342 replies to this topic

[Chris B]

BTW, I think this marks the end of A10 expansion. I see no reason to go to 16, because it just dilutes the basketball product. I have no interest in adding a team like Siena.

The next move for the conference is to see what UMass will do. If they are invited to the Big East or CUSA, I wouldn't be surprised to see them jump for their football aspirations. At that point, I think you see the A10 look again at George Mason or maybe Creighton.

[Nuclear Dish]

FSU's president issued a memo today where he weighed the pros and cons of leaving the ACC. The two things to take away from the memo, one the President lists more positives for staying than negatives and two, he says the faculty are adamantly against joining a conference that is academically weaker.

Some inside info on why FSU is making so much noise:

They are pissed off about the ESPN contract. The contract is backloaded, such that the schools are only getting $13M per year starting in 2013, but are getting as much as $24M per year in 2027. The increase right now, therefore, is only about $1M/year.

This is a major issue for FSU because they are running a huge deficit, and they need TV to help make that up.

The thing is, by moving, they'd have to pay a massive buyout (unless the Big 12 offered to do it for them, which is unlikely), plus make up the difference in added TV revenue.

This is the heart of the matter. Anything else that is discussed (academics, N. Carolina schools being favored, better football conference, geography) is irrelevant.

The irony is that the TV contract wasn't stronger because the football schools haven't pulled their weight. The reason it's backloaded is because right now the football profile is poor, but in 15 years, ESPN is betting it'll be better.

[Chris B]

VCU will be joining the A10 for THIS YEAR, starting July 1, 2012.

[Greg Pappas]

I assume the "North Carolina" bias revolves around the tournament being played there almost every year. I imagine there are other reasons, but can't think of any. Little help?

[BSLChrisStoner]

I assume the "North Carolina" bias revolves around the tournament being played there almost every year. I imagine there are other reasons, but can't think of any. Little help?

Scheduling, and calls are the charges you often here. Could discuss them in more detail, but just comes across as whining.

[Nuclear Dish]

I assume the "North Carolina" bias revolves around the tournament being played there almost every year. I imagine there are other reasons, but can't think of any. Little help?

Scheduling, and calls are the charges you often here. Could discuss them in more detail, but just comes across as whining.

I thought they league had gone to an every-other-year arrangement on the tournament? Scheduling is a ridiculous claim.

As for the calls, I love this one. All teams tend to get the benefit of more calls at home. And teams that are better talent-wise tend to have fewer fouls and more free throws attempted. So when it's UNC and dook, no kidding they are "getting more calls" - the other teams are fouling to have a chance to win.

Schools have been using the N. Carolina bias argument for wanting to leave the league since S. Carolina used it in 1971. It's convenient to say it, but it's pretty meaningless. The N. Carolina schools can't stand each other, let alone band together to receive any kind of special treatment.

[Chris B]

Andrea Adelson ‏@aadelsonESPN
ACC commish Swofford announces future hoops tournaments will include all 14 teams. Play would begin Weds w/seeds 11-12-13-14.
Retweeted by Andy Katz

[Greg Pappas]

Nuclear Dish, in your estimation, what might FSU be referring to in their comments regarding North Carolina?

[Pedro Cerrano]

As for the calls, I love this one. All teams tend to get the benefit of more calls at home. And teams that are better talent-wise tend to have fewer fouls and more free throws attempted. So when it's UNC and dook, no kidding they are "getting more calls" - the other teams are fouling to have a chance to win.

Schools have been using the N. Carolina bias argument for wanting to leave the league since S. Carolina used it in 1971. It's convenient to say it, but it's pretty meaningless. The N. Carolina schools can't stand each other, let alone band together to receive any kind of special treatment.

Like Stoner, I don't want to come across as a whiner but if you're suggesting that the reffing is as equal in Chapel Hill as it is in Blacksburg or Atlanta, I respectfully disagree.

[BSLMikeLowe]

FSU's president issued a memo today where he weighed the pros and cons of leaving the ACC. The two things to take away from the memo, one the President lists more positives for staying than negatives and two, he says the faculty are adamantly against joining a conference that is academically weaker.

Some inside info on why FSU is making so much noise:

They are pissed off about the ESPN contract. The contract is backloaded, such that the schools are only getting $13M per year starting in 2013, but are getting as much as $24M per year in 2027. The increase right now, therefore, is only about $1M/year.

This is a major issue for FSU because they are running a huge deficit, and they need TV to help make that up.

The thing is, by moving, they'd have to pay a massive buyout (unless the Big 12 offered to do it for them, which is unlikely), plus make up the difference in added TV revenue.

This is the heart of the matter. Anything else that is discussed (academics, N. Carolina schools being favored, better football conference, geography) is irrelevant.

The irony is that the TV contract wasn't stronger because the football schools haven't pulled their weight. The reason it's backloaded is because right now the football profile is poor, but in 15 years, ESPN is betting it'll be better.

It's not unheard of for the gaining conference to loan money to new schools to help pay the buyouts. I know for a fact the Pac loaned Colorado money to get out of the Big XII. That said, CO's buyout was nowhere near the $20 mil FSU would owe the ACC. But I'm sure the Big XII would contribute in some way IF FSU's presence would increase the return that all of the schools will reap on their next TV deal. Also, in addition to what would likely be more money already, FSU would get to keep/sell its 3rd tier football TV rights, which in a state the size of FL might be worth a few million per year.

[Nuclear Dish]

Nuclear Dish, in your estimation, what might FSU be referring to in their comments regarding North Carolina?

I think they are referring primarily to John Swofford (UNC alum and former UNC AD). I think they were taking a swipe at him for the ESPN contract, and I think that the ACC will consider pushing him to resign to try to placate FSU.

It also doesn't help that league headquarters are in Greensboro and that the basketball tournament is so often there as a result. Geographically, it's central, so it makes some sense, but I understand that as the league has expanded north, there is a push to move the tournament to DC some. If they add UConn and/or Rutgers, they might have to consider a more northerly central location for the offices.

[Nuclear Dish]

Like Stoner, I don't want to come across as a whiner but if you're suggesting that the reffing is as equal in Chapel Hill as it is in Blacksburg or Atlanta, I respectfully disagree.

Give me a break. Better teams get more calls across the board, especially at home. Doesn't matter if you're in Chapel Hill, Lexington, Durham, Bloomington, or Lawrence. If Maryland wants to get more calls, they need to improve as a program.

[Nuclear Dish]

Andrea Adelson ‏@aadelsonESPN
ACC commish Swofford announces future hoops tournaments will include all 14 teams. Play would begin Weds w/seeds 11-12-13-14.
Retweeted by Andy Katz

There are 2 primary reasons for this:

1. The ACC, the first conference with its own post-season tournament, has always been an advocate of giving every school a chance to qualify for the NCAA tournament via the league tourney. The philosophy remains no matter how many teams are involved.

2. The Big East served as an example of what happens when teams are excluded from the tournament. Syracuse and Pitt made clear that they did not care to see such discord because of schools being left out.

The problem is that the Thursday games are already being under-attended, and these play-in games are going to be a tough sell. I almost wish they'd decided to play them at campus sites.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Give me a break. Better teams get more calls across the board, especially at home. Doesn't matter if you're in Chapel Hill, Lexington, Durham, Bloomington, or Lawrence. If Maryland wants to get more calls, they need to improve as a program.

In one post today, you suggest Lawrie was right for his outrage that the umpire missed the multiple strikes called against him. In this post, you suggest that because UNC has long been an elite program, they are entitled to get more calls? I don't see how those views match-up.

For the record though, while I've seen irritation at calls; I've never seen anyone suggest that any calls UNC and Duke have received at home, is one of the leading reasons for their success. At-least from anyone that is not wearing a tin-foil cap.

When I've done recaps of games, I purposely avoid bringing up refs. If you let games come down to individual calls, you haven't done enough on the court / field to win. Knowing that, does not erase the desire to want to see games called evenly. By your admission, you seem to give credence to the fact that UNC might be the benefactor of some additional calls. UNC and Duke have great programs, talents, fan-bases, Coaches. They don't need to be the benefactor of any additional calls.

It would be wrong to say that MD fans are the only ones that feel a bias. Here is a piece from an NCST fan earlier this year (http://www.statefans...esnt-foul-much/). They include the quote from the ACC's Head of Officials stating, that 'historically, UNC does not foul much.' When the author wrote the piece (2/10) UNC had been called for the 8th fewest fouls in the nation. Meaning that 337 schools were being called for more fouls per game than UNC.

The author reminded that UNC was not playing passively to avoid foul trouble. They were ranked 8th in the country for blocks per game and they were ranked 3rd in the nation for offensive rebounds per game. The author asked how they could be in the top 8 in two categories which show aggression, but never commit fouls?

I see that someone responded to that article saying that when you are bigger, and more talented; you don't have to foul. There is plenty of truth to that. Zeller earned his trips to the charity stripe against MD this year. MD could not handle his size and strength. Obviously UNC has never been short on talent, so maybe that logic alone has been the reason why 'historically, UNC does not foul much.'


Getting past point-less foul talk discussion, I think Maryland fans over the past 15-20 years have complained more about scheduling which they feel has hurt the Terps, if not directly favored the North Carolina schools.
Whether that has merit or not (my feeling has been it has not), that feeling does exist. Roughly 18 months ago when there were regular rumors of the Big Ten having interest in Maryland, there were many Maryland fans that wanted to make that jump, just to get away from the bias they perceived. The comments those Terps fans were making then, sounded very similar to the comments I was reading from the fan-bases of FSU, and Clemson this past week. The Universities themselves will only jump conferences if it makes long-term financial sense, but is it not noteworthy that multiple fan-bases within the conference have stated they 'feel' a bias?

[BSLChrisStoner]

College Sports Info: Should Boise St. Stay (in MWC) or Go (to Big East)?
http://collegesports...go-to-big-east/

NBC Sports / CFT: Derrick Brooks: Big 12 reached out to 'us' (FSU)
http://collegefootba...-to-us/related/

[Nuclear Dish]

I'm not at all suggesting that elite programs deserve to get more calls. I'm simply stating that the reality is that those programs get the benefit of the doubt on such calls, especially at home. The fact is that most home teams get the benefit of officiating on their behalf, and it's especially true at name programs.

But to think that they win games because of this perceived bias is wrong. These programs win year-in and year-out because they get the best recruits, they have the best coaches, and they have the biggest budgets for facilities, travel, etc., which then feeds the recruiting. It's a cycle that is hard to break, and it has nothing to do with the officiating.

I don't believe Maryland fans are the only ones who whine about unfair officiating, but to use NC State fans as your proof is a poor choice, as they are notorious for their whining about such things (it's an inferiority complex from being the #3 program in their own state). When Corchiani and Gugliotta got ejected from the stands this year, it was amazing to hear how many State fans somehow managed to blame Carolina as the culprit behind it, as if Carolina not only benefits from good calls, but even controls them from afar!

The incredible thing about all of this is that FSU and Clemson are supposed to be the football powers of the conference, and they are whining about the perception of N. Carolina bias in basketball? If they would just dominate the league in football the way UNC and dook have in basketball, wouldn't this be a moot point? I mean, the league championship in football has mostly been in Atlanta, not in Greensboro, and I haven't heard anyone complaining that dook or Carolina is benefiting from an abundance of pass interference calls.

Now, what is this scheduling benefit that you guys keep referring to? Schools make their own schedule as far as out-of-conference opponents. The league schedule is fairly simple, other than the decision whether to play on Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday and Saturday/Sunday. Home and away is done by a formula. UNC has dook as a primary partner and plays them twice every year. We play the best teams in the ACC-Big 10 Challenge every year too. The tournament times are set by seed, not by marquis matchup. What benefit are we getting exactly?

Are you referring to TV time? Well, duh, that ESPN wants to put UNC and dook on more than the other schools.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Now, what is this scheduling benefit that you guys keep referring to? Schools make their own schedule as far as out-of-conference opponents. The league schedule is fairly simple, other than the decision whether to play on Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday and Saturday/Sunday. Home and away is done by a formula. UNC has dook as a primary partner and plays them twice every year. We play the best teams in the ACC-Big 10 Challenge every year too. The tournament times are set by seed, not by marquis matchup. What benefit are we getting exactly?

Are you referring to TV time? Well, duh, that ESPN wants to put UNC and dook on more than the other schools.

Not referring to TV time, and obviously not referring to the scheduling of out-of-conference opponents.
To generalize with hyperbole, there is a feeling that at-times MD will be asked to play at BC on a Sunday, and travel to Miami on short-rest on a Tuesday. While thinking that if UNC had to travel to BC on the Tuesday, they are likely to be home on on a Sunday.

As I said, this is not something I think has merit.

[Nuclear Dish]

In one post today, you suggest Lawrie was right for his outrage that the umpire missed the multiple strikes called against him. In this post, you suggest that because UNC has long been an elite program, they are entitled to get more calls? I don't see how those views match-up.

Also, I don't see the parallel with Lawrie. If Carolina and dook are getting calls with the game on the line in the final seconds because they are Carolina and dook, I agree that other teams' fans have a right to outrage.

But really? How often has that happened? I can't think of a single instance. In most cases, in basketball, the refs let the teams play in the final seconds.

Also, Lawrie was at home, so if these were comparable, I would have expected Lawrie to benefit from the calls, not suffer.

Lawrie was absolutely entitled to his feelings that he got screwed because he did, in a crucial moment of a tight game, at home, TWICE. Show me a single instance of Maryland getting screwed by poor calls multiple times in crucial moments of a single tight game against UNC or dook, and I'll admit that you are entitled to your outrage OVER THAT ONE GAME.

I certainly don't think Lawrie would have a right to whine about the officiating for the Rays in general, or against the Jays in general, or against him personally for as long as he's been in the league. There's no proof of that, just as there is no proof of such an enduring bias against Maryland.

I admit there might be some favor shown to UNC and dook when they are at home, but not at crunch time, and not enough to warrant such ridiculous whining as many Maryland and State fans are apt to do.

[Nuclear Dish]

Oh, and one other thing... to tie this into the O's as well:

One guy who I think DID have a legit complaint that the umps were out to get him was David Segui.

I was with the O's when he came up, and the word got around the clubhouse very quickly that the umps thought he was cocky and they didn't like his reputation for having an especially discerning eye. Apparently, they had made disparaging comments about him in passing to opposing catchers, and it got back to the O's clubhouse.

He was often in the video room checking out various angles to see why they would have called him out on strikes. I should go back and see how many times he got called out on strikes in his first season or two. It would be interesting if the numbers backed up the perception/rumor in the clubhouse.

[Nuclear Dish]

Not referring to TV time, and obviously not referring to the scheduling of out-of-conference opponents.
To generalize with hyperbole, there is a feeling that at-times MD will be asked to play at BC on a Sunday, and travel to Miami on short-rest on a Tuesday. While thinking that if UNC had to travel to BC on the Tuesday, they are likely to be home on on a Sunday.

As I said, this is not something I think has merit.

Oh, you mean sort of like this:

2/16/2010
9:00 PM
Raycom UNC @ Georgia Tech L 51-68
2/20/2010
12:00 PM
CBS UNC @ Boston College L 67-71

Or is that too much time in between?

1/28/2009
9:00 PM
Raycom UNC @ Florida State W 80-77 Ty Lawson hits game-winning three-pointer as time expires
1/31/2009
3:30 PM
ABC UNC @ N.C. State W 93-76

Less time in between, but now it's as good as a home game because they can sleep at home in between? Now you'd be complaining that there are too many teams a bus-ride away.

2/25/2007 UNC @ Maryland L 87-89
3/1/2007 UNC @ Georgia Tech L 77-84

Again, 4 days in between!

1/19/2006 UNC @ Virginia L 68-72
1/22/2006 UNC @ Florida State W 81-80

Aha, now there's one with only 3 days.

2/23/2000 UNC @ Florida State W 70-67
2/26/2000 UNC @ Maryland L 73-81

Another one with only 3 days.

Should I go on?

Thank you, Chris, for recognizing that the idea is a poor one, and that it's just another excuse that people (and now the schools themselves) use to justify a move that wouldn't be popular if the publicly-stated reasons were entirely financial.