UConn is NEVER getting invited to the ACC

[nelsonmuntz]

I agree with the others. How can you say never, when we were evidently the 2nd choice after Syracuse even this summer? BC has probably just destroyed any influence it may have had with Flipper's idiotic interview, which made the ACC look bad. Do you think the rest of the conference will accommodate him if the SEC poaches a team? No way. They would probably insist that UConn be added to show that neither BC nor ESPN is driving the decision. Those articles convinced me even more that we are next in line.

You don't build an entire long-term strategy for an athletic program and university around a convoluted "if a happens then b happens then maybe c happens, which is good for us" corner-case scenario.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Waylon says UMass should be on the list, and left out Boise State. That's our best option?

We should have went after Baylor, ISU, and the Kansas schools when he had the chance and the Big 12 was faltering.

Now we need to act in a position of strength and go after BYU, Boise, UCF and Navy first and foremost.

Temple, ECU, Houston, SMU, they can wait. We need schools the computers like and those schools fit the bill.

I don't think BYU and Boise are available. I made that clear about Boise in my post, so you are deliberately misrepresenting what I said. BYU is a real longshot. I don't see a scenario in which that happens, so why bother?

 

[Skiblets]

Is this NEVER as solid as your proclamation that Texas A&M would NEVER get into the SEC?

This.

 

[tzznandrew]

Waylon says UMass should be on the list, and left out Boise State. That's our best option?

We should have went after Baylor, ISU, and the Kansas schools when he had the chance and the Big 12 was faltering.

Now we need to act in a position of strength and go after BYU, Boise, UCF and Navy first and foremost.

Temple, ECU, Houston, SMU, they can wait. We need schools the computers like and those schools fit the bill.

No. Waylon was right in his suggestion that, at this point, we need to do our best to pretty up the Big East's corpse. Unless there is an invite coming that we don't know (unlikely, but perfectly possible), then we need to convince other schools (like Navy) that the conference is stable.

If you look at my list, I'm not suggesting UMass. That's stupid. As is Nova. Temple less so, but sort of. My suggestion is to offer BYU and Boise. They will likely reject, but might as well. UCF and Navy are on my definite lists.

 

[BlueMAB]

I don't think BYU and Boise are available. I made that clear about Boise in my post, so you are deliberately misrepresenting what I said. BYU is a real longshot. I don't see a scenario in which that happens, so why bother?

Boise's coach thinks they are available, but you probably know more than he does.

You didn't see Texas A&M in the SEC, they shouldn't have bothered either.

If we're serious about Air Force, why wouldn't we be serious about Boise and BYU. Better football, and closer games to ease their travel. BYU is a longshot, but UMass, that's the key, right?

 

[06029]

I agree with the others. How can you say never, when we were evidently the 2nd choice after Syracuse even this summer? BC has probably just destroyed any influence it may have had with Flipper's idiotic interview, which made the ACC look bad. Do you think the rest of the conference will accommodate him if the SEC poaches a team? No way. They would probably insist that UConn be added to show that neither BC nor ESPN is driving the decision. Those articles convinced me even more that we are next in line.

This narrative that Uconn was choice #2 has no basis in any of the published reports with actual, bonafide quotes. The Globe article says that Big 12 approach Pitt made the ACC approach Pitt as #1. Cuse as #2 was pretty much a no-brainer since they were part of the first invite in 2004. Were Uconn and RU discussed? Probably but I do not see any evidence that Uconn was the default #2 by the ACC only to be stopped by BC.

One of these theories is false, pick one -
BC will never have any influence in the ACC.
BC has enough influence in the ACC to block Uconn.

I choose the first one because a single school could not derail a clear cut #2. Which leads me to believe that Uconn was not the clear cut #2. Maybe Uconn was behind Cuse/even with Pitt when the ACC discussions started, but the Pitt to Big 12 scenario moved them up the depth chart and Uconn down. That makes a lot more sense to me. Which also explains why the talk of Uconn as the school in an additional 2 team expansion by the ACC keeps popping up.

 

[Pudge]

I despise DeFillippo. (and we all need to have that signature)

Things change. If we have a great transition from Calhoun to Ollie ... and we continue to be a Power, we will be attractive. Our fanbase can climb. A number of the BCS "In" crowd won't. And EXCLUSION is a very tough position to maintain, methinks. Eventually, we can think about being so attractive that we can be the regional franchise to take.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Boise's coach thinks they are available, but you probably know more than he does.

You didn't see Texas A&M in the SEC, they shouldn't have bothered either.

If we're serious about Air Force, why wouldn't we be serious about Boise and BYU. Better football, and closer games to ease their travel. BYU is a longshot, but UMass, that's the key, right?

Please provide links where you have correctly predicted every conference expansion move. I will take your word for it on Texas A&M because I certainly do not care enough about this discussion to look that up, although given your propensity for lying about other people's positions, who the hell knows?

Your position seems to be that we should chase every longshot out there. Beg harder with the ACC, and while we are at it, go after the B1G too. Hell, call the SEC too. Of course, what thinking people recognize and you do not is that these are not free options. But that concept would take too long to explain and I can't use crayons and construction paper on a message board so I can't put it in terms you would understand.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I despise DeFillippo. (and we all need to have that signature)

Things change. If we have a great transition from Calhoun to Ollie ... and we continue to be a Power, we will be attractive. Our fanbase can climb. A number of the BCS "In" crowd won't. And EXCLUSION is a very tough position to maintain, methinks. Eventually, we can think about being so attractive that we can be the regional franchise to take.

Things don't change though. All the UConn principals from 2003 are gone, and there is still a solid anti-UConn block within the ACC. There is nothing we can do about it.

 

[upstater]

This narrative that Uconn was choice #2 has no basis in any of the published reports with actual, bonafide quotes. The Globe article says that Big 12 approach Pitt made the ACC approach Pitt as #1. Cuse as #2 was pretty much a no-brainer since they were part of the first invite in 2004. Were Uconn and RU discussed? Probably but I do not see any evidence that Uconn was the default #2 by the ACC only to be stopped by BC.

One of these theories is false, pick one -
BC will never have any influence in the ACC.
BC has enough influence in the ACC to block Uconn.

I choose the first one because a single school could not derail a clear cut #2. Which leads me to believe that Uconn was not the clear cut #2. Maybe Uconn was behind Cuse/even with Pitt when the ACC discussions started, but the Pitt to Big 12 scenario moved them up the depth chart and Uconn down. That makes a lot more sense to me. Which also explains why the talk of Uconn as the school in an additional 2 team expansion by the ACC keeps popping up.

The quotes come directly from BC's AD. I can't figure out how you came up with the statement that there are no quotes when there are.

As for whether a single school could derail another school, you're assuming you know how the 4-4-4 committee operated. You're assuming there was a 75% threshold. In most academic committees that I've been a part of, we do not make final decisions. We make recommendations based on the consensus of the committee. That recommendation is then forwarded onto the membership at large. In this case, the two names that popped out of committee were Pitt and Cuse (for whatever reason). They were then voted on by the membership, and finally that vote was higher than the 75% threshold.

 

[upstater]

I despise DeFillippo. (and we all need to have that signature)

Things change. If we have a great transition from Calhoun to Ollie ... and we continue to be a Power, we will be attractive. Our fanbase can climb. A number of the BCS "In" crowd won't. And EXCLUSION is a very tough position to maintain, methinks. Eventually, we can think about being so attractive that we can be the regional franchise to take.

Exclusion can only happen when each conference goes to 16 members.
Pretty hard to imagine the conferences at 16 without a seat for UConn.

 

[BlueMAB]

Please provide links where you have correctly predicted every conference expansion move. I will take your word for it on Texas A&M because I certainly do not care enough about this discussion to look that up, although given your propensity for lying about other people's positions, who the hell knows?

Your position seems to be that we should chase every longshot out there. Beg harder with the ACC, and while we are at it, go after the B1G too. Hell, call the SEC too. Of course, what thinking people recognize and you do not is that these are not free options. But that concept would take too long to explain and I can't use crayons and construction paper on a message board so I can't put it in terms you would understand.

I don't have the ego to claim I am able to accurately predict conference expansion moves. I'm smart enough to know that I don't have enough information. But your ego is big enough for you to ignore the fact you also don't have enough info.

The irony is you are often wrong, always condescending and disrespectful, intensely obtuse, and consistently duplicitous.

And when you are proven wrong then the person is either ignored, or ignorant. In this most recent case, you did both. You ignored my point, instead of refuting it. And called me stupid. Typical. If the facts aren't on your side, resort to ridicule. The irony is, even where I have agreed with some of your choices, you still feel the need to stroke your ego by ridiculing me and others. I pity you.

 

[mattp]

How about one of us has a kid, teaches him how to play basketball, he goes to BCU and plays hoops.

We then take up a collection and pay him to lose on purpose, BCU gets booted from the ACC and then we're in.

Who's with me?

who needs a kid? i still have eligibility remaining!! do you think BC needs a 5'10" overweight forward with bad feet and worse ball handling skills? i can shoot 60% from the line.

 

[epperson]

Things don't change though. All the UConn principals from 2003 are gone, and there is still a solid anti-UConn block within the ACC. There is nothing we can do about it.

I don't think the past law suits helped UConn but it's not a major factor in the decision-making process.

Money. It's about the money. Football rakes in the most money. The ACC wants to compete against SEC hegemony but it doesn't want to make too many compromises to achieve its objective.

Ideally (pipe dream) the ACC would love to add ND and Penn State.

UConn and Rutgers obviously don't have the same appeal.

 

[Waquoit]

It's over, Johnny. IT'S OVER!!

 

[Pudge]

Things don't change though. All the UConn principals from 2003 are gone, and there is still a solid anti-UConn block within the ACC. There is nothing we can do about it.

Yeah ... if we weren't regularly winning National Championships with a hard-ass coach & Geno; if we merely decent like Pitt; we might be more attractive. I am tired of hearing Syracuse fans (who are reflected by Kentucky & North Carolina ... and now the Boston Globe editorial page) talk about UConn's rise. It's pure jealousy ... and pure hypocritical mumbo-jumbo to ignore their own Gambling infamy & FedEx packages of dollar bills.

What a crock.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Things don't change though. All the UConn principals from 2003 are gone, and there is still a solid anti-UConn block within the ACC. There is nothing we can do about it.

From what facts do you draw this conclusion? Solid block? Duke and UNC have come out in favor, and they have more pull than any other two schools in conference. I have no doubt that Syracuse and Pitt would favor adding UConn. We've long had connections with UVA through Austin and others. BC seems to be the only school opposing us, and it seems to be DeFillippo personally, probably doesn't even extend to Fr. Leahy. After the recent bad press, I'd be surprised if DeFillippo is the BC AD at this time next year.

 

[epperson]

Your position seems to be that we should chase every longshot out there. Beg harder with the ACC, and while we are at it, go after the B1G too. Hell, call the SEC too. Of course, what thinking people recognize and you do not is that these are not free options. But that concept would take too long to explain and I can't use crayons and construction paper on a message board so I can't put it in terms you would understand.

At this point, UConn's options are severely limited. You can beg like Third World prostitutes or use any legal means necessary through your State-elected popinjay Blumenthal to coerce public scrutiny.

Begging hasn't worked so its time to give ND the ultimatum, expand and actually win meaningful, high-profile games against signature Football programs.

If the BE is stripped of its BCS status, refer to your smarmy State-elected popinjay.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I don't have the ego to claim I am able to accurately predict conference expansion moves. I'm smart enough to know that I don't have enough information. But your ego is big enough for you to ignore the fact you also don't have enough info.

The irony is you are often wrong, always condescending and disrespectful, intensely obtuse, and consistently duplicitous.

And when you are proven wrong then the person is either ignored, or ignorant. In this most recent case, you did both. You ignored my point, instead of refuting it. And called me stupid. Typical. If the facts aren't on your side, resort to ridicule. The irony is, even where I have agreed with some of your choices, you still feel the need to stroke your ego by ridiculing me and others. I pity you.

I make predictions and put myself out there. Usually I am right, sometimes I am wrong. Sometimes I am just provoking discussion.

You don't make points, you just attack other posters. That is the main difference between the two of us on this board.

 

[BlueMAB]

At this point, UConn's options are severely limited. You can beg like Third World prostitutes or use any legal means necessary through your State-elected popinjay Blumenthal to coerce public scrutiny.

Begging hasn't worked so its time to give ND the ultimatum, expand and actually win meaningful, high-profile games against signature Football programs.

If the BE is stripped of its BCS status, refer to your smarmy State-elected popinjay.

Thanks for your interest in UConn athletics.

 

[epperson]

The quotes come directly from BC's AD.

The "2nd Choice" claim wasn't in quotes in the article. Unless the writer was privy to internal 444 Committee documents or Minutes, let's adopt a wait and see attitude until its verified and confirmed.

Keep in mind, the Globe Writer has a history of conjectural arguments based on "sources" which contradicts court documents.

As for whether a single school could derail another school, you're assuming you know how the 4-4-4 committee operated. You're assuming there was a 75% threshold.

BC and 'Cuse were rejected initially in 2002-2003 because they failed to gain 75% approval.

 

[BlueMAB]

I make predictions and put myself out there. Usually I am right, sometimes I am wrong. Sometimes I am just provoking discussion.

You don't make points, you just attack other posters. That is the main difference between the two of us on this board.

Nonsense. I attack posters who intentionally misrepresent other's opinions so they can ridicule them. Basically, you.

You ignore the points I make unless you sense an opportunity to misrepresent them and ridicule me.

example: I have repeatedly stated why UMass is a bad idea. You ignored those responses and instead chose to call anyone who opposes UMass a hypocrite for behaving like BCU.

 

[epperson]

Thanks for your interest in UConn athletics.

I'm interested in your inside-track to the meaning of life.

 

[upstater]

The "2nd Choice" claim wasn't in quotes in the article. Unless the writer was privy to internal 444 Committee documents or Minutes, let's adopt a wait and see attitude until its verified and confirmed.

Keep in mind, the Globe Writer has a history of conjectural arguments based on "sources" which contradicts court documents.

BC and 'Cuse were rejected initially in 2002-2003 because they failed to gain 75% approval.

Yes, they were in quotes. "We blocked UConn." "Coach K. and Brodhead have limited influence."

UConn came up, BC blocked them. Duke's influence was blunted.

You can say this is all an exaggeration in Flipper's mind, but you can't say the quotes aren't there.

 

[Champions990411]

Facts are not in our favor.
40,000 seat off-campus stadium, poor showing in the stands and on the field in a BCS bowl.
Did not sell out our student section at the Final Four.
Football schools and BC blocking us in the ACC.
What am I missing?