If it's so ridiculous for the B1G to have its tourney in NYC, why isn't it equally ridiculous for the ACC?
You seem to think the ACC has an NYC presence. It doesn't. No one outside upstate New York gives a crap about Syracuse, no one gives a crap about Notre Dame bball period, and Duke and UNC have no more pull in the Big Apple than the Ohio States and Michigans of the world.
If establishing an NYC presence was the ultimate goal, the ACC screwed the pooch by not adding Rutgers and UConn when it had the chance. They're simply not breaking into that market as currently constructed.
It's not just about presence, as neither have a huge presence and NYC is definitely a pro sports city where I believe college sports will always struggle to be front and center. Due to the mass size, I think multiple conferences/teams will always share the city but no single conference/team will have a strong stranglehold on it. Even a small share of NYC can result in a large fanbase because of the shear numbers. This may just be my opinion, but it seems like we argue about 10 or so teams (Uconn, Rutgers, Duke, ND, PSU, UNC, UVA, OSU, Mich, St. Johns, etc) that all have a "strong" presence, at least in number of graduates. There is not going to be a massive change in demographics, so therefore I find it unlikely that any single conference (even with the addition of Uconn) will be able to lay claim to NYC as its turf. But, Uconn would help solidify NYC prensence for either conference by adding the largest piece of the pie remaining.
For the ACC, NYC is north of central ACC territory by a few hundred miles, but it is within its footprint. Also, many of the ACC teams have a history of playing in NYC for neutral site games and the former Big East tourny. Many ACC teams recruit NYC very heavily. I do not see the ACC choosing NYC as an every year event, but a rotation including NYC every 2 -4 years would be acceptable. The ACC should take adavantage of the other major cities within its footprint, including DC/Baltimore, Charlotte, Greensboro (tradition), Atlanta, and Miami.
For the B1G, NYC is east of its most eastern member and east of central B1G territory by more than a few hundred miles. In general, the B1G teams do not have the equal history of playing games in NYC that the ACC (including new Big East additions) does and do not recruit the NYC area as heavily as many ACC members. I think it would be just fine for the B1G to bring the conference tourny to NYC every 5 - 10 years. This would help keep the event special each time it is brought to NYC. But the B1G should use the resources within its footprint and play the games in Chicago and Indy, and then make occasional trips to NYC or maybe even Detroit, DC, OKC, etc.
If the B1G would like to get additional access to NYC, then stage a preseason tourny, east/west division challenge (similar to ACC/B1G challenge), or add an additional conference game at a neutral site for each member. If competitive advantage is a concern, then consider these games to be non conference and not count toward standings. This would allow the league schedule marquee games at a neutral site to showcase the league. Make a month of it, with 4 games being played in NYC (2 at MSG, 2 at Bar) and 3 games being played elsewhere (DC, OKC, Detroit, etc). The games could be played on saturdays to avoid travel headaches, and consider playing them prior to christmas as a kickoff to the conference season. This is something I have thought that every conference should consider but none have implimented to date. Just my rambling thoughts.
How does this impact Uconn? The Big East had as good of a presence in NYC as any conference will ever have. Uconn was a large part of it. If either the B1G or ACC are serious about having a stronger presence in NYC for TV dollars and recruiting, then the only logical next step is to add Uconn. Unless someone thinks that a combination of NYU, Princeton, St. Johns, and SUNY can fill the same void, but that's an idea that only the Big East would have dreamt of.