The decline of Miami, V Tech, & Louisville after leaving the Big East
- Thread starter gordel1
- Start date
This is capitalism at its best/worst
Best: Pool together to command a bigger payout
Worst: You are no longer a big fish competing for conference championships. This will erode your status overtime. Eventually, the biggest fish will eat your lunch (talent and resources).
Overtime, there will 2 or 3 BIG TIME programs in each of the Power 5 Conferences that will actually have a shot. The other 12/13 teams in the conference will be playing for fun.
Best: Pool together to command a bigger payout
Worst: You are no longer a big fish competing for conference championships. This will erode your status overtime. Eventually, the biggest fish will eat your lunch (talent and resources).
Overtime, there will 2 or 3 BIG TIME programs in each of the Power 5 Conferences that will actually have a shot. The other 12/13 teams in the conference will be playing for fun.
I agree. They won 9 games last year. This year they have 3 losses by a total of 13 points to "good" teams. They have FSU this weekend, but after that they have 6 very winnable games.
Haven't we been playing for fun for... well, forever? Isn't that kinda the point, that following your team is fun?
100+ teams "play for fun" each year by that standard... which is to say, the vast majority of them. So, most of NCAA football is "playing for fun" every week (and nearly everyone but a handful of teams by weeks 9-10. At the end of the day, conferences (and college football in general) are just relationships between differing fanbases. Even if neither team had a shot at a conference championship, each side still wants to win because it changes (or adds to) that relationship dynamic (for a time)... whether that's in the form of bragging rights, or whatever.
V Tech did rather well in their first few years of the ACC if I remember right. Maybe their downfall is due to Beamer getting kinda old.
It definitely is too soon to say Louisville is on the downward track...
It definitely is too soon to say Louisville is on the downward track...
You could take that a step further and say the revenue gap between conferences will have the acc at an even bigger disadvantage, including Fsu.
I think the decline in Miami is due to internal factors within the university as opposed to the conference they play in.
Va Tech has played in 5 of the 10 ACC championship games, the same number as Florida State & played in 4 BCS bowls. I'd take that kind of decline.
Couldn't you say the same thing about RU then? We were supposed to be the big fish in the BE/AAC once everyone else left. Now we're back in the bottom half.
Yeah, there hasn't really been enough time to weigh Lousiville. But if you go back to Boston College, it completely knocked them off the college football landscape. They make more money now, but they aren't anywhere near as relevant as they were in the old Big East. So it comes down to what matters most, I guess.
As an aside, the emergence of Rutgers as a viable option also helped undermine BC, as well as Syracuse and Pitt, but really, they disappeared the year they started ACC play.
To buy into your "big fish with the talent and resources" theory means I must have just been hallucinating for the last few years and it was really Oklahoma and Texas dominating the B12 not TCU and Baylor.
That's life in the "big time" . With the conference expansions and the overall competition week in and week out, consistently winning 9+ games a year is an extremely difficult thing. There are probably 12 - 15 colleges that have the resources and the ingrained culture to seriously compete at the highest level (for the the NC ) each year. That means 100+ schools (while saying the right things) are really trying to be in the upper half of these conferences and get to a major bowl game.
Agree with some of the comments.
However, I believe the key to establishing a successful program starts with picking the "Right" head coach and he in turn assembles a good coaching staff.
Once you have the right coach, then you have to retain him for the "long term" once he has turned your program around. Harder to do in this age of big $$$$.
If you were able to attract the "Right Long Term" head coach. At some point he needs to know when to leave.
Virginia Tech is a great example. (Good successful long term HC but now maybe should consider retiring).
Another good example is Steve Spurrier. Successful HC at Duke, Florida and South Carolina (he knows when to go).
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
However, I believe the key to establishing a successful program starts with picking the "Right" head coach and he in turn assembles a good coaching staff.
Once you have the right coach, then you have to retain him for the "long term" once he has turned your program around. Harder to do in this age of big $$$$.
If you were able to attract the "Right Long Term" head coach. At some point he needs to know when to leave.
Virginia Tech is a great example. (Good successful long term HC but now maybe should consider retiring).
Another good example is Steve Spurrier. Successful HC at Duke, Florida and South Carolina (he knows when to go).
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
College sports is not capitalism. You're thinking of free market, which is not quite the same. But it's not a free market either . It's a cartel and like all cartels filled with rent seeking, which is why the roster of teams at the top is so steady and stagnant. They've carved out a nice situation for themselves that keeps paying dividends year after year.
Sorry but disagree VT has won it division/ACC as soon as they stepped into the ACC first year 2004 they won ACC and also 2007, 2008, 2010. If they did not win the ACC they were Coastal Division champions many years as well.
VT has fallen just like S. Carolina, and PoSU did with OLD coaches who do not know when to QUIT
VT has fallen just like S. Carolina, and PoSU did with OLD coaches who do not know when to QUIT
I don't know... Utah and TCU seems to be doing ok. You can go from being a big fish in a small pond to being a big fish in a big lake. Rutgers was never a big fish, we were a sleeping giant.. who is still very sleepy but appears to finally have a chance to wake up.
Da U was cheating their butts off during their winning years. Once the School finally decided it didn't want to be known as Thug U, they have been on a decline. Also, they have still been in trouble since then anyway. Soo.. oh well.
V Tech was considered a top team in the ACC for awhile but they have been down the last few years, doesn't appear that it will change until their HC retires.
Louisville has always been hot and cold, they just are cold now. No reason to believe they will stay that way.
BC has been down for a very long time with no hope of returning due to their location and no longer playing in NJ every other year. Expect more "exciting" 3-0 final scores if they are lucky.
Pitt has had too many coach changes, since they fired Wannstedt for winning too many games and recruiting too good, they have been on a death spiral with endless coaches. Maybe their new HC will bring them back to being a decent team.
Cuse sucked in the Big East and they still suck now. Nothing has changed.
Da U was cheating their butts off during their winning years. Once the School finally decided it didn't want to be known as Thug U, they have been on a decline. Also, they have still been in trouble since then anyway. Soo.. oh well.
V Tech was considered a top team in the ACC for awhile but they have been down the last few years, doesn't appear that it will change until their HC retires.
Louisville has always been hot and cold, they just are cold now. No reason to believe they will stay that way.
BC has been down for a very long time with no hope of returning due to their location and no longer playing in NJ every other year. Expect more "exciting" 3-0 final scores if they are lucky.
Pitt has had too many coach changes, since they fired Wannstedt for winning too many games and recruiting too good, they have been on a death spiral with endless coaches. Maybe their new HC will bring them back to being a decent team.
Cuse sucked in the Big East and they still suck now. Nothing has changed.
The Tiger Woods mentality dominates the CFB landscape. Casual fans and the media want to see a select few teams succeed. Occasionally an upstart program emerges but the majority would rather see a Notre Dame, for example, rout Navy than root for an upset. Think Woods and Mediate in the US open. Almost all of my golfer friends then loved the result. Not so much now. The networks react by giving more airtime and cash to the big boys. This has been happening for decades.
Two factors can and will forge changes in these attitudes. Local enthusiasm for schools can spread and more equitable revenue sharing within conferences levels the playing field somewhat. It is important for us to repeat over and over and increase the atmosphere surrounding the MSU game. We need to hold our own in play until B1G money kicks in fully. We need to always be thinking about improving everything, stadium expansion and amenities included. Stand still and you will fall back. We may never in our lifetimes catch up to some traditional powers, but we can come pretty damn close.
Boise State has demonstrated that a no name institution can develop and maintain long term success. Our advantages over Boise are obvious. And look at Gonzaga in basketball. A little bit of luck and a hell of a lot of commitment can go a long way to move from Rocco Mediate status to Tiger Woods.
Two factors can and will forge changes in these attitudes. Local enthusiasm for schools can spread and more equitable revenue sharing within conferences levels the playing field somewhat. It is important for us to repeat over and over and increase the atmosphere surrounding the MSU game. We need to hold our own in play until B1G money kicks in fully. We need to always be thinking about improving everything, stadium expansion and amenities included. Stand still and you will fall back. We may never in our lifetimes catch up to some traditional powers, but we can come pretty damn close.
Boise State has demonstrated that a no name institution can develop and maintain long term success. Our advantages over Boise are obvious. And look at Gonzaga in basketball. A little bit of luck and a hell of a lot of commitment can go a long way to move from Rocco Mediate status to Tiger Woods.
Completely disagree that OBE teams degraded as they moved to the ACC. It's all cyclical. I remember in the late 2000s thinking how much sadder the ACC would've been had they not raided the BE. VT never got the national championship picture again, but they were top 2 in the ACC.
Miami and BC have BOTH taken a huge dive since joining the ACC......iswnt even debatable IMO
What is debatable is why.... Miami if it had the right leadership would compete in any conference in America. BC is a tough place to win.. pro town and no local recruits..Very difficult. louisville will be fine and VT will be okay if they replace Beamer with a good energetic coach. Pitt has a decent team and a good coaching staff for the first time since Gottfried was coach..late 80's... The question is how will RU do in the Big Ten? I say not very good unless they make a great HC hire in tandem with a supportive AD... PSU,UM, MSU,OSU will typically be better.. Best case scenario you are battling for fifth place in your division every year..
Exactly. You could make the case that Cincinnati hasn't been the same after leaving the Big East for the American Athletic Conference. They won 10 or more games in 5 of their last 6 seasons in the Big East while failing to win more than 9 in any season since joining the AAC.
Don't forget...BC was pretty respectable before making the move...isolation killed them...don't understand the ''U'' or VT.
Yeah, it is debatable. Miami no, but BC of course. Here is BC in the Big East and ACC:
Overall Record:
Big East: 94-71 0.571 (91-04)
ACC: 74-55 0.574 (05-14)
Conference Titles:
Big East: 1* (2004) *co-champ
ACC: 0 Division: 2 (07,08)
BCS Bowls:
Big East: 0
ACC: 0
All Bowls
Big East: 7-2
ACC: 3-5
Not really seeing much difference. Boston College has a better winning percentage in the ACC than the Big East. Only one conference co-champ in the Big East (where they didn't get the BCS bid) vs. two division titles in the ACC. Biggest difference is the bowl record. Explain to me how this constitutes a "huge dive."
Just for the record, here is the rundown of Virginia Tech
Overall Record:
Big East: 108-48-1 0.693
ACC: 106-41 0.721
Conference Titles:
Big East: 3 (95*, 96*, 99) *-co-champs
ACC: 4 (04, 07, 08, 10), Division: 5 ( 05, 07, 08, 10, 11)
BCS Bowls:
Big East: 3, 1 win
ACC: 5, 1 win
All Bowls:
Big East: 5-6
ACC: 5-6
Nobody can make an argument Virginia Tech has been worse in the ACC. They have a better winning percentage, by 28 points. They have more conference titles, plus 2 extra division titles to go along with it. The have been to 2 more BCS bowls, and have the same bowl record. The falloff for Virginia Tech has occurred in the last three years. The reason is obvious. Beamer is getting old.
The coach matters, as does geography and fit. VT did start well in the ACC. BC did, too, but they effectively tied a recruiting tourniquet around their won neck when they jumped leagues. Once those better players washed out of their program, they haven't been able to replace them with similar talent. At the same time, they've made a series of bad coaching hires (including the current one), and have subsequently floundered. Virginia Tech wasn't gerographically tied to the Big East; the ACC maybe a better fit. They just have a coach who is out of steam.
Pitt sits in a good recruiting area, and even if they are a somewhat odd geographic fit for the ACC, it's not outright bizarre, and just by staying strong in their own area, they will be OK. Probably never great, but OK. Syracuse ... man, I don't know what to say about that disaster. They were trending way down before the Big East broke up, and now they are a terrible geographic fit, with a football program that plays in a tent in the middle of nowhere, and has seen all its old recruiting grounds dry up - some by their own doing (disappearing in an out-of-area league), and some by the emergence of Rutgers, and even UConn and Temple to a degree. That place couldn't be colder right now, and I don't mean their winters (which also don't help).
Pitt sits in a good recruiting area, and even if they are a somewhat odd geographic fit for the ACC, it's not outright bizarre, and just by staying strong in their own area, they will be OK. Probably never great, but OK. Syracuse ... man, I don't know what to say about that disaster. They were trending way down before the Big East broke up, and now they are a terrible geographic fit, with a football program that plays in a tent in the middle of nowhere, and has seen all its old recruiting grounds dry up - some by their own doing (disappearing in an out-of-area league), and some by the emergence of Rutgers, and even UConn and Temple to a degree. That place couldn't be colder right now, and I don't mean their winters (which also don't help).
Topdecktiger, I'm assuming you're a Clemson fan and that you don't spend an overwhelming amount of time on this board. Here's the deal...we don't like facts and stats on this board. Don't come with factual evidence to back up a statement. BC (often known as Fredo in these parts) has been a bit on the downswing lately, so we'll pretend they've never had any success in the ACC, because that's how we like it. And around here, if we like it, it's better than fact.
Let's see, Boston College was in the Big East with: Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Miami, Virginia Tech. Now they are in the ACC with.......Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Miami, Virginia Tech. So you're really going to make the case that they are going to lose because they don't play Rutgers and West Virginia?
I also think it's laughable that you say Virginia Tech only "start(ed) well." Here is Virginia Tech's year by year results since joining the ACC:
10-3
11-2
10-3
11-3
10-4
10-3
11-3
11-3
7-6
8-5
7-6
They had 10 win seasons for 8 years after leaving the Big East. If you are claiming that Virginia Tech's recruiting was hurt by joining the ACC, that would have shown up a lot earlier than 8 years. Sorry, your theory doesn't fly. Now for comparison, let's look at Virginia Tech's last 11 years in the Big East (to mirror their time in the ACC):
9-3
8-4
10-2
10-2
7-5
9-3
11-1
11-1
8-4
10-4
8-5
Explain to me how their recruiting was so much better in the Big East, when they never strung together more than two 10-win seasons, yet they had 8 in a row in the ACC. If their recruiting was better in the Big East, they should have had 8 straight years of 10 wins in the Big East, not in the ACC. So yeah, the logical conclusion here is that your theory about geography has nothing to do with it, and the obvious answer is that Beamer is getting old.
Virginia Tech dominated the ACC for a number of years. Whatever has happened to Va Tech is not related to the old Big East days.
Miami dropped off the map.
Louisville's struggles, I think, are due more to having a young QB. I think their program is still in good shape.
Fredo initially improved in the ACC compared to the Big East, but wonder if that was mostly because of Matt Ryan.
Fruit U was a tackling dummy before and after the ACC move.
Pitt's move hasn't seemed to move their needle very much, though they are off to a good start this year.
Bottom line - I was never convinced the ACC was ever a better league than the BE or NBE. (Probably better than the AAC years.)
Miami dropped off the map.
Louisville's struggles, I think, are due more to having a young QB. I think their program is still in good shape.
Fredo initially improved in the ACC compared to the Big East, but wonder if that was mostly because of Matt Ryan.
Fruit U was a tackling dummy before and after the ACC move.
Pitt's move hasn't seemed to move their needle very much, though they are off to a good start this year.
Bottom line - I was never convinced the ACC was ever a better league than the BE or NBE. (Probably better than the AAC years.)
The acc is the place where football goes to die, or at least viewers unfortunate to have to watch their games.
