take a man at his word, would ya

[dasher]

" I don't understand it. How do you vote as a collegiate president on something that has the potential to provide some benefit for your institution and the conference you're affiliated with but has a very negative consequence for a host of other members of the academy, as presidents like to call it?
I'd like to know how much of these discussions are: What's right? What is the best best thing for the larger enterprise, and how many other schools would be adversly impacted?
I just don't know that's happening.
Jack Swarbrick ND A.D. in sept of 2011 to USA today

 

[Townie72]

" I don't understand it. How do you vote as a collegiate president on something that has the potential to provide some benefit for your institution and the conference you're affiliated with but has a very negative consequence for a host of other members of the academy, as presidents like to call it?
I'd like to know how much of these discussions are: What's right? What is the best best thing for the larger enterprise, and how many other schools would be adversly impacted?
I just don't know that's happening.
Jack Swarbrick ND A.D. in sept of 2011 to USA today

So your point is?

That ND's move from partial membership in the Big East to partial membership in the ACC somehow "has a very negative consequence for a host of other members of the academe"?

Many would disagree with that. John Feinstein in the Wash Post today says that ND's entry into the ACC adds a little luster, but that's about it. A significant number of posters on the NNBE forums have been calling for ND to be ousted for years (some here too).

I think Swarbrick was talking about Pitt and SU and their departure for the ACC was a much bigger deal than ND basketball and lacrosse going to the ACC.

ND's departure by itself is not a big deal. The problem is that it adds to the general perception that the Big East is crumbling.

 

[omniorange]

So your point is?

That ND's move from partial membership in the Big East to partial membership in the ACC somehow "has a very negative consequence for a host of other members of the academe"?

Many would disagree with that. John Feinstein in the Wash Post today says that ND's entry into the ACC adds a little luster, but that's about it. A significant number of posters on the NNBE forums have been calling for ND to be ousted for years (some here too).

I think Swarbrick was talking about Pitt and SU and their departure for the ACC was a much bigger deal than ND basketball and lacrosse going to the ACC.

ND's departure by itself is not a big deal. The problem is that it adds to the general perception that the Big East is crumbling.

The point is obvious to me. And it's both funny and ironic.

ND has said over and over again that this move to the ACC is $$$-neutral to them. At least SU and Pitt will see a significant $$$ increase for their move. So, which hurts more? Two institutions moving from a conference for a much better payday rather than the quality of play in that conference or ND sticking it in the BE's rear end just to hobknob with better academic institutions and dissing the quality of play?

Ultimately though, what it shows is that the rumors from two summers ago about ND-Pitt-SU being tied at the hip may not have been entirely off-base.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[dasher]

So your point is?

That ND's move from partial membership in the Big East to partial membership in the ACC somehow "has a very negative consequence for a host of other members of the academe"?

Many would disagree with that. John Feinstein in the Wash Post today says that ND's entry into the ACC adds a little luster, but that's about it. A significant number of posters on the NNBE forums have been calling for ND to be ousted for years (some here too).

I think Swarbrick was talking about Pitt and SU and their departure for the ACC was a much bigger deal than ND basketball and lacrosse going to the ACC.

ND's departure by itself is not a big deal. The problem is that it adds to the general perception that the Big East is crumbling.

what omniorange said.

 

[Townie72]

The point is obvious to me. And it's both funny and ironic.

ND has said over and over again that this move to the ACC is $$$-neutral to them. At least SU and Pitt will see a significant $$$ increase for their move. So, which hurts more? Two institutions moving from a conference for a much better payday rather than the quality of play in that conference or ND sticking it in the BE's rear end just to hobknob with better academic institutions and dissing the quality of play?

Ultimately though, what it shows is that the rumors from two summers ago about ND-Pitt-SU being tied at the hip may not have been entirely off-base.

Cheers,
Neil

I actually didn't catch the "quality of play" part. In basketball, ND has had its fair share of "bangers" underneath couple with outside shooters. They may find the ACC less hospitable when it comes to how the games are played and refereed. Pitt is going to have to make huge adjustments or they are going to be playing with four guys in the second half.

Back to the main point. The defections of Pitt and SU were way more damaging to the Big East.

First they played football not just basketball and the other sports.

Second, SU was a charter member, while Pitt was a very longstanding member.

Third, they were Eastern. Losing these two schools shifts the weighted footprint radically.

Other than perception, I don't see the loss of ND as hurting them that much. Other than the fact that it adds to the idea the conference is dying from 1000 cuts.

I'll bet if asked the NNBE would rather see Pitt and SU come back, than ND.