Texas Tech fans want the ACC?

[SUinNYC]

According to this blog...

http://www.jwtns.net/2013/05/texas-techs-goal-for-2025-join-acc.html

Here's the money paragraph...

"The advantages for Tech to move to the ACC are fairly numerous. With the current membership of the ACC, joining the conference would mean exposure in Boston, New York, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia. Joining the ACC would greatly expand the market of Texas Tech beyond West Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma, and open up the nation's eyes to the Red Raiders. Tech would be looking at playing Notre Dame, Syracuse, Florida State, Miami, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Louisville, and Clemson in football, instead of Iowa State, Kansas State, or Kansas. Tech would play Duke, North Carolina, Miami, Pitt, and Louisville in basketball, instead of Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, or Oklahoma State."

How quickly the worm has turned. They can line up behind Cincinnati, UCONN, and WVU. The only team from Texas the ACC should take is UT.

 

[SUintheVille]

Makes no sense.

 

[Jeepers]

If Texas were to ever join the ACC, they'd need some companions.

 

[longtimefan]

Makes no sense.

They want to exit the Big 12. Just clutching at any straw.

 

[HtownOrange]

Many people, myself included, have been of the opinion that the Big 12 stayed together because of the TV deal, not because they like/respect each other, have similar missions, etc. Whereas the other top conferences have many ties to each other and as long as the money is reasonably close, no one really wants to leave, Maryland excepted as they screwed up their AD budget. In the Big 12, money is the only thing holding it all together and that only lasts until Texas/OU become bored with the other schools.

 

[orange79]

"Instead of playing second fiddle to texas and Oklahoma in recruiting, Tech could market themselves as the only Texas school in the ACC, and offer something different to high school recruits in Texas and elsewhere. Live in West Texas, but travel and experience the world. Tech would be able to recruit Florida and Georgia in football, and New York and Philadelphia in basketball. Tech would also be free of competing against texas, Baylor, and TCU for State and division supremacy. Ask TCU about the advantages of being the only Texas school in your conference in recruiting, and not having to play any other state schools in conference play."

Uh, they do know that Villanova is not in the ACC, right? Or do they know something we don't (I'm looking at you, Temple)?

 

[MaxwellCuse]

So Tech wants to become the West Virginia of the ACC?

Sorry Tech. Your fans are too good to be subjected to the sort of isolation the Mountaineers faithful are going to experience for the next decade or more.

 

[Shermthegeneral]

They want to exit the Big 12. Just clutching at any straw.

For a second I confused tech with A&M! That statement is like Temple discussing a move to the B1G, unfortunately, the Big 12 let Texas strong arm the conference in letting them have whatever they want. Before the breakup, I thought the Big 12 was the top conference in bball and football combined.

 

[Lou_C]

It is obviously silly to think about inviting TT to the ACC...however...

The ACC should definitely be positioning itself over the next decade to be the best home for the group of Texas, TT, OU, OSU, Baylor and WVU. The ACC would desparately benefit from pod-based scheduling, but have no good options for 16 that will pay their share.

So the next best option is a long term goal of 20, and that's the best way to get there. I understand that the ACC is probably not the first choice for those schools, especially Oklahoma, but we've got a decade to change that. As things stand now, the ACC is very likely the only option to the East that would keep the Texas and Oklahoma schools together. The PAC could conceivably do it, but even if they wanted to, going an hour East is far preferable to playing two hours West. The biggest drawback is the ACC having to prove itself as financially competitive and a strong football conference. And we've got time to make that happen.

It's not as far fetched as it sounds. Texas and the ACC talked, and TX has been forthcoming about desiring a move East over West if it came to that. They also love any association with Notre Dame. TT and Baylor would come of course, because they'd have no other options. But the ACC probably needs them to overcome the politics that would be involved, and to make sure Texas and the OK schools feel that they would maintain their Texas presence (otherwise Kansas would be a better fit). I think WVU would do this if the opportunity arose.

The main issue would be Oklahoma, who I'm sure doesn't even have the ACC on it's radar. That's why this will have to be a long play.

So this TT column is silly, but the more we see of this over the next ten years, the better.

 

[AAM62]

According to this blog...

http://www.jwtns.net/2013/05/texas-techs-goal-for-2025-join-acc.html

Here's the money paragraph...

"The advantages for Tech to move to the ACC are fairly numerous. With the current membership of the ACC, joining the conference would mean exposure in Boston, New York, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia. Joining the ACC would greatly expand the market of Texas Tech beyond West Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma, and open up the nation's eyes to the Red Raiders. Tech would be looking at playing Notre Dame, Syracuse, Florida State, Miami, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Louisville, and Clemson in football, instead of Iowa State, Kansas State, or Kansas. Tech would play Duke, North Carolina, Miami, Pitt, and Louisville in basketball, instead of Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, or Oklahoma State."

How quickly the worm has turned. They can line up behind Cincinnati, UCONN, and WVU. The only team from Texas the ACC should take is UT.

I find it funny that they name dropped syracuse in the football discussion and Lville for the basketball. Lville is strong in both sports and we're clearly more recognized for bball. Random thought, I know.

 

[Btstimpy]

According to this blog...

http://www.jwtns.net/2013/05/texas-techs-goal-for-2025-join-acc.html

Here's the money paragraph...

"The advantages for Tech to move to the ACC are fairly numerous. With the current membership of the ACC, joining the conference would mean exposure in Boston, New York, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia. Joining the ACC would greatly expand the market of Texas Tech beyond West Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma, and open up the nation's eyes to the Red Raiders. Tech would be looking at playing Notre Dame, Syracuse, Florida State, Miami, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Louisville, and Clemson in football, instead of Iowa State, Kansas State, or Kansas. Tech would play Duke, North Carolina, Miami, Pitt, and Louisville in basketball, instead of Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, or Oklahoma State."

How quickly the worm has turned. They can line up behind Cincinnati, UCONN, and WVU. The only team from Texas the ACC should take is UT.

It's refreshing to see folks way outside the ACC's footprint recognize that the ACC has assembled a very good league here with representation from a lot of different areas up and down the east coast. Notre Dame certainly recognized it. It's interesting to see a Texas Tech fan do the same.

I don't know if the ACC wants to get outside the eastern time zone too much due to travel concerns for the student athletes. But if it did, Texas is certainly a good place to go. The SEC and the Big Ten sprawl East-West. So it can be done. The ACC has preferred North-South.

 

[Alsacs]

Without reading each post in this thread, but I assume the consensus is Texas Tech is smartly realizing for their own survival they should inquiry to any positive solution. Texas Tech knows that Texas won't be have to attached at their hips for survival as its every man for themselves, and the SEC/B1G have no interest in Tech, and we already know Stanford/Cal told the Pac-12 they didn't want Texas Tech and to be invited into the Pac-12 it requires unanimous consent. Thus, that leaves the ACC, and Big XII conferences and when crap hits the fan within their own conference they want to think the ACC is an option for them. I wouldn't take Texas Tech unless Texas would come with them, but that isn't going to happen so need to speculate.

 

[MassOrange]

It's bad enough we will only get V-Tech, Miami, etc. to the Dome once every six years.

Who really wants a conference with 18-20 schools?

Thanks, but no thanks.

 

[OrangeCrush22]

Tech would be looking at playing Notre Dame, Syracuse, Florida State, Miami, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Louisville, and Clemson in football, instead of Iowa State, Kansas State, or Kansas. Tech would play Duke, North Carolina, Miami, Pitt, and Louisville in basketball, instead of Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, or Oklahoma State.

Football school.

They also list Syracuse Orangemen in the tags.

 

[Lou_C]

It's bad enough we will only get V-Tech, Miami, etc. to the Dome once every six years.

Who really wants a conference with 18-20 schools?

Thanks, but no thanks.

Ah, but that's the point. We need pod scheduling badly for that very reason. There is no justification for Syracuse to go a decade without playing VT or Miami, but they will play NCSU every year and Miami will play Duke every year.

The ACC's scheduling problem is that schools have 7 mandated games every year, and that's WAY too many. NO school in this conference has 7 games worth protecting.

Pods solve that, whether by being independent divisions and the conference having semifinals, or by rotating pods to form new division every year.

The main thing is that in pods of five let's say (in this scenario) Syracuse might have Louisville, WVU, BC and Pitt as pod-mates. They play them every year. Then you have five games (four in a 16-team scenario) against another pod every year.

So if you do the home and home scheduling with conferences do now, you'd face VT and Miami etc twice every six years, once at home. That's not great, but much better than now, and the same as the ACC and SEC were doing at 12.

If you drop the home and home in consecutive years, you would still only host them once every six years, but SU and VT would play every third year. That is MUCH MUCH better than twice every 12 years or whatever it's going to be now. And while for you guys it's VT and Miami, for FSU it's GT, for Wake it's UNC, etc. We've all got a couple schools that we never play.

That makes ACC football way more appealing, with more frequent premier matchups, better geographical ties and the opportunity to build or rekindle rivalries..

 

[orangenirvana]

I find it funny that they name dropped syracuse in the football discussion and Lville for the basketball. Lville is strong in both sports and we're clearly more recognized for bball. Random thought, I know.

Don't underestimate the (temporary) effect that the Pinstripe Bowl curbstomp followed by our head coach moving to the NFL followed by months of NFL Draft talk about our quarterback had on a segment of the football fan population's consciousness.