This Fox Sports Guy Ranks Syracuse Dead Last in his Realignment Rankings

[jimsonjunction]

"The teams in the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac 12 can rest assured that whatever comes in the future, their conference is secure. The teams in the ACC and the Big 12? You're ground zero for the next conference realignment earthquakes."

I just have a hard time believing that this is where it's going. THREE conferences? Really? Maybe I'm naive, but I think that's a little far-fetched.

 

[HOFCeluck]

PC.

lol

 

[Alsacs]

As long as the ACC is aligned with the SEC the ACC is fine. ESPN being in bed with both matters a lot and the Big Ten being with FOX is the war. PAC-12 and Big XII are neutral being aligned with both. PAC-12 can't expand without the Big XII up. Big Ten wants ACC schools but they can't get them and the SEC is fine right now.

 

[billsin01]

lol

I love providence. Underrated city, IMO, but my point was you were playing games all throughout your primary recruiting territory.

 

[Alsacs]

The article was written by the biggest SEC homer/shill Clay Travis. Baghdad Bob blushes at the loyalty Clay Travis has for the SEC. Since he works for FOX Sports as a "writer" and college football analyst he has to kiss the Big Ten's ass and make their additions sound good. That list is just a passive aggressive way of accomplishing all of these things.

 

[NKR1978]

You don't think playing in philly and MSG and at the garden vs. the Johnnies and at UCONN and PC and all those incredible games vs. G'town and all the press those games generated for years helped hoops recruiting? Will they forget us? No, but I'd say if you were drawing up an ideal conference we'd be playing in those kids back yards all season long. It's fine that we're in the ACC and cuse hoops will be fine, but I'd say it's a stretch to say we've got a great fit going in the ACC. That's my only point here.

We are playing Nova, have a 4 game series with Georgetown and played SJU and will continue to play them.

And the Duke game at the Dome was bigger than any game the Big East ever got us. All those Providence and Seton Hall battles sure warm the heart.

Football is even better. I miss WVU, but Pitt and BC on our schedule is great along with one of FSU and Clemson in the Dome every year is pretty awesome.

And seriously the B1G. ACC is better academically and athletically. It's been 12 years since the B1G won a football title and will be 15 years since it won a basketball championship. It has some nice stadiums and tradition and money, but that's it.

 

[BlazeOrange]

"The teams in the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac 12 can rest assured that whatever comes in the future, their conference is secure. The teams in the ACC and the Big 12? You're ground zero for the next conference realignment earthquakes."

I just have a hard time believing that this is where it's going. THREE conferences? Really? Maybe I'm naive, but I think that's a little far-fetched.

I think his point is that if it ever goes from a B5 to a B4, it will either be the ACC or B12 that gets torn up. So even though one of the two will come out a winner, it's not certain which one it will be. He ignores the fact that most, if not all, of the schools in the losing conference will still come out as winners since they'd most likely be picked up by one of the four in that scenario.

 

[Scooch]

The ACC WAS a southern regional conference. It's changed/changing. The ACC acknowledges this, those schools, and their fanbases, recognize it as well.

It'll be a slow change, and merely adding a school in upstate NY, a school in western PA, and a school in Indiana (w/o the full-time presence of it's most popular sport) doesn't make the ACC a truly east coast conference, no matter what the marketing shills might say.

As with most things conference realignment, I think the ACC took a half-hearted approach that left them unable to truly become the Pac-10 of the east coast. Unfortunately I don't think any of the members back in 2002 had the stomach to be that bold, nor were they even in 2011.

If Swofford didn't have to appease the conservative membership, then the play would have been to add: Miami, BC, SU, Pitt, Rutgers, UConn and VaTech. A 16 team, all-sports conference that actually would have owned just about every major athletic program, market, and state on the east coast (save for Philly, which you need Penn State to land).

But college administrators don't think that way, they're scared of their own shadow basically, while being greedy and self-interested. So you end up with the silly mish-mosh of conference membership that we have today.

 

[HtownOrange]

It'll be a slow change, and merely adding a school in upstate NY, a school in western PA, and a school in Indiana (w/o the full-time presence of it's most popular sport) doesn't make the ACC a truly east coast conference, no matter what the marketing shills might say.

As with most things conference realignment, I think the ACC took a half-hearted approach that left them unable to truly become the Pac-10 of the east coast. Unfortunately I don't think any of the members back in 2002 had the stomach to be that bold, nor were they even in 2011.

If Swofford didn't have to appease the conservative membership, then the play would have been to add: Miami, BC, SU, Pitt, Rutgers, UConn and VaTech. A 16 team, all-sports conference that actually would have owned just about every major athletic program, market, and state on the east coast (save for Philly, which you need Penn State to land).

But college administrators don't think that way, they're scared of their own shadow basically, while being greedy and self-interested. So you end up with the silly mish-mosh of conference membership that we have today.

Isn't that what the Big East Commish once proposed to the ACC? I think it was WVU in place of UConn.

 

[Scooch]

Isn't that what the Big East Commish once proposed to the ACC? I think it was WVU in place of UConn.

Kinda, except that the BE wanted a joint "affiliation" for football or whatever. To which the ACC smelled blood in the water and proceeded to destroy the BE over a 10 year period.

 

[OrangePA]

ACC is Demographically The Best Place For SU.

 

[nzm136]

Wow, it's difficult to simply agree with your point which is basically what I was trying to do. I would argue it's different in two ways:

1) the acc is a conference dominated by Tobacco Road and inherently southern (despite it's name). If it becomes a true east coast conference then great but were certainly not there right now.

2) SU went from a conference loaded with meaningful regional rivals in key recruiting areas and within easy driving distance to a conference with no philly presence, no jersey presence, no dc/nova presence and no NYC presence. It also includes a total of 1 regional rival (BC). That sucks. Now the point is moot b/c what else can you do if you're extremely concerned about reaching the Belk Bowl 3 out of every 5 years and building huge indoor practice facilities (which is what all football programs seem to care about)? They had to go somewhere for football and the acc offered a lifeline. But I'd say it's a stretch to call it an ideal fit.

1) The Pac-12 is dominated by the 4 California and inherently LA/SF

2) What meaningful football rivalries did we lose? As far as I can tell, we traded WVU for BC + ND (5/14 years). I'll take that trade. Heck, when we made the move, we gained UMD. Sure, they jumped to the B1G, but they're desperate for NE games (as is WVU), so it shouldn't be hard to play them whenever we want. Even basketball wasn't a huge hit. StJ isn't really a rivalry anymore, and the loss of UConn, Nova, and GU isn't ideal, but we play GU OOC anyway (we have a 10 game series that will likely be renewed forever) and I would be amazed if we didn't also play at least one of VU or UConn virtually ever year. Those were our losses. Our gains include BC (once again a school that sees us as a rival), Duke (a school based in NC with a large NJ alumni population and a national following), and UNC a school with a national following. That seems like a net gain in terms of regional interest to me.

We're actually in a great place. We get the benefits of being in the ACC and the benefits of having the relationships to play UMD/WVU fb virtually at will, PSU (apparently) regularly, and UConn, GU, StJ (if we want) and VU in basketball virtually at will. That's basically a power conference and the cream of the crop of another power conference.

What more could you possibly ask for in terms of NE rivalries/exposure? What other teams are there?

 

[SUinNYC]

If SU and Pitt don't leave for the ACC, the B1G doesn't need to take Rutgera and Maryland. So the basis of his argument is invalid.

 

[billsin01]

1) The Pac-12 is dominated by the 4 California and inherently LA/SF

2) What meaningful football rivalries did we lose? As far as I can tell, we traded WVU for BC + ND (5/14 years). I'll take that trade. Heck, when we made the move, we gained UMD. Sure, they jumped to the B1G, but they're desperate for NE games (as is WVU), so it shouldn't be hard to play them whenever we want. Even basketball wasn't a huge hit. StJ isn't really a rivalry anymore, and the loss of UConn, Nova, and GU isn't ideal, but we play GU OOC anyway (we have a 10 game series that will likely be renewed forever) and I would be amazed if we didn't also play at least one of VU or UConn virtually ever year. Those were our losses. Our gains include BC (once again a school that sees us as a rival), Duke (a school based in NC with a large NJ alumni population and a national following), and UNC a school with a national following. That seems like a net gain in terms of regional interest to me.

We're actually in a great place. We get the benefits of being in the ACC and the benefits of having the relationships to play UMD/WVU fb virtually at will, PSU (apparently) regularly, and UConn, GU, StJ (if we want) and VU in basketball virtually at will. That's basically a power conference and the cream of the crop of another power conference.

What more could you possibly ask for in terms of NE rivalries/exposure? What other teams are there?

I'm not sure of the first point. I wouldn't doubt it but doesn't UW have a title? And OU is obviously a huge program with cu being a pretty solid power as well. I mean, I get that LA probably runs that conference but between those three and the fact that Stanford is 6 hours north of LA there is a bit more north-south balance, IMO.

Regardless, I've argued this point way too often and I'm fine with people disagreeing with me. I would much rather be in a northeast conference. I loved BE hoops and all those road trips (Provy, Uconn, Sju, the hall, nova and especially g'town). Playing out of conference is ok but not the same. I loved MSG for the tournament. I've probably gone 12 of the last 15 years.

So while we didn't lose much of anything from the 'ball side, losing our presence in all those key northeast city is an absolute loss for hoops. And I really don't buy what we've gained. I was ok before UMD left but now? A bunch of good football teams but nobody outside of BC that has any regional tie whatsoever. Duke/unc should be cool I guess. I don't know.

Listen, we did what we had to do. It's ok but I hardly view SU in any sort of cat bird seat.

 

[billsin01]

ACC is Demographically The Best Place For SU.

Yes ... B/c the BE disintegrated.

 

[nzm136]

I'm not sure of the first point. I wouldn't doubt it but doesn't UW have a title? And OU is obviously a huge program with cu being a pretty solid power as well. I mean, I get that LA probably runs that conference but between those three and the fact that Stanford is 6 hours north of LA there is a bit more north-south balance, IMO.

Regardless, I've argued this point way too often and I'm fine with people disagreeing with me. I would much rather be in a northeast conference. I loved BE hoops and all those road trips (Provy, Uconn, Sju, the hall, nova and especially g'town). Playing out of conference is ok but not the same. I loved MSG for the tournament. I've probably gone 12 of the last 15 years.

So while we didn't lose much of anything from the 'ball side, losing our presence in all those key northeast city is an absolute loss for hoops. And I really don't buy what we've gained. I was ok before UMD left but now? A bunch of good football teams but nobody outside of BC that has any regional tie whatsoever. Duke/unc should be cool I guess. I don't know.

Listen, we did what we had to do. It's ok but I hardly view SU in any sort of cat bird seat.

Colorado is a power? Either way, I think that there's more to it than having a title. There are a bunch of non-ACC schools with titles. To put that in perspective, the Cali schools have minimum guaranteed payouts (unlike the rest of the Pac). The ACC treats everyone equally, NC schools and otherwise.

Also, you're ignoring Pitt, OOC games, and major programs with NE alumni bases and national following. That seems pretty cherry-picked.

 

[Madbiker]

I don't get the argument here. The Big East was dead whether SU left or not. If we stupidly turned down the ACC invite, they would have taken UConn and we'd be the program dying in the AAC. The B1G was not taking SU. Rutgers being a big public State U is a better fit for them. I'm thrilled to be in the ACC with a mix of medium size public and other private schools. It's a much better fit geographically than the B1G. It's all east coast. We just need to keep scheduling games each season in NYC and Philly and we have done that. It will help not hurt our recruiting in both football and hoops. SU is the conference presence in NYC (half the school's enrollment historically comes from metro NYC) and it was smart of TGD to position us as such.

 

[omniorange]

It'll be a slow change, and merely adding a school in upstate NY, a school in western PA, and a school in Indiana (w/o the full-time presence of it's most popular sport) doesn't make the ACC a truly east coast conference, no matter what the marketing shills might say.

As with most things conference realignment, I think the ACC took a half-hearted approach that left them unable to truly become the Pac-10 of the east coast. Unfortunately I don't think any of the members back in 2002 had the stomach to be that bold, nor were they even in 2011.

If Swofford didn't have to appease the conservative membership, then the play would have been to add: Miami, BC, SU, Pitt, Rutgers, UConn and VaTech. A 16 team, all-sports conference that actually would have owned just about every major athletic program, market, and state on the east coast (save for Philly, which you need Penn State to land).

But college administrators don't think that way, they're scared of their own shadow basically, while being greedy and self-interested. So you end up with the silly mish-mosh of conference membership that we have today.

I think the play back in 2002/2003 probably should have been Miami, BC, SU, Pitt, and VT. No need to take either Rutgers or UConn at that time. Wait a year or two and see if ND and/or PSU might bite. If they didn't then come back for two of WVU, RU, and UConn.

Northeast popularity in football is just so wound up in PSU and ND, a conference has to have at least one of them to truly have a shot of representing the area. And preferably both.

In 2011 the ACC was already in a position of weakness and the moves made were more about staying relevant than about true vision.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[billsin01]

Colorado is a power? Either way, I think that there's more to it than having a title. There are a bunch of non-ACC schools with titles. To put that in perspective, the Cali schools have minimum guaranteed payouts (unlike the rest of the Pac). The ACC treats everyone equally, NC schools and otherwise.

Also, you're ignoring Pitt, OOC games, and major programs with NE alumni bases and national following. That seems pretty cherry-picked.

Pity's fine. I didn't include them b/c we didn't lose them as a rival but I also would really consider them Northeast inherently. But it's fine either way. But as far as OOC, why would I include them in a discussion about the conference?

Regardless -- it's fine. It's all about football and money. I get it. I just liked road-tripping to those NE schools.

 

[nzm136]

Pity's fine. I didn't include them b/c we didn't lose them as a rival but I also would really consider them Northeast inherently. But it's fine either way. But as far as OOC, why would I include them in a discussion about the conference?

Regardless -- it's fine. It's all about football and money. I get it. I just liked road-tripping to those NE schools.

It's about losing NE rivalries. If we're still playing them (in conference or otherwise), the rivalries aren't lost.

 

[billsin01]

It's about losing NE rivalries. If we're still playing them (in conference or otherwise), the rivalries aren't lost.

Not really. For hoops, conference rivalries are king. There is absolutely no debating that. You can make an argument for football but conference play in hoops is huge.

 

[nzm136]

Not really. For hoops, conference rivalries are king. There is absolutely no debating that. You can make an argument for football but conference play in hoops is huge.

We really still are playing them. We have a ten year contract with GU where we play them every year and we played Nova last year and will play them this year. Other than UCONN, who else do you really want to play every year?

 

[HOFCeluck]

Not really. For hoops, conference rivalries are king. There is absolutely no debating that. You can make an argument for football but conference play in hoops is huge.

That might be true, but the schools you listed (GU, nova, PC, SHU, UCONN at least until 2004) are not football schools. And, as we've all seen, sharing a conference with schools like that is untenable.

The landscape was going to change, whether we liked it or not.

 

[billsin01]

We really still are playing them. We have a ten year contract with GU where we play them every year and we played Nova last year and will play them this year. Other than UCONN, who else do you really want to play every year?

I realize that but it is just nowhere near being in the same conference. A random game in nov/dec is fine but it's not generating the buzz and attention that a big conference game or conference tourney game generates in jan/feb/march. Football yes but it's just not the same in hoops.

 

[Lou_C]

Clay Travis is the worst. He's a Bleacher Report caliber writer that somehow has an outlet with Fox Sports.