News and Observer reporting now UNC Board of Trustees against expansion đ
Link:
Click here
39 Replies
2y
(In response to this post by Stech)
M
Mercury
2y
all are part of the UNC system. (actually UNC Raleigh is NC State). UNC Chapel Hill, UNC Ashville yada yada. The oversight system was always top heavy to UNC and the rest... NC State always just followed and never opposed.
Also UNC also always have acted within the ACC over the years, they always thought they had 4 votes always in the ACC. They were the blood bloods. To consider NC state diverting itself, is interesting. Are they tired to be no 2 and pushing themselves to be 'an another perspective? Also, is UNC not really tying itself to NC State??? in the athetlic world, (does the state get involved behind the scenes with leadership to advise do what you want, but one doesn't leave unless the other has a equal place??/
(In response to this post by dobrohokie)
2y
I believe UNC was opposed to the expansion that included VT, Miami and BC and Syracuse. I'm certain that UNC was opposed to VT joining the conference on every occasion in the past 50 some odd years. I've forgotten the specifics -- someone help me here -- but I believe VT was one vote away from being included in the 1970s and I seem to remember that NC State voted for us. Will has the history of all of this in his archives somewhere.
This is one reason I'd like to keep the ACC together. We worked so doggone hard to get into the ACC and, for the most part, it's been pretty good to us. Of course, I'm an old codger who grew up in ACC territory, listening to the Dixie Classic on the radio at night.
(In response to this post by Mercury)
D
duro
2y
(In response to this post by Stech)
D
duro
2y
at VT however he should be doing what is in the best interest of Virginia Tech and the rest of the current ACC membership when it comes to expansion. His past connection to Cal should have nothing to do with his vote on this. And quite frankly Iâm shocked that more people havenât questioned the logic of this move. Most posters on this board and the subscribers board seem to be totally chill with everything Babcock and Sands have been doing and the media covering VT appears to be scared of asking tough questions or challenging either one of them. This same attitude bleeds over into how the football program is and has been run since Sands and Whit came on the scene.
If our fanbase has a âIâm content with the job the VT administration is doing then we are in big trouble. Way too many fans on this board have adopted an attitude of âVT will never be what it was in the 90âs and 2000âs ever again and Iâm ok with thatâ mentality. You get the product you deserve. I for one wish the VT board would compel both of their firings.
(In response to this post by Durham Hokie)
H
Hokester
2y
Making this issue left vs right is totally off base.
(In response to this post by duro)
2y
If you've been annoyed with Sands over his alma mater and perceived politics, you think this decision is somehow about those things
(In response to this post by Hokester)
2y
Plus, I imagine many of the Presidents did not want to stick a stake in the back of the other conference teams by trying to break up the current ACC. So, they chose to expand until a later time. To ensure viability and more money for the upcoming few years.
(In response to this post by duro)
M
Mercury
2y
you still fighting the protest of the sixties, I know many professionals, top notch in their profession that graduated from Cal Berkley and have a broad spectrum of political perspectives.
Sorry its an honor to bring high level universities into the conference (beats some directional regional, school)... but maybe you are not into education.
(In response to this post by duro)
D
duro
2y
expansion. This is an athletic conference expansion just in case youâve been marooned on a desert island somewhere. It would appear your comment trumps mine on the dumb comment scale.
(In response to this post by Mercury)
2y
** Edited by BROman Hokie at 9/1/2023, 8:26:55 AM
(In response to this post by duro)
H
HOO86
2y
It's highly inappropriate for UNC to behave as FSU in the media. He needs to tell his Chancellor this, not the public. They will all rue the day they do this. They are stuck for 12 years, and will have no grounds to complain.
Jim Phillips looks as novice now as Swofford in 2002.
(In response to this post by Stech)
D
duro
2y
and did nothing until it was too late regarding smart expansion doesnât mean the double down with more bad decisions by bringing to bad football programs from the west coast that have no fanbase into an east coast based conference where half the schools have bad football programs and no fanbase. They are just doubling down on their previous bad decisions.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
The ACC has been run as poorly as the Pac-12 IMO.
It's just that their mistakes are less glaring, and their death is slower.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
2y
The ACC didn't have the LA market to screw up. How did they manage that????? They should have buried the Big 12 last year.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
...they would probably still be together today. They had geography on their side. No one would have jumped to another P5 conference so far away if they were getting paid their actual worth. Heck, they owned the later television time zone.
But you hire an idiot to run the conference, and it implodes. That's a good lesson for every conference.
(In response to this post by HokiesACC2004)
2y
So your premise is ridiculous
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
...in the history of college athletics. The ACC has made some bad decisions, but the P-12 has been on an entirely different level of suck.
Adding the CA/TX three would be a horrible decision. I would be more receptive if they were within 500 miles of the ACC's footprint or they were football crazy, but two of the three are on the other end of the country, and none support their football team. Neither the SEC or Big-12 want SMU, and both the B1X and B12 passed on Stanford and Cal. ESPN even said they would only give the ACC barely enough to cover travel. Expansion for the sake of expansion is insane or desperate. Or in this case, would be both.
The B1X threw a harpoon into the Pac-12 and ripped out its heart by taking their two most valuable properties. That conference was killed and everyone knew it.
The B12 saw the opportunity to pick up some decent schools next door to them, so they took the western and southern schools.
The B1X next picked off two more at a significant discount, leaving four that no one wanted. Why would the ACC ever consider taking two of the left overs? Why would the ACC consider taking schools on the other side of the country? The ACC is the furthest conference away from California. The B1X taking Pac-12 schools is crazy, but the ACC following that path would be totally insane, especially since 95% of expansion is driven by football (5% basketball, and 0% non-revenue programs) and those schools just don't care. (Probably why they were left behind)
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
WRT your SMU comment.
SMU would do more for the ACC than they would for the B12 or SEC since those schools are already in Texas.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
That's probably the only thing ESPN is willing to pay the ACC, and we only get half of the increase.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
I guess they'll postpone the meeting again, LOL
The ACC will finally vote on expansion in 2036.
(In response to this post by Stech)
H
HOO86
2y
Is there to reward the successful football programs. The deal creates it. There shouldn't be any NO votes from members who expect to win in football in the ACC.
UNC isn't one of those. But a couple other of the four holdouts are.
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
V
VPI_1998
2y
all it's focus on improving football over the next decade so as to not be left out in the cold when it finally goes down
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
The meetings will continue until the voting improves đ´ââ
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
Why release something like that otherwise?
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
Otherwise weird leak
(In response to this post by 4x4hokies)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
...at their cocktail parties. There is no other reason to vote to add them.
If ND really wants to help their CA buddies, they know what it would take to add them.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
2y
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
2y
And there is a Board of Trustees that can't really do anything.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
H
HOO86
2y
The Board of Governors hires the Chancellor. That is correct. The Board of Trustees oversees academics and faculty at UNC. Same group that oposed expansion when UVA was allowed to push VT through.
Make this public with long delay, and opposition organizes on campus. John Swofford in 2002. Same faculty oversight group again at UNC.
My question is who is the intended audience for this release? Has the chancellor not heard from them?
** Edited by HOO86 at 9/1/2023, 6:27:05 AM
(In response to this post by 4x4hokies)
2y
** Edited by Stech at 8/31/2023, 11:26:26 PM
(In response to this post by 4x4hokies)