Delaney stands virtually alone against progress

[PSUFAN]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4141080

1. Big 10 teams have traditionally ended the season when The Game is played.
2. The de facto CCG has been The Game, traditionally.

These things need to and will change. All of the flopping, around and prevaricating employed by Delaney will not change this. Unfortunately the Big 10 boss is well-situated to thwart progress toward what we all want - a true champion we can crown each season.

[Van]

Paterno is right. People like Delany pay public lip service to him, while they snicker at him behind his back.

mgo said it once, and it remains true to this day...

Jim Delany must die.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Only problem is, though Delany has a lot of pull, he's still only a fraction of the overall problem. We'd have to mass hire hitmen for all the university presidents too, and I don't think we've got the coin.

[Van]

Domino Effect. The first piece must fall.

[Left Seater]

"The issue has come up with our football coaches a couple times -- with the extra week and if we did expand, would we be more competitive?" Delany said. "I would say in some years they might be right. But has it enhanced the competitiveness of the ACC in football?

Seriously? The ACC is nothing today without its expansion starting over a decade ago. Florida State to start and then VTech, Miami and BC. You don't have the seasons you have from Wake, NC State, even Maryland a few years ago without the expansion. Delany has to be smarter than that quote. Right?

[PSUFAN]

Lefty, he's just talking shit. I think you have a nicely articulated argument against the implementation of a playoff system, but it is nothing like what Delaney's trying to do here. Plain and simple - he's farting out a smoke screen.

The idea that the Big 10 would come smashing to the ground if any change is made is laughable. Yet, he's out there trying to sell that.

[Terry in Crapchester]

"The issue has come up with our football coaches a couple times -- with the extra week and if we did expand, would we be more competitive?" Delany said. "I would say in some years they might be right. But has it enhanced the competitiveness of the ACC in football?

Seriously? The ACC is nothing today without its expansion starting over a decade ago. Florida State to start and then VTech, Miami and BC. You don't have the seasons you have from Wake, NC State, even Maryland a few years ago without the expansion. Delany has to be smarter than that quote. Right?

I'll grant you that the addition of Florida State was a net positive, no doubt. On the more recent expansion, though, the jury is still out somewhat. Note that two of the three examples you cite occurred prior to that expansion.

Van and I were discussing that expansion in another thread, and the gist of it was, at least from some circles, that that expansion would make the ACC the new power conference in college football. Hindsight being 20/20, those expectations probably were a bit overblown from the start, of course. At the same time, you could make an argument that the conference victimized by that move -- the Big East -- is actually a stronger conference right now than the ACC is.

[Left Seater]

Can't use the word victimized in reference to the ACC taking teams from the Big East. Hell that is exactly how the Big East grew back in the day.

I guess you can make any argument that you want, but I don't see how the Big East is a better conference than the ACC. Start with the Orange Bowl and work from there. I understand where you are going, but there is little doubt that expansion even the recent one has been very positive for the ACC. The ABC cash out front should have told everyone all they needed to know.

[Mr T]

I'll grant you that the addition of Florida State was a net positive, no doubt. On the more recent expansion, though, the jury is still out somewhat. Note that two of the three examples you cite occurred prior to that expansion.

Football.....BC and VT have owned the ACC as of late. Playing in the past two championship games. Miami has been a bust, so far.
Basketball....I guess Conn, Pitt, and Syracuse wouldve been better if the ACC was just building a basketball conference. Wouldve been a sick B-Ball conference.

Van and I were discussing that expansion in another thread, and the gist of it was, at least from some circles, that that expansion would make the ACC the new power conference in college football. Hindsight being 20/20, those expectations probably were a bit overblown from the start, of course. At the same time, you could make an argument that the conference victimized by that move -- the Big East -- is actually a stronger conference right now than the ACC is.

Considering the ACC had more bowl teams then any conference in history last year and owned most of the bcs conferences head-to-head last year, I dont quite follow.

If we are speaking on just NC contenders, than yes the ACC has been shit.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I guess you can make any argument that you want, but I don't see how the Big East is a better conference than the ACC. Start with the Orange Bowl and work from there.

It's an open question, to be certain. Since the 2005 season, the Big East and ACC are deadlocked at 16-16 in head-to-head matchups. I'd say that's enough games to be a meaningful statistic. Certainly, it's more relevant to that question than who won last year's Orange Bowl game.

I understand where you are going, but there is little doubt that expansion even the recent one has been very positive for the ACC. The ABC cash out front should have told everyone all they needed to know.

No doubt, it's been a success financially speaking. But everyone thought it would place the ACC head-and-shoulders above the Big East on the field. That hasn't happened, at least not yet.

[Left Seater]

I see your point, Terry, just was making my own that the best of the ACC last year was better than the best of the Big East. Also, when I look to the future I see the ACC as having the brighter one. Granted that is only my opinion, but as you are pointing out they have been even over the past couple of years while some of their top teams are in their worst stretches of the last 30 years. I don't see FSU and Miami staying at their lower level of play for the next decade.

Plus the Big East is hurt by their fractured nature. It is hard to know who plays what sport at what level within the conference.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Plus the Big East is hurt by their fractured nature. It is hard to know who plays what sport at what level within the conference.

That was difficult in the early 90's, not so much anymore. There's no such thing as a football-only member in the Big East anymore.

Of the schools that don't play football in the Big East, only ND plays football at the FBS level, so it's really not that hard. Truth be told, the Big East's current arrangement hurts the conference in basketball moreso than in football, given the unbalanced schedule that necessarily results in basketball. OTOH, the large size of the basketball conference allows for more power teams than the conference otherwise could reasonably hold.

[Left Seater]

I was talking more about the fact that the schools are all over the map when it comes to football. ND is independent, others play in the Big East, while still others play at a completely lower level.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Also, when I look to the future I see the ACC as having the brighter one. Granted that is only my opinion, but as you are pointing out they have been even over the past couple of years while some of their top teams are in their worst stretches of the last 30 years. I don't see FSU and Miami staying at their lower level of play for the next decade.

At least when you're talking about head-to-head vs. the Big East, the decline of Florida State and Miami in recent years has not hurt the ACC. Those schools are a combined 1-0 vs. the Big East since '05.

[MuchoBulls]

there is little doubt that expansion even the recent one has been very positive for the ACC. The ABC cash out front should have told everyone all they needed to know.

You call this positive?





The ACC better hope FSU wins their division this season, or it will look like that in RJS again in 2009.

[RadioFan]

On a related note, thanks a lot J.C. Watts.

[Van]

How could he be a BCS "lobbyist"? Who the fuck is he lobbying?? For the people who decide this garbage, he'd be preaching to the choir.

[PSUFAN]

there is little doubt that expansion even the recent one has been very positive for the ACC. The ABC cash out front should have told everyone all they needed to know.

You call this positive?





The ACC better hope FSU wins their division this season, or it will look like that in RJS again in 2009.

You paint a telling picture...but I just don't see the Big 10 championship game having that problem.

[Van]

Call me crazy, but I believe at least one part of the ACC's CCG problem is the simple fact that they hold the game in RJJ, in Tampa.

Tampa's not exactly ACC Country, or even college football country. They ought to hold that game in, oh, say, Fed Ex Field in D.C., or maybe in Charlotte; i.e., somewhere centrally located in the heart of ACC Country.

[TheJON]

Mucho,

I'm a positive person and maybe you see that stadium as half empty but I see it as half full............or at least 1/3 full!!

But yeah, Big-10 would never have that problem. We have too large of fan bases for that to happen. Everyone except for Indiana, Northwestern, and Minnesota would travel well and we won't ever have to worry about those teams playing for any titles most likely. The question is where would you play the Big-10 championship game? St. Louis possibly? Edward Jones Dome is decent considering it's a dome. I was at a Rams-Cardinals game a couple years ago and the atmosphere was very lame but that's because the Rams were horrible. The only loud cheers came when Warner got into the game. The sound system was pathetic. We were in the upper level and couldn't hear the PA announcer. Other potential spots would be the Colts new stadium or Ford Field. Only problem I have with Ford Field is where it's located. If I never have to visit Detroit ever again in my life I will die a happy person! And since the Hawkeyes would be headed to the title game every year, I'd have to go there.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Mucho,

I'm a positive person and maybe you see that stadium as half empty but I see it as half full............or at least 1/3 full!!

But yeah, Big-10 would never have that problem. We have too large of fan bases for that to happen. Everyone except for Indiana, Northwestern, and Minnesota would travel well and we won't ever have to worry about those teams playing for any titles most likely. The question is where would you play the Big-10 championship game? St. Louis possibly? Edward Jones Dome is decent considering it's a dome. I was at a Rams-Cardinals game a couple years ago and the atmosphere was very lame but that's because the Rams were horrible. The only loud cheers came when Warner got into the game. The sound system was pathetic. We were in the upper level and couldn't hear the PA announcer. Other potential spots would be the Colts new stadium or Ford Field. Only problem I have with Ford Field is where it's located. If I never have to visit Detroit ever again in my life I will die a happy person! And since the Hawkeyes would be headed to the title game every year, I'd have to go there.

St. Louis? Unless you're talking about adding Missouri as your 12th team, that makes no sense whatsoever. And even in that instance, Missouri is still a geographic outlier, so certainly not an ideal selection.

Geographically, Chicago would be the logical choice. Of course, there's the possibility that an open-air stadium in December in the midwest would shrink attendance. With that in mind, my nominations, in order, would be: (1) Indianapolis; (2) Detroit.

[MuchoBulls]

Tampa's not exactly ACC Country, or even college football country.

This is a college football area. Plenty of UF, FSU, and USF fans in this area. The problem for the ACC Championship game is that FSU wasn't playing in it the last couple of seasons. The only way that game would draw if it is played in the state of Florida is if FSU was playing in it. Miami doesn't have the fan base to sell that many tickets if the game was played in Jax or Tampa.

PSU, I certainly agree with you that the Big 10 would definitely not have to worry about attendance problems if they held a Championship game. I think the Big 10 would then have fun trying to divide up the 12 teams into 2 divisions. What do you do with Ohio State and Michigan? Would you force them into the same division, so that they play one another every season, or would you put them in opposite divisions with the stipulation that they play one another every season (and every other team in the league has 1 common crossover opponent)? In the latter scenario you could conceivably have Michigan and Ohio State playing 2 games against one another within a couple of weeks. Would that be overkill?

I agree with Terry that Chicago makes the most sense to host the championship game, but Indianapolis and Detroit would be more likely to host a Big 10 Championship game.

[Terry in Crapchester]

You paint a telling picture...but I just don't see the Big 10 championship game having that problem.

Two main differences, as I see it.

One is that the ACC sacrificed a lot of its tradition and self-identity in exchange for getting better on the football field, and getting enough teams to hold a CCG. Used to be that the ACC was THE basketball conference, and it was made up of the Tobacco Road schools and a few other schools in relatively close proximity thereto.

The second difference is geography. Florida State, although a geographical outlier, did not stretch the ACC beyond its geographic breaking point. In fact, In some respects Florida State was the perfect addition to the ACC: by itself it had enough pull to change the perception of the conference in football for the better, but not enough to change the fundamental image of the conference. Adding Va Tech, Miami and BC, however, stretched the conference from Boston to Miami, and left it with one school (BC) with no real connection to any of the others. Yeah, it made the conference better in football, on paper anyway, but at what price?

The Big Ten is different. The Big Ten will always be about tOSU and Michigan, no matter what (by contrast, the major football powers in the ACC, Florida State and Miami, were Johnny-come-latelys to the conference). And whatever school the Big Ten adds as a 12th member likely will come either from within the existing footprint of the Big Ten, or reasonably close thereto. I don't see a 12-member Big Ten fundamentally altering either that conference's geography (Penn State did that already) or its existing image.

For Big Ten fan, I think the dilemma is a bit different. Do you hold out for your dream addition, or is a CCG important enough that you add any warm body that can give it to you?

[M Club]

Geographically, Chicago would be the logical choice. Of course, there's the possibility that an open-air stadium in December in the midwest would shrink attendance. With that in mind, my nominations, in order, would be: (1) Indianapolis; (2) Detroit.

Bah, Chicago attracts tourists as it is. A CCG would give a bunch of fat Midwesterners just another reason to descend upon that shithole to eat Vienna sausages for breakfast, lunch, and dinner before getting a little culture at Navy Pier. [Save a little room for dessert at the Cheesecake Factory!]

All you Southerners like to go on about your obsessive fan bases, but the Big 10 regularly packs in 100,000 rain, shine, or fucking blizzard. The game would only be a week after the last game we sat in the out of doors.

And even if the game were to be held in Detroit, everyone within a 52-state radius has some sort of cousin-type who lives in the metro-D. That's why there are no such things as hotels in Michigan.

[Vito Corleone]

"The issue has come up with our football coaches a couple times -- with the extra week and if we did expand, would we be more competitive?" Delany said. "I would say in some years they might be right. But has it enhanced the competitiveness of the ACC in football?

Seriously? The ACC is nothing today without its expansion starting over a decade ago. Florida State to start and then VTech, Miami and BC. You don't have the seasons you have from Wake, NC State, even Maryland a few years ago without the expansion. Delany has to be smarter than that quote. Right?

I'll grant you that the addition of Florida State was a net positive, no doubt. On the more recent expansion, though, the jury is still out somewhat. Note that two of the three examples you cite occurred prior to that expansion.

Van and I were discussing that expansion in another thread, and the gist of it was, at least from some circles, that that expansion would make the ACC the new power conference in college football. Hindsight being 20/20, those expectations probably were a bit overblown from the start, of course. At the same time, you could make an argument that the conference victimized by that move -- the Big East -- is actually a stronger conference right now than the ACC is.

From my vantage I see the ACC as the sleeping giant of college football. Miami and FSU will be back, too much tradition and local talent for them not to be back. Then you have UNC who should be just as good in football as they are in basketball. They may not have the tradition but they do have the local recruiting base. Virgina and Vtech are two solid programs as well. Georgia tech and NCSU are two programs that remind me of taco tech not a national power but able to field a bad ass team every once in a while. Where the ACC gets my respect is that they have everything the SEC has but they do it with much higher academic standards even more so than the Big 12.

I'm glad that the ACC is sucking but I don't expect it to last much longer.