Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 44 of 44
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    The better the BEFC was, the better chance of ESPN and CBS monetarily increasing their TV contracts down the road?
    Except that VT's counterproposal may not have been for just football only, but all other sports too. The Big East did not have any grounds to re-negotiate its football TV contract since VT was already a football-only member and technically the conference was not adding a new member. All the renegotiations did was probably give VT a larger slice of the current (at the time) "football" pie.
    Last edited by VTHokie2000; Mon Jul 01 2013 at 01:21 PM.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    October 14, 2003
    Why would we NOT have made a push for the SEC if we would have been left out of the first and second wave of ACC expansion? As far as I'm concerned, if we didn't attempt to call the SEC the moment we got the MIA-SU-BC news in 2003, it was dereliction of duty. Now if the SEC turned us down, then fine. But I'd much have preferred the SEC to the process we followed to get in the ACC.
    Quote Originally Posted by Calamitous View Post
    Then the ACC expanded with Rutgers and Pitt to get to 14 and ND as the reserve #15. Who does the ACC target as #16 assuming UMd stayed? Would it be Louiville, UConn, Cincinnati, West Virginia or Virginia Tech? Academically, I think it would be UConn or Tech over the others. Of course, this all assumes the B1G sits on their hands and doesn't take Rutgers or any other Big East schools or Maryland from the ACC.

    Also, assume the ACC did everything above before considering Tech. Would the SEC have added Tech and aTm instead of Mizzou? I'm not sure Tech would have been a lock IMHO. The SEC has a habit of having schools come to them, not the other way around where they approach the schools. So for Tech to have been invited to the SEC, they would have had to make a strong push to join the SEC. aTm would have been the #1 choice for the SEC hands down. I have no clue if the SEC would have preferred Tech over Mizzou. I would like to think they would have taken Tech first based on geography and market, but who knows.

    This is why I'm glad we got in when we did... no matter how controversial it was at the time.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    December 01, 2002

    Someday Someone will Write the History of This

    Maroon, I remember the talk on this board 10 years ago and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but I think I started it. Before that I had never heard VT and SEC mentioned in the same breath.

    Then TennStud and a few other SEC fans started posting here and at the time Hokie fans seemed pretty flattered that some of us would want to welcome you.

    The VT to the SEC talk started on this board and spread like wildfire. I sent a message to and the board owner reposted it. He agreed with me that VT and Texas A&M should be in the SEC. After that the idea took on a life of its own until everyone was talking about it.

    I am not as hopeful as I once was, but have not despaired.

  4. #44
    reestuart's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    roanoke, va
    Quote Originally Posted by Victor Tango View Post
    One minor nitpick is that Mizzou wasn't taking Nebraska's spot in the Big Ten. Mizzou was dying for that spot, and the Big Ten passed them over for Nebraska.

    Otherwise, who knows? VT landed in a good spot, at least for the time being.
    "Knowledge is good"

    --Emil Faber, 1904

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts