Army finally hired a good football coach who can evaluate high school talent and turn 2-star players into 3-star players and occasionally a 4-star player.

Football is the most important sport, and the ACC doesn't have Notre Dame as a full member, just 5 football games. The ACC was desperate when they added Notre Dame. Notre Dame is using the ACC. They were very aware of the ACC's desperation. Kudos to them for taking advantage. The ACC was afraid that FSU and Clemson were going to leave. Even Georgia Tech's membership wasn't stable (B1G had interest in them). After Notre Dame was invited, Maryland flees to the B1G a two months later. The ACC prides itself academically yet adds scandal-ridden Louisville with an academic reputation much worse than any SEC school. That was another desperate decision. The Big Ten's BTN was generating loads of cash while the ACC had to wait for the SEC to get their network (because ESPN knows that the SEC is the most watched football conference). Once the ACCN finally debuts, those who have Comcast (one of the nation's top cable services) have to wait over a year before they can get it. Comcast didn't treat the SEC like that.

The ACC continues to fall further behind the B1G and SEC. Like I said before, the ACC's problems stem from its membership. The ACC needs to have the same public-private ratio as the SEC and B1G and even the Pac-12. The ACC's best hope is that all of its members consistently field Top 25-40 football programs or at least become football-first universities, and we all know that that isn't going to happen. Half empty football stadiums at Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Duke, Wake and even Miami don't help the ACC's image. The ACC can't magically change its membership makeup. It is what it is. The B1G and SEC have the right model and have had the risk takers and innovators, not the ACC. The ACC has always been reactionary, not the trendsetter.

I've answered your questions. You have made it clear that you want the ACC to move its HQ's to DC but haven't gone into detail how being in DC will be any different than being in Greensboro or Charlotte or Lynchburg, except that all the decisions are being made on The Hill. Those who disagree with you are called "living in the past" or backwards thinkers or followers of John Swofford. Those of us who disagree just want details, not vague answers. IMHO, I don't think anyone who disagrees with your position is being disrespectful. No one has attacked your character. We just demand details. I'm just not sold on DC as conference HQ's. You have do give me and others more details to convince us. Like 2hhoop3 said, "You may be right that DC will be the next ACC HQ's." I feel the same way. If DC is the ACC's new home, I'll accept it with no problem. I'll feel the same way if the HQ's remains in Greensboro.
[Post edited by Old Line Hokie at 04/06/2022 7:15PM]