An idea with no basis in reality

[Orangemen]

But I like it anyway.

How about Temple for the ACC?

Plusses-
Basketball is competitive. Football is suprisingly competitive. They bring the Philly market.

Minuses-
They are Temple, an A-10/MAC school. Those schools don't jump to the ACC.

From an athletics standpoint, they are superior to Rutgers in every way. They are below UConn, due to UConn's bball being so strong, football is essentially a wash.

Should ND ever commit to the ACC (another idea with no basis in reality) Temple would be a perfect compliment. ND delivers the NYC market, Temple delivers the Philly market.

This works out great for bball recruiting, giving the ACC a presence in every major NE city. It would also damage the BE even more, which, less face it, is part of the ACC plan here.

Clearly, I know it will never happen. But when thinking about the big picture, there are a lot of good things about a move like this.

 

[OttosBestFriend]

If you thought the ACC fan bases were lukewarm about the inclusion of Cuse & Pitt football... There might be riots in Tallahassee, Death Valley, Atlanta, throughout North Carolina and all across Virginia if Temple were invited.

Fail.

 

[Townie72]

Interesting idea. Creative ---- but with one huge flaw,

Temple has never "delivered the Philly market" after decades of trying.

There may nevver be a Philly market for college football. And what there is seems to favor Penn State (or Penn).

Could Temple theoretically capture a new college football market in Philadelphia and Southern NJ? Sure. But nobody is going to bet on it.

And Temple, as a school, isn't much like the other ACC schools. An urban commuter college located in the middle of a "War Zone" would shock the sensibilities of the sports jacketed UVA and UNC crowd.

 

[44PRIDE]

Um...no

 

[Orangemen]

If you thought the ACC fan bases were lukewarm about the inclusion of Cuse & Pitt football... There might be riots in Tallahassee, Death Valley, Atlanta, throughout North Carolina and all across Virginia if Temple were invited.

Fail.

Is it possible to "Fail" with an idea that comes with a disclaimer of it being realistically impossible?

But I'm happy you got a chance to use "Fail".

People who like to use that term feel very good about themselves when they get to type "Fail".

Well done. Excellent use of "Fail".

All this thread needs now is a post with "pwned" in it, and we have hit the internet daily double.

 

[kingottoiii]

Interesting idea. Creative ---- but with one huge flaw,

Temple has never "delivered the Philly market" after decades of trying.

There may nevver be a Philly market for college football. And what there is seems to favor Penn State (or Penn).

Could Temple theoretically capture a new college football market in Philadelphia and Southern NJ? Sure. But nobody is going to bet on it.

And Temple, as a school, isn't much like the other ACC schools. An urban commuter college located in the middle of a "War Zone" would shock the sensibilities of the sports jacketed UVA and UNC crowd.

The ACC needs a Philly presence. It is the only East coast city missing. However academics and being a commuter school in the dumps will keep Temple from being discussed. If ND ever comes I still think Nova would be the best 16th over UConn or RU who both add nothing.

 

[zibby]

As bad an idea as this is, it's still a better idea than adding Jersey State. At least Temple is decent at basketball. Jersey State's basketball team is a crime against humanity.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Is it possible to "Fail" with an idea that comes with a disclaimer of it being realistically impossible?

yes it is. and you failed.

why bother to post made up shitt that you know will never happen??

is it to see your name as a thread starter?? do you feel good about yourself when you see your name as such??

temple is worse idea than the penn state rubbish.

and king, it really is a shame that nova could never get their football act together over the last 30 years. but theyre a non-starter as well.

 

[OttosBestFriend]

Is it possible to "Fail" with an idea that comes with a disclaimer of it being realistically impossible?

But I'm happy you got a chance to use "Fail".

People who like to use that term feel very good about themselves when they get to type "Fail".

Well done. Excellent use of "Fail".

All this thread needs now is a post with "pwned" in it, and we have hit the internet daily double.

Yes, it is possible to fail with an idea that comes with a disclaimer of it being realistically impossible.

You see, you posted the notion of Temple to the ACC - along with several bits of "evidence" as to why you felt it might not be a particularly bad notion.

In fact, your "evidence" was an attempt to prove it a good idea.

Meaning, you wanted to test the waters and see what others thought of the "brilliant" suggestion - One that you were proud no one had proposed to this point.

Only, you wanted a safety net in case we all decided the idea sucked (we did).

The "disclaimer" you provided up front served a purpose too. It was the aforementioned safety net - Giving you an easy out if/when everyone called you crazy for even suggesting Temple to the ACC (and they did)

The Temple idea is awful and although you might not have been certain when you started the thread, it's as clear as day now.

PWNED. (you're welcome)

 

[Cuse87]

If you thought the ACC fan bases were lukewarm about the inclusion of Cuse & Pitt football... There might be riots in Tallahassee, Death Valley, Atlanta, throughout North Carolina and all across Virginia if Temple were invited.

Fail


... But the fans don't have a say in the matter... fail

Obviously Temple would fit in from a bball standpoint
I don't think their inabilty to grab the Philly market is a fair negative either... it's hard to get any market when you are 0-11, 1-10, 2-9

They are getting pretty good, I've watched there Penn State games this year and last, and they just absolutely trounced Maryland in a true road game.

I'm not saying it is probable the ACC snatches them up but there have been worse ideas thrown out there on this board. If they put together a couple more winning seasons in a row they could really own Philly fball fans (who else are they going to root for Nova? PSU is 4 hours away? Penn?)​

 

[OrangePA]

But I like it anyway.

How about Temple for the ACC?

Plusses-
Basketball is competitive. Football is suprisingly competitive. They bring the Philly market.

Minuses-
They are Temple, an A-10/MAC school. Those schools don't jump to the ACC.

From an athletics standpoint, they are superior to Rutgers in every way. They are below UConn, due to UConn's bball being so strong, football is essentially a wash.

Should ND ever commit to the ACC (another idea with no basis in reality) Temple would be a perfect compliment. ND delivers the NYC market, Temple delivers the Philly market.

This works out great for bball recruiting, giving the ACC a presence in every major NE city. It would also damage the BE even more, which, less face it, is part of the ACC plan here.

Clearly, I know it will never happen. But when thinking about the big picture, there are a lot of good things about a move like this.

I live in Philadelphia.

I can't imagine such a thing happening.

One of the more bizzare ideas I have heard this football season.

 

[billsin01]

While we all take comfort in our alignment with an established "power conference," it is worth noting (again) that Temple has legitimately thrived since being expelled from the BE (which no one ever mentions as when destroying tradition to make money).

And can someone please explain to me how Temple fails to deliver the Philly market yet BC "delivers" Boston or Cuse/Uconn/RU "deliver" NYC? Or USF or even Miami deliver the south florida market?

Notre Dame delivers a market. Duke/UNC and the traditional acc schools combined deliever the mid-atlantic. The SEC schools deliver their markets, to some degree. But believe me, if we're closer to "delivering" the NYC market than Temple is to "delivering" the philly market, it's not by much.

That said, it's not a bad thought but in reality it's absurd b/c college commisioners and presidents don't look further than the next TV contract.

 

[Chip]

An idea with basis in reality.

ACC stays at 14 teams.

Winner = Syracuse.

 

[zibby]

it is worth noting (again) that Temple has legitimately thrived since being expelled from the BE

Define "thrive." Temple has NEVER beaten a MAC team with a winning record. They're real good at beating up on the bad teams in the MAC, but whenever they have an opportunity to take on one of the better teams in the MAC, they choke.

And even if they do manage to beat Toledo on Saturday, wait until Chester Stewart graduates before you say Temple is "thriving." Jersey State has proved that its time with an elite running back was an anomaly. After Ray Rice left, they went right back to sucking.

 

[OrangePA]

While we all take comfort in our alignment with an established "power conference," it is worth noting (again) that Temple has legitimately thrived since being expelled from the BE (which no one ever mentions as when destroying tradition to make money).

And can someone please explain to me how Temple fails to deliver the Philly market yet BC "delivers" Boston or Cuse/Uconn/RU "deliver" NYC? Or USF or even Miami deliver the south florida market?

Notre Dame delivers a market. Duke/UNC and the traditional acc schools combined deliever the mid-atlantic. The SEC schools deliver their markets, to some degree. But believe me, if we're closer to "delivering" the NYC market than Temple is to "delivering" the philly market, it's not by much.

That said, it's not a bad thought but in reality it's absurd b/c college commisioners and presidents don't look further than the next TV contract.

I think you're right that in the same sense that Temple will not deliver Philly, Boston College probably does not deliver Boston etc.

There are some differences though.

Temple has never - never had any substantial success on the national level.

Boston College has had that kind of success.

Temple does not play on campus, which is in a very rough section of Philadelphia - though it is better than it was just a few years ago, but plays in the Eagles' stadium that usually draws maybe 10,000 fans, unless Penn State is in town.

Boston College plays in a nice college stadium on a great campus that it fills on a regular basis.

And Boston College was not thrown out of the Big East. I have to believe that that plays a part in the discussion.
I don't think you can compare Temple's experience to the teams you mentioned.

 

[TheOrangeBuddha]

There is a better chance of Villanova joining the ACC, then Temple.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

"Minuses-
They are Temple, an A-10/MAC school. Those schools don't jump to the ACC."

^^This...

Although, IF Temple gets invited into the NNBE and IF Temple becomes a perennial Top 20 power and IF Temple begins attracting 40,000 fans a games and IF Temple boosts its academic profile then maybe after 10, 15 years if the ACC still hasn't expanded to 16 teams maybe, just maybe, the ACC would give Temple some consideration. Since the NNBE won't be around in 10, 15 years that seems unlikely.

 

[billsin01]

Define "thrive." Temple has NEVER beaten a MAC team with a winning record. They're real good at beating up on the bad teams in the MAC, but whenever they have an opportunity to take on one of the better teams in the MAC, they choke.

And even if they do manage to beat Toledo on Saturday, wait until Chester Stewart graduates before you say Temple is "thriving." Jersey State has proved that its time with an elite running back was an anomaly. After Ray Rice left, they went right back to sucking.

This is a fair point. I guess I was thinking in a relative sense that they went from not winning ... ever ... against anyone to being a solid program.

I'll grant that thrived is too strong, but let's not undersell what they have actually accomplished. In '08, they won 5 games, which for them at the time was a minor miracle. They also did that despite losing four games by four points or less and another one in OT. Since that season they've won 20 of 29 games and two of the losses are to Penn State by a combined 13 points.

I'm not pimping Temple for the ACC, merely pointing out that I'm not sure conference affiliation is quite as important as we all (myself included) make it out to be.

 

[billsin01]

I think you're right that in the same sense that Temple will not deliver Philly, Boston College probably does not deliver Boston etc.

There are some differences though.

Temple has never - never had any substantial success on the national level.

Boston College has had that kind of success.

Temple does not play on campus, which is in a very rough section of Philadelphia - though it is better than it was just a few years ago, but plays in the Eagles' stadium that usually draws maybe 10,000 fans, unless Penn State is in town.

Boston College plays in a nice college stadium on a great campus that it fills on a regular basis.

And Boston College was not thrown out of the Big East. I have to believe that that plays a part in the discussion.
I don't think you can compare Temple's experience to the teams you mentioned.

Yes, there are a ton of differences between the programs. I think my point was that very few teams "deliver" any markets period. I have a hard time believing UCLA delivers LA in football. USC doesn't either. Miami. There are big differences in all those programs but the point is very few come even close to delivering markets and even fewer deliver markets national advertisers care about.