Pittsburgh and Syracuse to the ACC?

CBS Sports and ESPN are saying they’ve applied for entry!

I guess that’s a quick way to solve the basketball strength of the conference. I think this is fantastic. Sound off in the comments, and don’t forget to make your picks with the Triangle Prophets below.

This entry was posted in Miscellaneous and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Pittsburgh and Syracuse to the ACC?

Register |

  1. marshallplumpleesavesduke says:

    I like it. Syracuse and Pitt are solid teams, and make more geographic sense as any of the other conference moves. They both seem like good fits.

    That ESPN article said 10 schools approached the ACC; it’d be interesting to know which ones those are. The conference has been really quiet with all this realignment business, but it looks like they’ve got the ACC in a pretty good position.

  2. Nate says:

    Hmmm. Depending on how this shakes out, I might pen you a midweek column on the ramnifications. In short, this would be interesting for basketball, but really no sense football-wise beyond preserving the existence of the least-good auto-qualifying conference. Aside from that one year, Pitt sucks, and Syracuse is basically terrible all the time.

    But it would make basketball season WAY cooler!

  3. Justin says:

    The speculation is that this means that the rumors of Texas to the ACC is more true than not since Texas was trying to recruit both schools to the Big 12. Now all of the sudden they apply to the ACC? I think Texas is playing ringleader again.

    So if the ACC adds Texas, Pitt, and Syracuse, that’s 15 teams. Who would be the team to make us a 16-team superconference?

    I would vote for TCU. They just moved to the Big East and all of the sudden it’s crumbling. They’d want to bail quickly. Plus, it would give Texas a sister school in their state and it would up the football cred of the conference.

    I hope this happens. We would be in for some incredible college basketball seasons.

    1. Shane says:

      Justin, I could be wrong, but I really doubt Texas would come to a conference like the ACC. The football just isn’t good enough. I think the ACC just wants two schools to replace FSU and Virginia Tech, who look like they’re gone after this year.

      1. Brian says:

        No way they would have agreed to increase the buyout to leave the ACC to $20 million if they had any intention of leaving. Virginia Tech is stuck because the legislature will not allow them to leave after they snuck in last time. FSU wouldn’t leave because the “weak” ACC is still their best bet for a football championship, and their basketball is actually improving to the point of year-to-year respectability and NCAA tournment bids.

      2. Justin says:

        I don’t see many other options for Texas. They don’t want to be a follower, so the B1G, SEC and the Pac-12 are out because other Big 12 teams already left for those conferences. They aren’t going to the Big East because it’s crumbling.

        They could try to save the Big 12 again, but that seems futile. So either go independent or join the ACC. Maybe they do both and only join the ACC for basketball. I don’t know. Anything could happen as we’ve seen thus far in this conference realignment game.

        1. Forrest says:

          I highly doubt this. My money is still on Texas, Oklahoma, TTU, and and OSU moving as a unit wherever they go, and the PAC just seems most likely. There is no way any of those four teams will touch the ACC. It doesn’t make sense from a geographical OR a skill level standpoint.

      3. Nate says:

        Shane, absolutely no way VT or FSU or both leave. The ACC just upped the buyout unanimously to $20 million, so no way. More likely is that the ACC is making a play to be one of the Big Four superconferences when it shakes out. It was always going to be Pac-12, SEC, and Big 10, with the fourth conference being either the Big East or the ACC. ACC seems to be making a play for it.

  4. Brian says:

    I’m not convinced this is the best move for the ACC to say yes to. Doesn’t help the football money significantly, and while it certainly helps basketball, as Swofford himself said, 14 or 16 teams creates major scheduling conflicts and damages traditions/rivalries if not done right.

    I’d also love to see that list of 10 schools and see how many are more like East Carolina than are like Pitt or Cuse.

    1. Brian says:

      From the CBSSports article:

      “Our preference is to remain at 12 [schools], we like 12 as the number. We’re not crazy about 14 or 16 [schools] because it begins to change a number of things tangibly such as scheduling and intangibly such as culture.

      “But we want to remain nimble enough so if we want to look in that direction we’ll be ready to do that in very short order. Twelve [teams] works. It’s not to say 14 or 16 can’t work, it can. I don’t think [16 team conferences] is inevitable, it’s possible.”

  5. WVUHoops'08 says:

    Living about 2 1/2 hours from Syracuse and being a WVU grad, I am not in favor of this for selfish reasons. If SU and Pitt leave, I won’t be able to watch the WVU @ SU football game every other year. WVU plays @SU every once in a while in basketball depending on the rotation. At least I can still catch a WVU football game @ U Conn.

    Big East football is pretty weak, but in basketball strong. Would the ACC hoops schedule provide a better strength of schedule for SU and Pitt to get seeded in the NCAA tourney? I don’t think so.

    Go ‘Eeers!

  6. TarHeelAlex says:

    I am not a fan of the move. Of course, as a football guy I look at the non-basketball angles as well. To me Syracuse doesn’t work. The less BC’s we have the better. And Syracuse is another BC (with amazing basketball). I just don’t see the value of Syracuse. Private school. Doesn’t travel. Bad football. No added TV revenue outside basketball. Another cold, Northern school. Pitt is a stronger fit. Elite public school, care about football while still having great basketball. I’d really rather add West Virginia despite the academic rankings. And I’d LOVE Texas in the ACC.
    Also, I’m hoping for ECU to the Big East.

    1. WVUHoops'08 says:

      Not sure what you mean by WVU’s Academic Ranking – check out this article.

      Where can one find a current list of academic rankings?

      1. TarHeelAlex says:

        As awful as they are, I was talking about USNWR rankings, which of course also is pretty indicative of perception. WVU is #164. NC St and FSU are both tied for #101, I think they are the lowest. But most ACC schools are 25-50. Pitt & Syracuse are in the 50s and 60s. The knock on WVU routinely is its lack of academic as an institution prestige. I reject that notion for adding them to the conference, but a LOT of people take said rankings seriously when looking at “fit”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *