NY Times: Syracuse and Pitt in Talks With ACC

I'd be OK with it. Can we add UConn and West Virginia, too?: "The person with knowledge of the talks declined to speculate on a timetable or the seriousness of the discussions. But in this delicate time for conferences and their futures, the discussions between the 12-team A.C.C. and two Big East members are significant."

UPDATE: "Syracuse and Pittsburgh have begun the formal process of leaving the Big East by applying to join the Atlantic Coast Conference, an A.C.C. official with direct knowledge of the applications said Saturday."

8 months ago furrer4heisman 9 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

WFV + UConn?

Do not want. Rather fill those slots with Texas/Kansas.

by AdamBC on Sep 17, 2011 12:46 AM EDT reply actions

Texas/Kansas won't happen

In fact I hadn’t even heard about kansas in discussions. What I heard is if we took the pod of Texas, TT, Oklahoma and Ok St. that Texas would be buyers. But that would be contingent upon Oklahoma and Ok St. being interested, which they’re not. Texas is not just going to up and join the ACC by themselves with NO team from their past or proximity. So the idea of the ACC pursuing Texas is silly. If Texas were ever in such a crunch to maintain the Longhorn Network that they’d apply to the ACC regardless of circumstance, we would be stupid not to take them in. But until then keep running your rabbit foot.

by chicagomaroon on Sep 17, 2011 8:14 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I'll take WVU and anyone else

WVU > BC being a protected rival

by bigern on Sep 17, 2011 8:51 AM EDT reply actions

My question is, who are the other 8 that heather dinich mentions here: http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6980644/pitt-syracuse-apply-join-acc-ranks-source-says

WVU? Rutgers? UConn?

↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → b a (select) start

by renstar on Sep 17, 2011 9:55 AM EDT reply actions

I suppose this is making the best of a bad situation.

I’m against this whole super-conference realignment scheme, partly because the ACC is one of the big losers in the move and the conference prestige will slide even further. Even adding the best big east teams would not match the moves of the SEC and PAC-??.

If we were to expand to 16 based solely on football competence, then the targets should WVU, UConn, Pitt and USF. But if the ACC vows to uphold their academic standards, WVU and USF don’t make the cut. Notre Dame probably would join the (former) Big 10 if they were to join any conference, so I don’t think they’re much of a possibility.

Football wise, Syracuse isn’t much better than Duke. Pitt annually underachieves, maybe that will change with Wannstache out, and probably would only be a middle of the pack ACC team. UConn would probably be a good fit. WVU could compete for conference titles.

With the basketball abilities of those teams, I fear that we may drop from average team to conference doormat.

by Duens-Capps on Sep 17, 2011 11:02 AM EDT reply actions

You mean from the most successful (in terms of wins) team in the ACC not named Duke or UNC

To average team in the best conference in the nation with those additions.

by chicagomaroon on Sep 17, 2011 8:07 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I feel like that speaks more about the recent mediocrity of the conference, than the strength of our team

Our team has accomplished nothing the past few years, and had too much talent to even be in a position to be NCAA snubs. But I don’t want to turn this into a basketball debate…

by Duens-Capps on Sep 17, 2011 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Definitely

looks like VT will stay in the ACC, especially considering they just raised the exiting fee to $20 million from $12 million. I don’t think any current members will leave the ACC now, maybe FSU… Good move by the ACC; the first to 14, and possibly the first to 16. My votes are for UConn and Kentucky.

by Chazz Micheal Michealzz on Sep 17, 2011 2:38 PM EDT reply actions