So about the ACC in MSG

Doesn't look like it's going to happen...but they are going to go head-to-head in the New York area for a few years.

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/report-...nter/13478360/

They will also be moving their championship game to Saturday night.

ACC = the bully conference.

Raiding the Big East more than once, and now kicking the A-10 out of the Barclays. They couldn't wait another year and wait until their contract was up to move in? I hate that whole damn conference.

Interesting. It references that it will still rotate every so often. Wonder if they plan on trying to rotate to MSG?

For those more familiar with the NY area - what is a better area to have the conf tourney - Barclays or MSG?

I know this comes off as blaspemy, but the Big Ten tourney is better in Indy as opposed to Chicago. All the restaurants and bars are built around the stadium in Indy whereas the United Center is off the beaten path on the west side of the city and creates a bit of a disjointed feel for those visiting for the tourney.

All a matter of perspective. The BE raided other conferences before and will do so again when the time comes. The A10 will get something out of the deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

All a matter of perspective. The BE raided other conferences before and will do so again when the time comes. The A10 will get something out of the deal.

---

Right, they raided in reaction to getting raided. The ACC didn't get raided, they started everything.

Sure the A-10 will get something out of it, but that's not the point. ACC couldn't spend 2 years in DC and then move to the Barclays once the A-10 contract was up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

Right, they raided in reaction to getting raided. The ACC didn't get raided, they started everything.

Sure the A-10 will get something out of it, but that's not the point. ACC couldn't spend 2 years in DC and then move to the Barclays once the A-10 contract was up?

---

Conference raiding has been going on for years. The ACC didn't start it. Conference have never been set in stone. Why do we act like 2005 was a sacred date of some sort for conference affiliation?

And the A10 will get something negotiated out of the deal. It is drawing terribly at Barclays. There may be a clause in the contract...they may actually be losing money...they may simply want out. It's business.

BTW, here are the attendance figures. The A10 drew just over 5,000 fans per game at Barclays last year.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_bask...on%2010-18.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WindyCityGoldenEagle

Interesting. It references that it will still rotate every so often. Wonder if they plan on trying to rotate to MSG?

For those more familiar with the NY area - what is a better area to have the conf tourney - Barclays or MSG?

I know this comes off as blaspemy, but the Big Ten tourney is better in Indy as opposed to Chicago. All the restaurants and bars are built around the stadium in Indy whereas the United Center is off the beaten path on the west side of the city and creates a bit of a disjointed feel for those visiting for the tourney.

---

Barclay's is in Brooklyn in a fairly up and coming area, but it's not Manhattan. As far as buildings are concerned, MSG is still the larger venue and is much easier to get to from a transportation perspective - helps to have Penn Station and a couple of subway lines below it. If I were a commish and wanted to choose a venue it would be MSG all the way.

Good call on moving their title game to Saturday night. Those Sunday title games are a complete waste. The results are never factored into the bracket. It will be interesting to see how this goes forward. I have a hard time believing the people in North Carolina are going to like having their tourney hijacked to New York for 3-5 years. Can't see this lasting long term.

The ESPN article references that the ACC is still looking at MSG:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...dates-2017-acc

Cue the A-10/ACC Challenge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

Good call on moving their title game to Saturday night. Those Sunday title games are a complete waste. The results are never factored into the bracket.

---

That, or they are intentionally going head-to-head vs. the Big East championship game to steal their thunder. This is a calculated plan, they want to bury the Big East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

Why do we act like 2005 was a sacred date of some sort for conference affiliation?]

---

Because that is why MU & others left CUSA for the Big East after the ACC raided the Big East of Boston College, Virginia Tech and Miami.

The problem isn't conference shifting, its the fact that the ACC has always targeted the Big East, and for reasons beyond football. Why do they want the tourney in MSG? Becaue they knows its "The world's most famous arena". They know it is the premier facility. They want to be known as the best conference in the nation and the best conference in the nation plays their conference tournament in Madison Square Garden. They want it just to prove that they are top dog.

They can kiss the Big East's ass.

Look, the AD at BC slipped up and told the media that "ESPN told them what schools to target". ESPN was pissed that the Big East didn't take their contract, so ESPN and their affiliates will continue to take shot after shot after shot at the Big East and pump up the ACC as much as they can. While I would like to say we need to get used to that, it is asinine that this would even go on. These are supposedly institutions of higher education, but they are far from it in the way they are going about things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

That, or they are intentionally going head-to-head vs. the Big East championship game to steal their thunder. This is a calculated plan, they want to bury the Big East.

---

That's it right there..

It sure is a business, and the ACC has been very aggressive including turning up the volume this week. Interesting that the ACC is also targeting the Verizon Center in DC where they have no teams after Maryland moves to the B1G. One would think that Georgetown would have had a non-compete clause in their lease.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Because that is why MU & others left CUSA for the Big East after the ACC raided the Big East of Boston College, Virginia Tech and Miami.

The problem isn't conference shifting, its the fact that the ACC has always targeted the Big East, and for reasons beyond football. Why do they want the tourney in MSG? Becaue they knows its "The world's most famous arena". They know it is the premier facility. They want to be known as the best conference in the nation and the best conference in the nation plays their conference tournament in Madison Square Garden. They want it just to prove that they are top dog.

They can kiss the Big East's ass.

Look, the AD at BC slipped up and told the media that "ESPN told them what schools to target". ESPN was pissed that the Big East didn't take their contract, so ESPN and their affiliates will continue to take shot after shot after shot at the Big East and pump up the ACC as much as they can. While I would like to say we need to get used to that, it is asinine that this would even go on. These are supposedly institutions of higher education, but they are far from it in the way they are going about things.

---

But again, that's not the first time conferences raided one another.

The SEC took Arkansas from the SWC. The Big 8 took four schools from the SWC and basically left the rest hanging. Then there is the B10 taking from the B12 and the ACC. The P12 taking from the B12 and Mountain West. You guys are acting like the ACC is the only aggressor and the BE is the only victim here. Cmon... If the BE decides to expand down the line, they are going to probably look at a couple A10 schools. And our excuse is going to be "well they did it first?"

Why can't we simply be intellectually honest enough to understand where we are on the food chain and we participate in the same things that we are bitching about others doing. The BE is below the major football conferences. They take what they want and there isn't much we can do. And we do the same to the A10, the MVC and others below us.

You can't blame the ACC for doing what they did. It made sense for them. Just like you can't blame the BE for first raiding the CUSA for schools...and then the A10 and MVC.

ACC (Duke and Syracuse) wants to be in NY and can't get The Garden.
They go and get Barclays to show the Big East they can own NY from a different venue.

Here's to hoping in 2017 the ACC title game does not feature Duke or Syracuse (bring on Wake and Miami), while the Big East has a battle of highly ranked teams at The Garden for a packed title game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

That, or they are intentionally going head-to-head vs. the Big East championship game to steal their thunder. This is a calculated plan, they want to bury the Big East.

---

The TV numbers are way better on Saturday night. And in the past, ESPN had the BE to fill that time slot. This year they will have the AAC, which is going to be a significantly weaker draw after Louisville leaves.

It makes perfect sense for ESPN to do this.

Sultan, I think the issue that rubs most here is that most of those other moves were football motivated. The ACC's initial moves of Va Tech and Miami were too.

This recent decade has seen that change. The Big East raided C-USA not just to shore up their weakened football but to enhance their basketball. That was different. And the ACC clearly didn't like it. With Duke, UNC, Maryland, etc they were used to being the alpha dog in basketball. The Big East starting in 2005 was clearly the strongest basketball conference.

Florida, Virginia, those were areas that made sense to the ACC. Boston was a stretch, but at least on the Atlantic. But Syracuse? Pitt? Louisville? Notre Dame? Those were clear basketball moves made by a conference jealous that they were no longer top dog.

I get it. The Big East left their geographic footprint first, but I think people take issue that in the past basketball was always an afterthought and the ACC made it a focal point. They took our little sport off the back burner. Maybe the Big East started it with the C-USA raid, but now that we are the ones targeted, people take issue. Can't be that surprising, is it?

I am in NYC right now so my appropriate respond is F them. Predatory pricks playing like it I s the NFL vs the old AFL. Nice to see what higher education has become. Maybe the internet based universities will ruin all of this soon anyway. F them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

ACC = the bully conference.

Raiding the Big East more than once, and now kicking the A-10 out of the Barclays. They couldn't wait another year and wait until their contract was up to move in? I hate that whole damn conference.

---

I like the A-10. They would be better served to play in Philly at The Palestra.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gato78

F them.
Predatory pricks.
F them.

---

I agree, and perfectly stated! :)

Another thing with the ACC. Their moves seem to be deliberately trying to take down the Big East. They keep raiding the same conference, keep trying to compete with us, try to one-up us in our backyard.

Other moves have been made but they usually seem to be more about strengthening the raiding conference rather than eliminating the target conference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

But again, that's not the first time conferences raided one another.

The SEC took Arkansas from the SWC. The Big 8 took four schools from the SWC and basically left the rest hanging. Then there is the B10 taking from the B12 and the ACC. The P12 taking from the B12 and Mountain West. You guys are acting like the ACC is the only aggressor and the BE is the only victim here. Cmon... If the BE decides to expand down the line, they are going to probably look at a couple A10 schools. And our excuse is going to be "well they did it first?"

Why can't we simply be intellectually honest enough to understand where we are on the food chain and we participate in the same things that we are bitching about others doing. The BE is below the major football conferences. They take what they want and there isn't much we can do. And we do the same to the A10, the MVC and others below us.

You can't blame the ACC for doing what they did. It made sense for them. Just like you can't blame the BE for first raiding the CUSA for schools...and then the A10 and MVC.

---

True.

But, I think it's pretty clear this is different. When the Big Ten took Nebraska from the Big 12, Maryland from the ACC, and Rutgers from the Big East they chose those teams based on whatever criteria they valued most and found those to be the best fits. That was the end of it.

The Pac 12 took on Colorado from the Big 12 and Utah from the Mountain West. Those two made the most sense for their expansion, so they invited them. That was the end of it.

The ACC, however, continues to poach the Big East. Now that they've poached the league, now they are trying to do all that they can to kick them out of MSG so they can hold their conference tournament there. Try as they may, it appears that it won't happen (not sure if I believe it won't happen eventually, but regardless). OK, if they can't get in MSG, they'll do the next best thing and get as close to MSG as possible and hold it in Brooklyn. Want to really play hardball? They move their traditional Sunday tournament championship game to go head-to-head against the Big East championship with the sole intention of keeping asses out of MSG's seats and stealing TV eyeballs from FS1 over to ESPN for their title game.

I'm really quite flabergasted that you don't think it's a real big deal what the ACC is doing. In other instances, I do believe conference moves were done with some civility. With the ACC, Swofford is trying to completely kill another conference. Not cool!

The ACC is very top heavy, which is why so many think it is the best conference (and that Coach K tells them that), but from top to bottom not so much.

What happens if Duke and Syracuse struggle for a few years post Coaches K and Boeheim (like UNC and others)?
These two have been their basketball program for so long, few recall what they were like before these coaches were there. Boeheim head coach at Syracuse since 1976 and K head at Duke since 1980.

They are going to play the tourney in NY in 2017. Coach K will be 70 and Boeheim will be 72. After these two are done, will anyone else in the league (other than ESPN) really care if the tourney is in NY?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MU/Panther

I like the A-10. They would be better served to play in Philly at The Palestra.

---

"I hate that whole damn conference" was in reference to the ACC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

Sultan, I think the issue that rubs most here is that most of those other moves were football motivated. The ACC's initial moves of Va Tech and Miami were too.

This recent decade has seen that change. The Big East raided C-USA not just to shore up their weakened football but to enhance their basketball. That was different. And the ACC clearly didn't like it. With Duke, UNC, Maryland, etc they were used to being the alpha dog in basketball. The Big East starting in 2005 was clearly the strongest basketball conference.

Florida, Virginia, those were areas that made sense to the ACC. Boston was a stretch, but at least on the Atlantic. But Syracuse? Pitt? Louisville? Notre Dame? Those were clear basketball moves made by a conference jealous that they were no longer top dog.

I get it. The Big East left their geographic footprint first, but I think people take issue that in the past basketball was always an afterthought and the ACC made it a focal point. They took our little sport off the back burner. Maybe the Big East started it with the C-USA raid, but now that we are the ones targeted, people take issue. Can't be that surprising, is it?

---

I guess to me it really doesn't matter what their motivations which sports they were trying to strengthen and why. The fact is that our conference engages in the same practices.

And yeah we can be all flippant and say "f*ck them" and whine about the demise of higher education, but then fans of Dayton and their ilk have just as much right to do and say the same thing. So either you have to realize you are a part of the same problem, or you just have to live with it and move on.

Some people like being the victim I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

True.

But, I think it's pretty clear this is different. When the Big Ten took Nebraska from the Big 12, Maryland from the ACC, and Rutgers from the Big East they chose those teams based on whatever criteria they valued most and found those to be the best fits. That was the end of it.

The Pac 12 took on Colorado from the Big 12 and Utah from the Mountain West. Those two made the most sense for their expansion, so they invited them. That was the end of it.

The ACC, however, continues to poach the Big East. Now that they've poached the league, now they are trying to do all that they can to kick them out of MSG so they can hold their conference tournament there. Try as they may, it appears that it won't happen (not sure if I believe it won't happen eventually, but regardless). OK, if they can't get in MSG, they'll do the next best thing and get as close to MSG as possible and hold it in Brooklyn. Want to really play hardball? They move their traditional Sunday tournament championship game to go head-to-head against the Big East championship with the sole intention of keeping asses out of MSG's seats and stealing TV eyeballs from FS1 over to ESPN for their title game.

I'm really quite flabergasted that you don't think it's a real big deal what the ACC is doing. In other instances, I do believe conference moves were done with some civility. With the ACC, Swofford is trying to completely kill another conference. Not cool!

---

Regardless of what their motivations are (and I don't think "killing" the BE is by any means their biggest motivation), they are doing what is in their right to do.

Look, if the BE is such a great conference, and we have an "iron clad" contract through 2026 at MSG, and a Fox contract of similar length, what exactly are we worried about here? The conference has 12 years to prove that it can perform with the BCS conferences both on the floor and in the ratings. And if it can't, well, we don't really deserve either the contract or the Garden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

Another thing with the ACC. Their moves seem to be deliberately trying to take down the Big East. They keep raiding the same conference, keep trying to compete with us, try to one-up us in our backyard.

Other moves have been made but they usually seem to be more about strengthening the raiding conference rather than eliminating the target conference.

---

It's because the ACC is the bottom of the football pile. (And yes, football was by far their primary motivation.) Who else would they raid from? The SEC? The MAC? The BE made the most sense because those schools would say "yes" and it expands their geographic reach.

And if their primary goal was to kill the BE, all they would have had to do is invite Nova and Georgetown as basketball only members, given them each $2 - $3M a year, and the BE is dead. (And both those schools would have accepted that deal in a heartbeat, just like Marquette would have, and it would have cost each of their members peanuts - about $400k per year.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

Regardless of what their motivations are (and I don't think "killing" the BE is by any means their biggest motivation), they are doing what is in their right to do.

---

I think you're being pretty naive about the ACC's intentions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

I think you're being pretty naive about the ACC's intentions.

---

They could have easily done it already if it were their primary intentions.

So who do you expect the ACC to go after? UCLA? The first run on the Big East made a whole lot of sense. They were at nine teams. They needed three more for a conference play-off game and a big TV payout. They went after schools on the East Coast. Miami made lots of sense for football, as did BC. They didn't really want Va. Tech, but got them. The third one they wanted was Syracuse. If they were going to expand beyond that, the only place to get schools was the Big East. And they expanded when the Big Ten expanded and shook things up, and it looked like an absolute war of attrition. The ACC grabbed Pitt before the Big Ten could. Louisville is going there because it is the only sensible place for them to go to play football. The fact that the Big East did not flourish in football meant that it was vulnerable to being raided, which is why it was looking to add TCU and a few others. I look at football as the villain here, not the ACC. Are they also trying to take over in basketball? Sure, but I expect that conferences are going to do that, and the ACC is miffed by the fact that they were the premier basketball conference back in the day. As for moving their tournament to Saturday night, that just makes sense. It seems it was only scheduled for Sunday to appease the television networks. Now those networks do not seem to care so much. Having their championship decided the day of the selection show caused problems, and sometimes seemed to leave some of their teams out of the picture or sent somewhere unfriendly, (unless they are Duke and NC, who somehow always get to play their first couple of games in the state somewhere.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

They could have easily done it already if it were their primary intentions.

---

Didn't they? The Big East died. Mission accomplished. The current Big East is a start-up conference that kept the name...and MSG. And the ACC is clearly going after that now too. It's all pretty clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unclejohn

So who do you expect the ACC to go after? UCLA? The first run on the Big East made a whole lot of sense. They were at nine teams. They needed three more for a conference play-off game and a big TV payout. They went after schools on the East Coast. Miami made lots of sense for football, as did BC. They didn't really want Va. Tech, but got them. The third one they wanted was Syracuse. If they were going to expand beyond that, the only place to get schools was the Big East. And they expanded when the Big Ten expanded and shook things up, and it looked like an absolute war of attrition. The ACC grabbed Pitt before the Big Ten could. Louisville is going there because it is the only sensible place for them to go to play football. The fact that the Big East did not flourish in football meant that it was vulnerable to being raided, which is why it was looking to add TCU and a few others. I look at football as the villain here, not the ACC. Are they also trying to take over in basketball? Sure, but I expect that conferences are going to do that, and the ACC is miffed by the fact that they were the premier basketball conference back in the day. As for moving their tournament to Saturday night, that just makes sense. It seems it was only scheduled for Sunday to appease the television networks. Now those networks do not seem to care so much. Having their championship decided the day of the selection show caused problems, and sometimes seemed to leave some of their teams out of the picture or sent somewhere unfriendly, (unless they are Duke and NC, who somehow always get to play their first couple of games in the state somewhere.)

---

Yes, this is exactly right. The latest round of expansion was all about expanding football and geographic reach. In the latest round of expansion, very little expansion took place inside of territories where these conferences already existed. And they didn't care about the quality of the football programs involved. The B10 took Maryland and Rutgers. The P12 took Colorado and Utah. The SEC took A&M and Missouri. So it made sense for the ACC to grab what it could - Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse made perfect sense considering their locations and where they stood on the pecking order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

It's because the ACC is the bottom of the football pile. (And yes, football was by far their primary motivation.) Who else would they raid from? The SEC? The MAC? The BE made the most sense because those schools would say "yes" and it expands their geographic reach.

And if their primary goal was to kill the BE, all they would have had to do is invite Nova and Georgetown as basketball only members, given them each $2 - $3M a year, and the BE is dead. (And both those schools would have accepted that deal in a heartbeat, just like Marquette would have, and it would have cost each of their members peanuts - about $400k per year.)

---

Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse are not football powers, and may actually hurt the overall football product in the ACC (especially with the departure of Strong to Texas). ND was a football gamble (hoping they join for football), but also hurt the Big East basketball product.

It was a basketball move, and taking ND may have been too, as ND would fit perfect with the Big East (not saying that was the reason).

ND to the ACC could actually hurt ACC football pocketbooks.
Let's say ND is a top dog in football. ND plays, and beats, five ACC teams non conference (could hurt bowl chances).
ND is rated higher, and under the agreement, ACC bowl tie ins also include ND, but ND keeps all their football cash, no sharing 15 ways.

It is possible ND brings nothing hoops related (like this year), and could mean less bowl revenue when ND football is very good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goose85

Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse are not football powers, and may actually hurt the overall football product in the ACC (especially with the departure of Strong to Texas). ND was a football gamble (hoping they join for football), but also hurt the Big East basketball product.

It was a basketball move, and taking ND may have been too, as ND would fit perfect with the Big East (not saying that was the reason).

---

Sorry but it wasn't a basketball move - frankly none of the moves had anything to do with on-the-field quality. As I mentioned above, it was a move about expanding conference geographically to more markets to set themselves up for bigger television contracts. It really could be argued that *none* of the conferences improved themselves football-wise with expansion. All of them got terrible football programs in the process.

I disagree - They can make it look how they want, but there continuing actions suggest the last ACC moves were basketball driven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUBasketball

Didn't they? The Big East died. Mission accomplished. The current Big East is a start-up conference that kept the name...and MSG. And the ACC is clearly going after that now too. It's all pretty clear.

---

Correct, mission accomplished.

ESPN did not want to have to pay another conference big money for content as they have enough, but still did not want other networks having content that could compete with ESPN.

What to do?

Get rid of the Big East (football wise breaking up the conference) instead of paying both the ACC and the Big East similar money for football and basketball. Just take three of the top basketball programs, that also play higher level football, and get that content basically for free. This would justify what they are paying for the ACC and provide them with plenty of content for less than paying both ACC and Big East.

Now Coach K, Boeheim, and ESPN want to make sure they are promoting the top hoop conference, and ESPN doesn't want Fox to succeed, so why not try to move into NY, compete directly, and try to downgrade the Big East and in doing so Fox Sports?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goose85

Correct, mission accomplished.

ESPN did not want to have to pay another conference big money for content as they have enough, but still did not want other networks having content that could compete with ESPN.

What to do?

Get rid of the Big East (football wise breaking up the conference) instead of paying both the ACC and the Big East similar money for football and basketball. Just take three of the top basketball programs, that also play higher level football, and get that content basically for free. This would justify what they are paying for the ACC and provide them with plenty of content for less than paying both ACC and Big East.

Now Coach K, Boeheim, and ESPN want to make sure they are promoting the top hoop conference, and ESPN doesn't want Fox to succeed, so why not try to move into NY, compete directly, and try to downgrade the Big East and in doing so Fox Sports?

---

That addresses ESPN's motivations with regards to their programming and dealing with Fox. But the ACC's motivations were about making money in the process. You think that they are going to take Pitt and Syracuse just to say "hey look how good we are at basketball" without ESPN making it worth their while?

Not a chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

I disagree - They can make it look how they want, but there continuing actions suggest the last ACC moves were basketball driven.

---

They were money driven. Basketball was a fortunate (from their view) side effect.

Goo - Agree with everything you said except for bringing Boeheim into the discussion. He is one guy that despised the move and still despises the move.

The Big 10 tried to get Syracuse a few years back when all of this started. It is my understanding that Boeheim is the one that stepped in and stopped that from happening.

Then when Syracuse left for the ACC, Boeheim immediately blasted the move, only to come out and bless the move a few days later, after his president and other influences stepped in and silenced him. And what did he say in his post game presser after the Syracuse-Pitt game this year? "That was a classic Big East game!"

Boeheim hates being in the ACC. He wants to be in the Big East.