It doesn't seem that long ago we were focused maybe going to the B1G.

[orientalnc]

Those rumors now seem to be relegated to history, but this piece in Grantland brought back my thoughts from that time. Maybe the ACC is actually a better football conference than the B1G. The money is less, but maybe this is where we belong.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...-tens-toxic-reputation-for-playoff-relevance/

“There is nothing that exists so great or marvelous that over time mankind does not admire it less and less.” - Lucretius

 

[Animal02]

Those rumors now seem to be relegated to history, but this piece in Grantland brought back my thoughts from that time. Maybe the ACC is actually a better football conference than the B1G. The money is less, but maybe this is where we belong.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...-tens-toxic-reputation-for-playoff-relevance/

“There is nothing that exists so great or marvelous that over time mankind does not admire it less and less.” - Lucretius

Tech instead of MD in the Big10 would have been interesting......from a market footprint to a competition aspect. (also for selfish reasons I would have loved it......seven teams are withing easy driving distance)

 

[Madison Grant]

Yeah, I guess a lot of our transplant fans were loving the possibility, but I got no thrill from the thought of playing the likes of Indiana, Minnesota, Purdue, Northwestern, and the sporadically good Iowa. The B1G has actually made Maryland and Rutgers look somewhat decent.

 

[Yoda]

Rutgers has Fridge

 

[Minawreck]

I was pro Big Ten but only because I thought the ACC was going to fold. This was pre-ND deal and Louisville as a replacement.

The ACC is a good place for us but I still think there are a couple programs who would bolt for the right price so to speak.

 

[Enuratique]

All I know is we'd be in control of our destiny in the B10. Weak conference we'd own even with our suspect defense.

 

[4shotB]

Yeah, I guess a lot of our transplant fans were loving the possibility, but I got no thrill from the thought of playing the likes of Indiana, Minnesota, Purdue, Northwestern, and the sporadically good Iowa. The B1G has actually made Maryland and Rutgers look somewhat decent.

All I know is we'd be in control of our destiny in the B10. Weak conference we'd own even with our suspect defense.

For the sake of discussion...Indiana, Minnesota, et al is very similar in my mind to the likes of NCSU, Syracuse, Wake, etc. Who else brings a big game feel into BDS outside of Clemson, FSU and (possibly) Miami.

The only league the BIG 10 is .500 against is the "similarly marginilized" ACC. Discussing the ACC vs. Big 10 is alot like arguing over Wendy's vs. McDonalds or Capt.D's vs. Long John Silver's imo.

 

[Madison Grant]

Yeah, I wasn't saying Indiana and Minnesota were worse than some of the weak ACC teams. Just saying I was less interested in us playing them because I grew up locally and couldn't give a farge about the upper Midwestern also-ran schools. Playing Ohio St would be the only B1G matchup for me to get excited about. As far as the 'faded glory' schools go, I think somebody like Miami is in a better place than, say, Michigan or Penn St right now.

 

[Animal02]

Yeah, I wasn't saying Indiana and Minnesota were worse than some of the weak ACC teams. Just saying I was less interested in us playing them because I grew up locally and couldn't give a farge about the upper Midwestern also-ran schools. Playing Ohio St would be the only B1G matchup for me to get excited about. As far as the 'faded glory' schools go, I think somebody like Miami is in a better place than, say, Michigan or Penn St right now.

Really? Playing in the "big house" is not something to get excited about (even if UM is down this year) or Happy Valley? Playing ranked MSU would not be exciting?

 

[Madison Grant]

Really? Playing in the "big house" is not something to get excited about (even if UM is down this year) or Happy Valley? Playing ranked MSU would not be exciting?

Nope. Not to me. Rather play a Clemson team stocked with skill athletes year-in and year-out than play a 17-10 type game against Michigan St and Wisconsin. If we want to play in big stadiums packed full of fans, why don't we just sit around wishing we could get in the SEC again? What I care about is the matchup, not the number of fans at the stadium or the 'storied history' the sports media carries the torch for LONG after it's lost relevancy.

 

[Squints]

The B1G has actually made Maryland and Rutgers look somewhat decent.

I'm not sure I completely agree. I'm a casual follower of Rutgers football because I'm from NJ and the only B1G team they've beaten has been the dumpster fire that is Michigan. They almost beat Penn State but Nova threw away the game. Other than that they've been smoked by the B1G teams. However, I do think it's a better program than most realize though. Rutgers has been at least "somewhat decent" for some time. Them going into the B1G and holding their own isn't a big surprise if you were paying attention to anything other than the name of the school.

I think something similar could be said about Maryland. They've been on a steady upward trajectory for a few years. It's not entirely the B1G's fault. Perhaps Maryland and Rutgers were just better than people thought.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I too was intrigued by the idea of Tech going to the B1G. There were several reasons why it made sense to me at the time which I will not repeat. But to my mind the ACC is on an upward trajectory similar to one the SEC went through several years ago. The main difference at this point is that the SEC has historically had a strong propaganda machine aided by one of the largest and most rabid fan bases in the country. Anyway, I am now glad we did not make that move to the B1G. I do not know if the article is correct or not but to suggest that the B1G's current status is not a cyclical thing is disturbing. At least when the ACC was at the bottom most of us knew it was a cyclical thing and the trend would reverse with time. This article sounded much more dire than that. I am so glad we are not Maryland right now.

 

[Animal02]

Nope. Not to me. Rather play a Clemson team stocked with skill athletes year-in and year-out than play a 17-10 type game against Michigan St and Wisconsin. If we want to play in big stadiums packed full of fans, why don't we just sit around wishing we could get in the SEC again? What I care about is the matchup, not the number of fans at the stadium or the 'storied history' the sports media carries the torch for LONG after it's lost relevancy.

The B10, from an academic viewpoint, is much more on par with Tech academics than the SEC will ever be. MSU would not be a great match up? Ranked #8? Seriously? Wisconsin at #25 would not be a great matchup? Yeah...lets continue to play UNC where football players take imaginary classes.

 

[ATL1]

Wasn't interested from the start... Slow/Boring football = B10..

 

[Squints]

The B10, from an academic viewpoint, is much more on par with Tech academics than the SEC will ever be. MSU would not be a great match up? Ranked #8? Seriously? Wisconsin at #25 would not be a great matchup? Yeah...lets continue to play UNC where football players take imaginary classes.

It's an especially hysterical thing to say considering both of those teams are putting up 39+ points per game. And that if we played them I think it wouldn't even be close to a 17-10 type of game. We'd give up at least 35 to each (easily 40 to Wisconsin) and most likely get smoked out of the stadium. The Southern football bias is out in full force in this thread.

Wasn't interested from the start... Slow/Boring football = B10..

That's one of the most common things said about our offense. It could have been a perfect fit!

 

[GTJake]

I grew up in the midwest, my biggest memory is Bo Schembeckler and Woody Hayes and every year the BIG10 title coming down to Michigan vs. Ohio State.
And of course Woody Hayes punching the Clemson LB on the sidelines.

 

[Animal02]

I would rather see student athletes play than thugs hopingwaiting to get their NFL ticket punched.

 

[Madison Grant]

It's an especially hysterical thing to say considering both of those teams are putting up 39+ points per game. And that if we played them I think it wouldn't even be close to a 17-10 type of game. We'd give up at least 35 to each (easily 40 to Wisconsin) and most likely get smoked out of the stadium. The Southern football bias is out in full force in this thread.
I may be biased, I admit. I think those who are from the North or whose families are and grew up fans of a B1G program are biased too only in the reverse. Have you seen Michigan St this year? They've got a great d, but their offense isn't really impressive to watch. They've played really only one respectable defense, Nebraska, and they put up 27 on them. Not sure how great their defense really is either since the one time they went outside of the B1G to play a power 5 team in Oregon, they got 46 laid on them and lost by 19. Not that I'm a big SEC fan. SEC hype annoys me as much as the rest of y'all. But the B1G vs ACC is a wash to me. I think the ACC passes the B1G long-term because of demographic shifts too.


That's one of the most common things said about our offense. It could have been a perfect fit!

 

[DTGT]

Wasn't interested from the start... Slow/Boring football = B10..

This is yet another line fed to the masses by the corporate media. The Orange Bowl against Iowa disproved that sound bite.

 

[Atomic Jacket]

The ACC is a crap conference. There is just no way to polish that turd. The B1G would have been huge for Tech football. It would have forced Tech to up its game. But there's no point in pining for lost opportunities now. There was a brief window when the ACC was on shaky ground, and one small jolt could have sent it all tumbling. But Tech foolishly stood by and allowed the ACC to set huge financial penalties for leaving. It's not going to happen in the near future.