payout is announced, its all guesswork and the ACC renegotiation may hopefully be surprising, just as when Fox and ESPN made offers to the Big 12 that largely ended up allowing the Big 12 to survive, when it looked like UT and company were on their way to the PAC.


With respect to the academics of Pitt versus WVU, it's not even close.
 
Only if the rumors of FSU and Clemson heading to the B12 prove false. If those turn out to be true and that the ACC could of appeased them by taking WVU instead of Pitt then a fair point could be made that the ACC screwed up. Academics aside (as I don't enough on this topic to have an opinion) they could have appeased the hoop schools by grabbing SU and the football schools by grabbing WVU. Instead they went for two hoops schools.

Guess we will know more when the dust settles and we see what is rumor and what is true in regards to FSU and Clemson.

I beg to differ about us being a "hoops" school in that for Pitt and Syracuse hoops is better right now but both schools are football schools, though. Each has made commitments to improve and has fired coaches for mediocrity. Pitt has been mediocre longer, basically since the early/mid 80's. We have been down further and have to climb further. Poor coaching hires have hindered each school but the dedication to football has always been there.

Also, I point out that Syracuse always tried to improve football in the Big East. When that failed, they attempted to leave the Big East (2003). They still tried to improve Big East football up to the time they announced they were headed to the ACC. I think the ACC understands that being a football school is a long term dedication, not a short term deal like Rutgers. Syracuse has been dedicated to football, basketball and lacrosse for decades.
 
I beg to differ about us being a "hoops" school .

While I am hopeful the move to the ACC helps us turn around the football program I am not optimistic if I am being honest.
 
While I am hopeful the move to the ACC helps us turn around the football program I am not optimistic if I am being honest.

The board prefers you to be dishonest...you prefer Orange or Citrus Blend Kool-aid?
 
Florida State isn't taking their football to the Great Plains to play in places like Kansas and Iowa. And neither is Clemson. Silly to think it's even a possibility.
 
Swofford is working with SEC, IMO it is the 100% right decision. I have come to the conclusion that Delany is a power hungry you know what that the Rose Bowl matters more than college football. His ridiculous Rose Bowl playoff proposal was specifically to tweak to the SEC and now that he and Scott are on the same page and will never disagree on anything regarding the playoff system or expansion that means 2 of the 5 major conference will never disagree.

The SEC knows if it is a top 4 system the chances they get 2 of 4 are pretty high. Delany knows his conference is mediocre and outside Michigan or Ohio State the chances of a top 4 aren't as likely as the SEC. So Delany and Scott pushing this top 6 model hurts the SEC. Swofford by siding the SEC gets them off the ACC and prevents the ACC from becoming the new Big East perception wise. If the alliances are SEC, ACC vs. B1G, P12 then the playoff system will depend on the B12.

The B12 would probably go for the top 4 scenario which the SEC backs because both OU and Texas wouldn't have a championship game and play early enough in the season where both could finish in the top 4 and play for a NC. If the SEC didn't have the ACC on their side then the B12 position wouldn't matter. I don't blame Swofford for siding with the SEC as long as it prevents the B1G and Delany from getting what he wants. If the ACC signs a deal paying 15-18 million per team then the conference will be fine.
 
Swofford is working with SEC, IMO it is the 100% right decision. I have come to the conclusion that Delany is a power hungry you know what that the Rose Bowl matters more than college football. His ridiculous Rose Bowl playoff proposal was specifically to tweak to the SEC and now that he and Scott are on the same page and will never disagree on anything regarding the playoff system or expansion that means 2 of the 5 major conference will never disagree.

The SEC knows if it is a top 4 system the chances they get 2 of 4 are pretty high. Delany knows his conference is mediocre and outside Michigan or Ohio State the chances of a top 4 aren't as likely as the SEC. So Delany and Scott pushing this top 6 model hurts the SEC. Swofford by siding the SEC gets them off the ACC and prevents the ACC from becoming the new Big East perception wise. If the alliances are SEC, ACC vs. B1G, P12 then the playoff system will depend on the B12.

The B12 would probably go for the top 4 scenario which the SEC backs because both OU and Texas wouldn't have a championship game and play early enough in the season where both could finish in the top 4 and play for a NC. If the SEC didn't have the ACC on their side then the B12 position wouldn't matter. I don't blame Swofford for siding with the SEC as long as it prevents the B1G and Delany from getting what he wants. If the ACC signs a deal paying 15-18 million per team then the conference will be fine.

Hey, let's hope they mess around long enough to realize the B1G would be better off in an 8 or 16 team format. I could agree with Delaney on that...but does he agree with me...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,141
Messages
4,682,908
Members
5,901
Latest member
CarlsbergMD

Online statistics

Members online
103
Guests online
1,141
Total visitors
1,244


Top Bottom