Football vs. basketball aren't the two choices, and even someone who is unexplainably nostalgic for the AAC, like you, should know that.
You talk a lot of smack for someone that complains nonstop about leaving the AAC. That conference affiliation was almost catastrophic for UConn athletics, and we would be in a power conference today if the school hadn't done something so catastrophically stupid because they thought it would help football. You do accidentally stumble onto a point though. UConn to the Big East was not just about basketball. It was in part about attempting to save the football program and getting it away from that southern cesspool of a conference that was the AAC. Anyone still complaining about the move from the AAC to Big East should stop following sports and take up another hobby.
Arizona to the Big 12 was mostly about basketball. The Big 12 didn't need both Arizona schools. The Big 12 taking Houston and Cincinnati were about markets first, but basketball was driving any fan interest that Houston had developed and the Big 12 already had a big presence in Texas. Syracuse to the ACC was mostly about hoops since everyone could tell that Syracuse's days of being relevant in football were a distant, distant memory.
Rutgers and Maryland to the Big 10 was entirely about markets. UCLA is about basketball, since the Big 10 doesn't need two LA schools for cable boxes, or whatever their rationale was for adding both.