Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="omniorange, post: 640231, member: 636"]
And that link only looked at it from an ACC perspective and left out other things that Les Robinson had to say.  From the article I linked the overall thinking on both sides came out, but even focusing on the ACC side there was this:
 
[I]The ACC, which had admitted Florida State in 1991, couldn't get the seven votes required for more expansion when a straw vote was taken.[/I]
 
UNC, Duke, and at least one other school was not going to expand beyond 9 for all sports at that time.
 
[I]He [/I](meaning Robinson)[I] also said several ideas were discussed from a complete merger of schools that played football to the move of only a few schools with Miami, Syracuse and Boston College [B]the most prominently discussed[/B].[/I]
 
As the latter part shows, others besides Miami, SU, and BC were discussed, they just weren't as prominently discussed.  And since this is from an ACC perspective, one can see why the ACC came back 5 years later after those three - but others were discusssed as well.  But by who?
 
Translation, the ACC's focus was possible merger for football that at best went to 12 looking mostly at Miami, SU, and BC.  However, Tranghese was looking for an entire merger first (and if not that) a proposal whereby at least 5 schools merged with the ACC for football (Miami, SU, BC, Pitt and one of WVU, VT or RU).  Anyone who believes Tranghese would have signed off on any merger of BE/ACC football that did not include Pitt or that Tranghese would be willing to sign off on SU leaving for the ACC in basketball needs to rethink that stance.
 
Anyway, as Scooch pointed out in his post, the merger of 5 with 9 actually came about but not for football only, but rather for all sports.
 
How might things have been different if a merger of the 9/7 back then came about in 1998?
 
Cheers,
Neil
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?