Is the continuation of football on Thursdays, and now Fridays. Football is for SATURDAYs and it speaks loads about how ESPN views the ACC if they aren't willing to slot us into the Saturday Night primetime spots instead of sticking us on Thursdays and the occasional Friday. That's what bothers me more than anything about this deal. Given, the conference hasn't really done too much to deserve any sort of national attention, but its still bothersome.
In light of the ACC's new TV deal would it be worth it for them to leave and pay that $25 million(?) exit fee for a couple extra mil a year and life in a notoriously unstable conference where UT gets more money cause they bullied everybody else into it?
Plus its an easier path to the MNC, not to mention travel expenses for the non-revs.
low teens, seems about right. i hate when we have a bunch of preseason hype anyway.
i'm officially worried about fake tech on labor day
How does this affect our deal with Raycom (if at all)?
but yeah the ACC is our home and assuming it doesnt implode a la our last home I say we stay put and try to build something great with our sister institutions. The academic thing is more important to university presidents than the average ball watchin fan realizes and we are in a great academic conference.
As far as Swofford being replaced; my question would be why? He let us in (and lets face it in 03 we all felt like we had reached the promised land after wandering the desert) How much has the revenue multiplied since he took over? I understand thats mainly because of the exploding popularity of college sports but he has worked to expand the ACC's brand, something that was essential in the Darwinian dog eat dog climate of the last few years. We're nipping at the mighty $EC's heels as far as TV revenue goes and we have the 2nd highest TV ratings behind the B1G for bball and 3rd behind those two for fball ratings. Pretty damn solid if you ask me.
Like Frank said when Pitt and Cuse joined last year, its better to be the conference people want to join and not the conference people wanna leave.
He's actually a small/power forward combo, meaning they play they exact same position. And with Jarrell Eddie possibly moving to the 2, Harrell could actually play the 3 right away, and act as a more efficient 3/4 combo. And with Doe Doe transferring (meaning that we lose about 7 points and 7 boards a game), I don't think that he's actually turned away by the transfer, but encouraged, giving him more playing time and being energized by a younger, more player-friendly coaching regime.
Also, Harrell never played with Doe Doe on an AAU team, and has no connections with him in terms of recruiters or campus hosts...I don't think that this has any effect on him, but if it does, it's probably a (slightly) positive one.
VT should not leave the ACC even if an offer was to come from the SEC. The ACC is the best overall conference for VT to be in for all sports. With the addition of Cuse & Pitt the Men's BBall conference will be the most talented and I believe the only power basketball conference. The Big East & SEC will still have good bball teams but will not have the number of powers that the ACC will have.
Also academic wise every other conference would be a step down. I believe out of the expanded 14 schools in the ACC only 2 are not ranked in the top 100 of best schools. The 2 left out are FSU & NC State which were ranked just outside at 101 in 2011.
VT would spend more money traveling in every sport. Plus the political mess that was VT joining the ACC, I think this would hurt us with our local politicians which would be a bad thing. The best place for VT now is to stay put, eventually the SEC's dominance will subside and I think this year is the year they do not win the football MNC. Once a play off system is started as well I don't see them doing as well either.
I do agree to get rid of Swofford though. I know everyone was nervous with him at the helm during the NCAA investigations against UNC since he was the AD during the infractions.
15 years is too long, but otherwise this is as good as a deal as the ACC is going to get. Let's face it, ACC football post-expansion has been not-so-good, so I'm pretty satisfied with $~17mil per year.
Random sidenote ... per this blog post, ACC is the single largest content provider to all of the ESPN networks, whether college or pro.
That blows my mind (assuming that's correct).
Can we get the hell out the ACC please? Or at least dump Swofford in the Atlantic Ocean.
"We really want Doe-Doe on our team. He's a great player and will be apart of the winning tradition we are establishing. We will do whatever it takes to make DFS happy here."
It didn't sound like he tried to keep him on the team. If he did, Gabbard had a very poor choice of words to show that JJ exhausted all efforts to placate and keep Doe-Doe happy.
Of course we don't want guys here who aren't going to be happy here. That does not equate to not trying to make them happy here. How hard is it to convince Doe-Doe that his unhappiness was all about Greenberg? No idea. Every person is different. Some people can be more easily swayed than others. Could be his mind was just made up. Be careful here. You sound like you're denigrating DFS, and that's harsh unless it's based on something firmer.
probably says more about how JJ views him. If JJ thought Doe-Doe was vital, he would have encouraged him to stay. I mean, how hard is it to convince Doe-Doe that his unhappiness was all about Greenberg, and now that he's gone, we are going to have a much happier, richer basketball environment.
I think this quote says it all:
"J.J.'s position is going to be if you don't want to be at Virginia Tech and you're unhappy here, we don't want you here," Gabbard said. "We're trying to build something. You only go through this (playing college basketball) once, and you need to be happy."
Sounds like JJ didn't even try to make him happy.
(to preface, this is not at all about academics)
VT is a football school, just like most of the names you mentioned. We are also strong in other sports, just not relative to football. We give away prizes to the first x number of people to show up for our lesser attended sports, and if I walked around campus and asked, I doubt even one out of 100 people would be able to tell me one player on our soccer team, track, tennis, baseball, etc. I'm sure one out of every five people could give me at least ONE name from basketball, but that's about it. Football? I think that statistic is quite a bit higher. It's unfortunate to say, especially since soccer is my favorite sport, but we are a football school and football is what brings in the money and fans, and it should be the determining factor in any major decisions. For further argument, just look at VT's record in every sport except for football vs UVA - they are our antithesis in both sports and academics, despite some recent regression in their bb program.
I digress. This post isn't to argue about the equality of our sports programs, but about the conference moves. Specifically, I really wanted to hear opinions on if this move would be possible and what repercussions it might have (not just on VT).
"In current quarterback Tyrod Taylor, Smith thinks he has the makings of another big-time recruit in two years."
i think he was right
They don't play the same position. If I was Harrell, I'd see this as something that makes the team worse, not something that improves my chances at playing time.
Football is a big draw and successful program for sure. Even Alababa, LSU, Oklahoba, OSU, Notre Dame, USC, ... do not consider themselves Football schools. I do not want VT to be a "football" school. I want VT to be a great all around university that affords anyone an opportunity for a great education and to participate on great sports teams that will compete with anyone. We are too good to be limited to just football. Great universities have great teams no matter what the sport or the conference affiliation.
Was recruited away. Kentucky is looking for a few good men since their turnover rate is pretty high too.
I'm a big fan of Hokie Tracks. Keeps me up to date on stuff I wouldn't necessarily know about.
After reading through some of the posts from that guy it has just hardened my stance that we need to get the hell out of the ACC.
Heck yes we like these posts.
Theres always tons of links that I haven't found in my own circle of blogs.
he's going to have success wherever he goes pretty much. It's the degree of success that will determine on what system and what players are in place. I think if you offered the challenge of having to "take advantage of his unique skill set" to most coaches they would ask "where do i sign." Personally I think he'd do well in the big east. He's a good fit for Georgetown or Syracuse in my opinion.
dfs wanted to leave before seth was fired. was talked out of it, sorta. pretty damn confident he was going to leave at the end of the semester anyway.
More money but more events. The $ per event is more important. With all this conference realignment are there clauses to readjust the terms if teams leave or are added? ESPN's TV revenue will increase very year and the costs of fielding teams will go up every year, yet we are locked into a fixed annual amount for the next 14 years. Our costs will probably double in that amount of time and ESPN's profits will more than double. I do not get how this deal is good for the long run.