Not like that for you, Biz? I'd have at least thought we had that effect on other folks in common, my friend. They never forget, do they?
I think UMass will be fine in its upgrade, and I think UMass' upgrading is a good thing for UConn because it builds for regional interest and is a much bigger threat to BCU than it is to UConn.
Seeing it just the opposite. BCU is in an established, stable, BCS conference. It also recruits a somewhat different student-athlete. And has more support than UMass does in the Boston market for what very little interest and support the Old Town has for college sports that are not hockey. UConn is in a less stable (nitroglycerin) conference and will most likely be competing with UMass in New England for a handful of players (look what happened to Syracuse, once UConn went 1-A and they no longer could cherry pick Connecticut alone. No more Tebucky Joneses for the Cuse. UConn would have been so much better off as a party of two not three in a small market.
if we're losing a lot of recruiting battles to UMass, their upgrading is the least of our problems. Temple to the Big East has more damaging recruiting repercussions IMO than UMass moving to the MAC
Temple??? Yeah, come play in front of 12K people in a stadium designed for an NFL team. A program with zero tradition, that was already kicked out of the conference once for failure to be relevant. Add in that Philly is a professional sports town and it's primary interest in college athletics is hoops and lacrosse. And located in a state where, at best, they are the third most prominent college football program (maybe fourth behind the Penn Quakers). Yeah, sign me up. Granted UMass faces some of these same obstacles. However, a look back in history will reveal that the last time UConn & UMass were on "equal terms" in football (the Colonial Conference and the old Yankee Conference), the Minutemen were "big brother" most years. So they are, IMO, definitely an annoyance at a minimun and a real threat at worse.
so you're more worried about a team moving from 1AA to MAC than a team moving from MAC to BE? comparing our Yankee/Colonial conference days has no bearing on today's reality. i guess you think Colgate will be big competition for us too? they were c0 national champions in 1916 and are nestled right in our recruiting territory.
Temple will be Temple 15 years from now. They have pretty much plateau at mediocre at best. The way things are going . . . UMass will be in the Big East before too long - and hence a real threat. There is an old saying - "When you've got 'em down, keep 'em down".
UMass isn't getting invited anywhere until they build up a fan base. They don't have it yet. 10 years, maybe.
luckily i have enough faith in our current recruiting that i don't think either of them should really hurt us too badly with local recruits. UMass never caught us in bball, and they won't catch us in football. hopefully the overall increase in football interest in the area will result in enough of a talent increase that while staying ahead of Temple and UMass we can also catch up to some national teams. New England will never produce the talent of Texas or Florida, but if we could become the east coast version of Wisconsin (we're already starting to have success with big home grown linemen) we could really be onto something
The conference situation has nothing to do with UMass. If UConn was in a stable conference, UMass is a bigger threat to BCU than it is to us. If UConn is not in a stable conference, UMass is far down the list of our problems.
Until UMass beats the snot out of UConn like Temple did in the BCS year, Temple is the far greater threat. Where do UConn fans get off badmouthing Temple?
You know Pop Warner coached at Temple? He won 4 national championships, 3 at Pittsburgh and 1 at Stanford. Temple was his last job and went out with a winning record at Temple.
Yale is loaded with tradition too (how many years since their last Heisman?). You want them in the Big East? Temple = irrelevance in college football.
TD, didn't you say UMass worried you more b/c when we were both 1AA they usually beat us? so does history matter or doesn't it? at least be consistent with your lunacy
Saying that Umass will be a problem for us is akin to saying Harvard will be a problem for us recruiting in basketball. The facilities, coaches, stadium and brand that UConn has is so far above what Umass has that there is no excuse for them out recruiting us. If that happens, we'll hire their coach.
Do I think that UMass is a threat now? We'll see in August. Longer term, yes they will be. History is not the be all, end all, but it bears watching. I'll bet that in 1997, Syracuse never worried one moment about UConn football . . . 15 years later how do they stack up. Problem with Temple is it's market. Philly is not a college sports market, it is a pro-sport first and foremost market. Name for me more than a handful of prominent BCS level college football programs that are in Big Cities such as Philly. Don't say BCU, because they are so low on the sports totem pole compare to Red Sox, Bruin, et al as to be irrelevant in Boston.
Their "leap" was nowhere near as great as ours. Temple is now a league peer and a recruiting competitor. Their past recruiting class was near to ours.
This is getting confusing, so I'll summarize . . . . 1.) Temple is already at D1 level so they don't necessarily have to "tool up". UMass does. Yes. 2.) In short term Temple is ahead of UMass. Again, got it. 3.) In long run though, Temple will always be Temple. UConn has a huge upside and up until this year's fiasco had appeared to have left Temple in the rear-view mirror (sort of like Buffalo and some other MAC teams). Apparently, there has been a hiccup and UConn has more work to do. 4.) This will eventually happen, IMO, because Temple is in Philly - not a hotbed for college environment. 5.) UMass has the same potential as UConn and, IMO, will eventually leave Temple behind and be more like UConn - hence the threat that they may actually become a treat to UConn (ala UConn to Syracuse).
i guess someone should advise USC to move from Los Angeles to Amherst if they ever want to succeed. your argument gets more ridiculous the longer this thread goes on. Columbus, OH and Austin TX are pretty big cities (both top15 in the country), i hope nobody wastes their time trying to put a college football team there either
So you didn't understand what was meant by "name more than a handful of programs"? OK, you got one, and don't forget UCLA while your LA. Seriously,dude? False start, 5 yard penalty, repeat down. Do you really think that I would have not qualified my described scenario to avoid the "never say never" checkmate, my friend, that knowing that you would be reading & most likely waiting in ambush. Come on,matt, not new here.
