forums

Acc love

jsy said:
After landing the number one recruit over sec, Miami shows acc ain’t no second rate, acc better realize their only chance at not being seen as a scrub league is Miami
We better be getting in calls like the cal game not that Syracuse game
Click to expand...
Always Sunny Shut Up GIF
 
Advertisement
RF-4CCane said:
There is no doubt the leadership of the ACC has been 2nd rate the last decade. That’s what caused the disparate TV network contracts.

But to imply the programs in the ACC are 2nd rate to the Big10, is BS. Outside of OSU, the Big 10 has accomplished nothing on the field.

Michigan has 1 NC in the last 20+ years and apparently cheated to do it.
Oregon hasn’t won an NC during my lifetime.
PSU hasn’t won an NC since 1986 and consistently overrated year in and year out.
USC has won officially won 1 NC in the last 20+ years.
Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin nothing.
Nebraska hasn’t been relevant in decades.
UW had one good season and got their doors blown off in the NC.

Meanwhile Clemson has been the most consistent program, not named Bama the past decade.
FSU is two years removed from an undefeated regular season where they were screwed out of the playoffs by an injury.
Miami missed the playoffs last year by stepping on their xxxx in two easily winnable games.
GT took playoff UGA to 8 OT’s and lost because of a blown targeting call.
SMU made the playoffs last year and appears on an upward trajectory.
LU is consistently a solid, but not an elite team.
Note Dame which plays an ACC schedule, played in the NC last year.

So since those with a narrative avoided my question of which conference has won the most NC’s the past 25 seasons and by the most different teams, how about a little exercise in prognostication.

Who would win on the field this year between the ACC and Big 10’s preseason predicted top teams?

Clemson - PSU
OSU - ND
Oregon - SMU
Miami - Illinois
Indiana - LU
GT - Michigan
NC - Iowa
Syracuse - UW
FSU - USC
Duke - Nebraska

I would predict a 5-5 record in those matchups. There simply isn’t a huge difference between the two conferences ON THE FIELD.
Click to expand...
I think you put the chicken before the egg with regard to the TV network deal and the conference stinking. What I mean is that, if I read what you wrote correctly (big if), you're saying that the ACC got a crappy contract because they are a crappy conference. I am saying that the crappy contract wasn't all that crappy at the time, but the duration of the contract that was signed is what boomeranged on the ACC causing them to become a crappier conference in large part because of the TV contract. I think the ACC signed an Albert Pujols Angels contract when they needed to follow the LeBron James model of being a free agent every other year. That falls directly ont he shoulders of the leaders of the ACC (as you pointed out) and I think it's a massive part of the reason why the ACC continues its downward slide.
Lastly, for clarification purposes, I'm not trying to say that the ACC wasn't a crappy conference when they signed that deal; they just weren't as crappy then as they are now.
 
Winning is cyclical. The only elite ACC team at the time of the last contract was Clemson.
The SEC sucked in the 80’s, the Big 10 sucked in the 90’s.
Miami and FSU picked a bad time to go through a period of mediocrity.
The Big 10 outside of OSU has been mediocre the past 20 years, they just worked behind the scenes to form an alliance with the SEC, which brought them a handsome contract.

Everyone needs an ally with blue blood power. That’s what the Big 10 was for the SEC.

And please don’t confuse my hatred of the Big 10 for love of the ACC. If I had my way, the ACC and Big 12 would have merged yesterday, kicked a couple programs that drag down the ratings to the curb and put a gun to ESPN’s head, demanding payouts commensurate with TV markets.
And most importantly found a commissioner to lead this merger that was as cutthroat and diabolical as the SEC has.
 
Miami is an ACC team that identifies as an independent with SEC tendencies and Power 4 kinks.
 
RF-4CCane said:
There is no doubt the leadership of the ACC has been 2nd rate the last decade. That’s what caused the disparate TV network contracts.

But to imply the programs in the ACC are 2nd rate to the Big10, is BS. Outside of OSU, the Big 10 has accomplished nothing on the field.

Michigan has 1 NC in the last 20+ years and apparently cheated to do it.
Oregon hasn’t won an NC during my lifetime.
PSU hasn’t won an NC since 1986 and consistently overrated year in and year out.
USC has won officially won 1 NC in the last 20+ years.
Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin nothing.
Nebraska hasn’t been relevant in decades.
UW had one good season and got their doors blown off in the NC.

Meanwhile Clemson has been the most consistent program, not named Bama the past decade.
FSU is two years removed from an undefeated regular season where they were screwed out of the playoffs by an injury.
Miami missed the playoffs last year by stepping on their xxxx in two easily winnable games.
GT took playoff UGA to 8 OT’s and lost because of a blown targeting call.
SMU made the playoffs last year and appears on an upward trajectory.
LU is consistently a solid, but not an elite team.
Note Dame which plays an ACC schedule, played in the NC last year.

So since those with a narrative avoided my question of which conference has won the most NC’s the past 25 seasons and by the most different teams, how about a little exercise in prognostication.

Who would win on the field this year between the ACC and Big 10’s preseason predicted top teams?

Clemson - PSU
OSU - ND
Oregon - SMU
Miami - Illinois
Indiana - LU
GT - Michigan
NC - Iowa
Syracuse - UW
FSU - USC
Duke - Nebraska

I would predict a 5-5 record in those matchups. There simply isn’t a huge difference between the two conferences ON THE FIELD.
Click to expand...

Additional context, but without the extremely biased perspective. some (I think) very relevant comparative statistics over the last 10 years, enough time to establish a reputation.

- out of conference record, against power conference opponents only: Conf. A 37 games under .500; Conf. B 12 games over .500

- Head to head wins between the two conferences: Conf. A 28; Conf. B 37

- NFL draft picks: Conf. A 347 draft picks; Conf. B 463 draft picks

which conference is the ACC, which is the Big 10
 
westcoastcanes said:
Additional context, but without the extremely biased perspective. some (I think) very relevant comparative statistics over the last 10 years, enough time to establish a reputation.

- out of conference record, against power conference opponents only: Conf. A 37 games under .500; Conf. B 12 games over .500

- Head to head wins between the two conferences: Conf. A 28; Conf. B 37

- NFL draft picks: Conf. A 347 draft picks; Conf. B 463 draft picks

which conference is the ACC, which is the Big 10
Click to expand...
Not disagreeing or refuting.
Is Oregon, Washington, USC and UCLA in your 10-year tally?
 
westcoastcanes said:
Additional context, but without the extremely biased perspective. some (I think) very relevant comparative statistics over the last 10 years, enough time to establish a reputation.

- out of conference record, against power conference opponents only: Conf. A 37 games under .500; Conf. B 12 games over .500

- Head to head wins between the two conferences: Conf. A 28; Conf. B 37

- NFL draft picks: Conf. A 347 draft picks; Conf. B 463 draft picks

which conference is the ACC, which is the Big 10
Click to expand...

The BiG wasn’t any better than the ACC until they stole the top PAC10 teams. Now they’ve clearly separated themselves. We need to GTFO of the ACC. The rev share change helped us. But even then we’re at a disadvantage monetarily and from a national exposure perspective. Like Clemson and if I’m being honest FSU until its meltdown last year, our brand is the only thing that helps sustain us.
 
Advertisement
westcoastcanes said:
Additional context, but without the extremely biased perspective. some (I think) very relevant comparative statistics over the last 10 years, enough time to establish a reputation.

- out of conference record, against power conference opponents only: Conf. A 37 games under .500; Conf. B 12 games over .500

- Head to head wins between the two conferences: Conf. A 28; Conf. B 37

- NFL draft picks: Conf. A 347 draft picks; Conf. B 463 draft picks

which conference is the ACC, which is the Big 10
Click to expand...
If you really want to give an extremely unbiased perspective (your words) subtract UW, UCLA, USC and Oregon, as well as SMU, Cal and Stanford, from those totals for the 9 out of 10 years they weren’t in the Big 10 or ACC.

Some of those OOC wins were against Big 10 teams (see Oregon vs OSU).

I’ve already pointed out in other threads, the crème puff OOC schedules the Big 10 uses, while the ACC plays Notre Dame multiple times every year and UGA every year, as well as SC and Kentucky. The ACC plays a much heavier SEC OOC schedule than the Big 10 does.

Make those corrections and let’s compare.
 
Last edited:
NJshoreCane said:
Not disagreeing or refuting.
Is Oregon, Washington, USC and UCLA in your 10-year tally?
Click to expand...
Those numbers include those teams records for the 2024 season in the totals, yes, but not prior to their joining the conference.

grover said:
The BiG wasn’t any better than the ACC until they stole the top PAC10 teams. Now they’ve clearly separated themselves. We need to GTFO of the ACC. The rev share change helped us. But even then we’re at a disadvantage monetarily and from a national exposure perspective. Like Clemson and if I’m being honest FSU until its meltdown last year, our brand is the only thing that helps sustain us.
Click to expand...

Here is the comparison without the Pac teams over the 9 years preceding 2024:

- Wins out of conference against p5 opponents:
Conf. A: 31 games under .500
Conf B: 9 games above .500

- Wins against each other:
Conf. A: 24
Conf. B: 32

- Draft picks:
Conf. A: 305
Conf. B: 392

I fully agree we need to get out of this conference. I disagree that the big 10 was dependent on adding the pac teams to distinguish itself from the ACC however. That served to move them further ahead of the ACC and big 12, and closer to the SEC, as they got stronger at the top and not the bottom.
 
RF-4CCane said:
If you really want to give an extremely unbiased perspective (your words) subtract UW, UCLA, USC and Oregon, as well as SMU, Cal and Stanford, from those totals for the 9 out of 10 years they weren’t in the Big 10 or ACC.

Some of those OOC wins were against Big 10 teams (see Oregon vs OSU).

I’ve already pointed out in other threads, the crème puff OOC schedules the Big 10 uses, while the ACC plays Notre Dame multiple times every year and UGA every year, as well as SC and Kentucky. The ACC plays a much heavier SEC OOC schedule than the Big 10 does.

Make those corrections and let’s compare.
Click to expand...
Here you go:

Here is the comparison without the Pac teams over the 9 years preceding 2024:

- Wins out of conference against p5 opponents:
Conf. A: 31 games under .500
Conf B: 9 games above .500

- Wins against each other:
Conf. A: 24
Conf. B: 32

- Draft picks:
Conf. A: 305
Conf. B: 392

You are right about the SEC point, they are the dominant league, ahead of the Big10. They have played each other much less, however that is another metric the Big fairs better over the last decade by a small margin: Acc is 44 and 65 against the SEC, 40.4% win percentage. Big is 21 and 29, 42% win percentage. Culling that from the data would have a marginal impact on the comparison, the acc would be fewer games below .500, and the big would be more games above .500.
 
Last edited:
RF-4CCane said:
Winning is cyclical. The only elite ACC team at the time of the last contract was Clemson.
The SEC sucked in the 80’s, the Big 10 sucked in the 90’s.
Miami and FSU picked a bad time to go through a period of mediocrity.
The Big 10 outside of OSU has been mediocre the past 20 years, they just worked behind the scenes to form an alliance with the SEC, which brought them a handsome contract.

Everyone needs an ally with blue blood power. That’s what the Big 10 was for the SEC.

And please don’t confuse my hatred of the Big 10 for love of the ACC. If I had my way, the ACC and Big 12 would have merged yesterday, kicked a couple programs that drag down the ratings to the curb and put a gun to ESPN’s head, demanding payouts commensurate with TV markets.
And most importantly found a commissioner to lead this merger that was as cutthroat and diabolical as the SEC has.
Click to expand...

Let’s expand the scope regarding Conferences.

To simplify this, I’m going to give credit to teams that’s won Nat’l titles in their previous conference to their respective, current conferences, & it’ll make sense as I narrow the scope. (For example, if Miami won a Nat’l Title as an Independent or Big East Member, it’ll be assigned to the ACC).

For the past 50 yrs (1975-present):
•ACC: 13 (Miami: 5, FSU: 3, Clemson: 3, GT: 1, Pitt: 1)

•B1G: 14 (O$U: 3, Nebraska: 3, USC: 3, PSU: 2, UofM: 2 UW:1)

•Big XII: 2 (BYU: 1, Colorado: 1)

•SEC: 24 (Bama: 9, OU: 3, UGA: 3, UF: 3, LSU: 3, UTenn: 1, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 2 (ND: 2)

For the past 40 yrs (1985-present):
•ACC: 10 (Miami: 4, FSU: 3, Clemson: 2, GT: 1)

•B1G: 12 (O$U: 3, Nebraska: 3, USC:2, UofM: 2, PSU: 1, UW:1)

•Big 12: 1 (Colorado: 1)

•SEC: 20 (Bama: 7, UF: 3, LSU: 3, OU: 2, UGA: 2, UTenn: 1, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 1 (ND)

For the past 30 yrs (1995-present):
•ACC: 5 (FSU: 2, Clemson: 2, Miami: 1)

•B1G: 9 (O$U: 3, Nebraska: 2, USC: 2, UofM: 2)

•Big XII: 0

•SEC: 18 (Bama: 6, UF: 3, LSU: 3, UGA: 2, OU: 1, UTenn: 1, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 0

For the past 20 yrs (2005-present):
•ACC: 3 (Clemson: 2, FSU: 1)

•B1G: 3 (OSU: 2, UofM: 1)

•Big XII: 0

•SEC: 14 (Bama: 6, UF: 2, LSU: 2, UGA: 2, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 0

For the past 10 yrs (2015-present):
•ACC: 2 (Clemson:2)

•B1G: 3 (OSU: 2, UofM: 1)

•Big XII: 0

•SEC: 6 (Bama: 3, UGA: 2, LSU: 1)

•Independent: 0

There’s several things to note:

1. The ACC has become a more & more diluted conference over the yrs.

2. The ACC is slowly becoming the East Coast version of the PAC-12, relying upon past history while adding no brand power while expanding

3. The B1G has more programs w/in conference that had more eyeballs driving viewing revenue. Out of the top 15, The SEC had 8, the B1G had 5, the Big XII had 1, & Independent had one. No ACC team appeared in the top 20, except for….us.

4. The ACC joining the Big XII does nothing to move the needle. Both conferences are not moving the viewership needle except Colorado (who was the only Big XII school in the top 15, top 20, & top 25.
 
Rellyrell said:
Let’s expand the scope regarding Conferences.

To simplify this, I’m going to give credit to teams that’s won Nat’l titles in their previous conference to their respective, current conferences, & it’ll make sense as I narrow the scope. (For example, if Miami won a Nat’l Title as an Independent or Big East Member, it’ll be assigned to the ACC).

For the past 50 yrs (1975-present):
•ACC: 13 (Miami: 5, FSU: 3, Clemson: 3, GT: 1, Pitt: 1)

•B1G: 14 (O$U: 3, Nebraska: 3, USC: 3, PSU: 2, UofM: 2 UW:1)

•Big XII: 2 (BYU: 1, Colorado: 1)

•SEC: 24 (Bama: 9, OU: 3, UGA: 3, UF: 3, LSU: 3, UTenn: 1, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 2 (ND: 2)

For the past 40 yrs (1985-present):
•ACC: 10 (Miami: 4, FSU: 3, Clemson: 2, GT: 1)

•B1G: 12 (O$U: 3, Nebraska: 3, USC:2, UofM: 2, PSU: 1, UW:1)

•Big 12: 1 (Colorado: 1)

•SEC: 20 (Bama: 7, UF: 3, LSU: 3, OU: 2, UGA: 2, UTenn: 1, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 1 (ND)

For the past 30 yrs (1995-present):
•ACC: 5 (FSU: 2, Clemson: 2, Miami: 1)

•B1G: 9 (O$U: 3, Nebraska: 2, USC: 2, UofM: 2)

•Big XII: 0

•SEC: 18 (Bama: 6, UF: 3, LSU: 3, UGA: 2, OU: 1, UTenn: 1, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 0

For the past 20 yrs (2005-present):
•ACC: 3 (Clemson: 2, FSU: 1)

•B1G: 3 (OSU: 2, UofM: 1)

•Big XII: 0

•SEC: 14 (Bama: 6, UF: 2, LSU: 2, UGA: 2, UT: 1, AU: 1)

•Independent: 0

For the past 10 yrs (2015-present):
•ACC: 2 (Clemson:2)

•B1G: 3 (OSU: 2, UofM: 1)

•Big XII: 0

•SEC: 6 (Bama: 3, UGA: 2, LSU: 1)

•Independent: 0

There’s several things to note:

1. The ACC has become a more & more diluted conference over the yrs.

2. The ACC is slowly becoming the East Coast version of the PAC-12, relying upon past history while adding no brand power while expanding

3. The B1G has more programs w/in conference that had more eyeballs driving viewing revenue. Out of the top 15, The SEC had 8, the B1G had 5, the Big XII had 1, & Independent had one. No ACC team appeared in the top 20, except for….us.

4. The ACC joining the Big XII does nothing to move the needle. Both conferences are not moving the viewership needle except Colorado (who was the only Big XII school in the top 15, top 20, & top 25.
Click to expand...
Agree with much of your post, though I would point out on #4, the following:

An ACC-Big 12 merger would add the following MSA’s and or states for TV markets:

Cincinnati
State of West Virginia
State of Arizona including Phoenix
State of Colorado including Denver
Orlando
Salt Lake City
Houston
State of Kansas
Ft Worth
DesMoines-Ames

They account for all or a share of the 5th, 10th, 12th, 18th, 19th, 33rd, 34th, 65th, 68th, 69th, 71st, 94th largest TV markets in the country.

That moves the needle significantly in my opinion, as an aggregate.
 
RF-4CCane said:
Agree with much of your post, though I would point out on #4, the following:

An ACC-Big 12 merger would add the following MSA’s and or states for TV markets:

Cincinnati
State of West Virginia
State of Arizona including Phoenix
State of Colorado including Denver
Orlando
Salt Lake City
Houston
State of Kansas
Ft Worth
DesMoines-Ames

They account for all or a share of the 5th, 10th, 12th, 18th, 19th, 33rd, 34th, 65th, 68th, 69th, 71st, 94th largest TV markets in the country.

That moves the needle significantly in my opinion, as an aggregate.
Click to expand...

I can definitely see ur view point on this; I just feel a Big XII-ACC moves the needle in basketball, but not so much CFB.

Let’s play devils advocate w these markets:

•The Orlando market is split. UCF is an Orlando school, but Orlando is flooded w $EC blood (UF), so that market is diluted

•Cincinnati is also a market that’s diluted not b/c it’s a Suckeye city, it’s just a city that is more pro sports than college sports.

•Kansas is a tricky market; just knowing a guy from there, he’s a big KU b-ball fan, but a huge OU football fan. That market is split between Big XII, & SEC; but, since football is king, this is more SEC CFB territory than Big XII CFB territory.

•Ft-Worth is pro UT & Texas A&M, & I would argue it’s a stronghold of UT fans as UT has a slew of alums/boosters here. SMU nor TCU move the needle in this area like The Longhorns & A&M. Also, TCU has a very small student body.

So we’re talking about merging w/ a diluted Big XII. If Mizzou, Texas, & OU were still in the Big XII, this would’ve been a home run. ****, I thought the ACC should’ve brokered a deal w the PAC-12 called “Battle of the Coast” in like 2017 after our miracle season, building momentum w both Clemson & U.S. to garnish exposure in the L.A, & Bay Area markets.

The ACC missed on several opportunities to expand its footprint or positioned itself as a Big 3, & I just feel w/ the Big XII being as diluted as it is in 2025 v. 2022 doesn’t bring the cache needed to move the needle in CFB. College Basketball?? Absolutely.

The more I think about the ACC’s decision makings, the more I become disappointed, as a CFB fan. A lot can be learned from the PAC-12, & I’m still in shock but not surprised that they collapsed.
 
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
I can definitely see ur view point on this; I just feel a Big XII-ACC moves the needle in basketball, but not so much CFB.

Let’s play devils advocate w these markets:

•The Orlando market is split. UCF is an Orlando school, but Orlando is flooded w $EC blood (UF), so that market is diluted

•Cincinnati is also a market that’s diluted not b/c it’s a Suckeye city, it’s just a city that is more pro sports than college sports.

•Kansas is a tricky market; just knowing a guy from there, he’s a big KU b-ball fan, but a huge OU football fan. That market is split between Big XII, & SEC; but, since football is king, this is more SEC CFB territory than Big XII CFB territory.

•Ft-Worth is pro UT & Texas A&M, & I would argue it’s a stronghold of UT fans as UT has a slew of alums/boosters here. SMU nor TCU move the needle in this area like The Longhorns & A&M. Also, TCU has a very small student body.

So we’re talking about merging w/ a diluted Big XII. If Mizzou, Texas, & OU were still in the Big XII, this would’ve been a home run. ****, I thought the ACC should’ve brokered a deal w the PAC-12 called “Battle of the Coast” in like 2017 after our miracle season, building momentum w both Clemson & U.S. to garnish exposure in the L.A, & Bay Area markets.

The ACC missed on several opportunities to expand its footprint or positioned itself as a Big 3, & I just feel w/ the Big XII being as diluted as it is in 2025 v. 2022 doesn’t bring the cache needed to move the needle in CFB. College Basketball?? Absolutely.

The more I think about the ACC’s decision makings, the more I become disappointed, as a CFB fan. A lot can be learned from the PAC-12, & I’m still in shock but not surprised that they collapsed.
Click to expand...
You make some valid points.
A few things to consider.

1. UCF is a sleeping giant. It has the largest undergraduate enrollment of any public University in the country. At some point alumni of UCF will greatly outnumber UF grads in Orange, Seminole and Osceola counties.
During their run a few years back, I’m sure people in Orlando were watching more UCF games than UF and if they ever really got serious about football, they could swamp UF.

2. The Big 10 has a lot of the same issues you mentioned.
How many people in NJ do you think actually watch Rutgers football games.
Indiana has historically been a college BB state rather than a CFB state.
The only major MSA in Minnesota is Minneapolis which is a pro football city. That state also has a lot of hockey fans.
Similar situation with Maryland. It’s only major MSA’s, DC and Baltimore are pro football cities.
Cincinnati and Cleveland are both Pro football cities and make up the two largest MSA’s in Ohio. When Cincinnati had its run under Fickel, I’m sure there was a significant bandwagon audience there.

3. The networks value Big 12 sports. From what I’ve read, their annual contract rights will be $380 million by 2030 and that’s based on the new contract extension that starts this year. Add that to the ACC’s contract and that would pass the Big 10’s media rights deal even without renegotiation.
 
jsy said:
After landing the number one recruit over sec, Miami shows acc ain’t no second rate, acc better realize their only chance at not being seen as a scrub league is Miami
We better be getting in calls like the cal game not that Syracuse game
Click to expand...
1750936008360.gif

Bruh….
 
Rellyrell said:
I can definitely see ur view point on this; I just feel a Big XII-ACC moves the needle in basketball, but not so much CFB.

Let’s play devils advocate w these markets:

•The Orlando market is split. UCF is an Orlando school, but Orlando is flooded w $EC blood (UF), so that market is diluted

•Cincinnati is also a market that’s diluted not b/c it’s a Suckeye city, it’s just a city that is more pro sports than college sports.

•Kansas is a tricky market; just knowing a guy from there, he’s a big KU b-ball fan, but a huge OU football fan. That market is split between Big XII, & SEC; but, since football is king, this is more SEC CFB territory than Big XII CFB territory.

•Ft-Worth is pro UT & Texas A&M, & I would argue it’s a stronghold of UT fans as UT has a slew of alums/boosters here. SMU nor TCU move the needle in this area like The Longhorns & A&M. Also, TCU has a very small student body.

So we’re talking about merging w/ a diluted Big XII. If Mizzou, Texas, & OU were still in the Big XII, this would’ve been a home run. ****, I thought the ACC should’ve brokered a deal w the PAC-12 called “Battle of the Coast” in like 2017 after our miracle season, building momentum w both Clemson & U.S. to garnish exposure in the L.A, & Bay Area markets.

The ACC missed on several opportunities to expand its footprint or positioned itself as a Big 3, & I just feel w/ the Big XII being as diluted as it is in 2025 v. 2022 doesn’t bring the cache needed to move the needle in CFB. College Basketball?? Absolutely.

The more I think about the ACC’s decision makings, the more I become disappointed, as a CFB fan. A lot can be learned from the PAC-12, & I’m still in shock but not surprised that they collapsed.
Click to expand...
Correct. The ACC is like a blind man at the plate, with a bat in his hands. Ain’t hitting ****. They have whiffed at every opportunity to be proactive. Now they’re trying to be reactive. This conference is up “****’s creek” with one paddle. Now the conference is basically on life support and in a position where they’ve got to do something to try to keep itself alive. Expansion is the only thing they can do, but because they were sitting around with their thumbs up their asses, all the good football schools were taken by the SEC and the B1G. So yeah…. the ACC is a 2nd rate football conference. The ONE school that can save it, is Notre Dame, and they ain’t looking to be a savior. As far as football is concerned, merging with the BXII would basically be like putting a bandaid on a stab wound.
 
Back
Top