A case for football independence, Part II | Page 5 | The Boneyard

A case for football independence, Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wouldn't it be fun to have UConn's schedule built around when the Mets play?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Your underlying assumption is that independence is worse than the AAC for football. I think independence would be liberating for football to get UConn out of this goat rodeo of a conference, and would be more lucrative. I think SNY would pay UConn at least $1MM a year for 6-7 home games, and we could possibly even do better if we went to the Big East for hoops because Fox might pick up a game or two and help us schedule.

You make assertions about independence that were true 20 years ago, but are no longer valid. There will be 50-80 FBS schools looking for games because scheduling FCS schools is going to become much less common with the playoff system. The playoff system will also make 9 game conference schedules less appealing. It is going to be much easier to put together an independent schedule that it was 20 or even 10 years ago.

If you want to see basketball succeed, moving to the Big East or even taking a shot at a partial ACC membership is a no brainer. If you want to see football succeed, going independent is a no brainer. If you want to shake things up and see if UConn can smoke out a P5 invitation, doing something creative is a no brainer. If you want to see UConn die a slow death, staying in the AAC is a no brainer.
Expand ...

Yes, but most of those 50-80 schools will be looking for home games. They want the money from their home gates, concessions and such. I know Michigan came in last year, but they tried like Hell to get out of it. Our former AD set up the home and home to get a somewhat larger school in for The Michigan Stadium rededication game. It was done at the last minute and UConn came through. That won't happen very often again. What you propose (playing MAC, Sunbelt at home) will kill UConn football. After all the improvements made and money invested bringing UConn football up to D1, you really want to do that?

Why do you think the ACC will take you in as a partial member? Because they did with ND football? As good as UConn has been (and is) in basketball, it has neither the 80+ years tradition, nor the national brand of Notre Dame football. You may say the NYC market. What good would that do them right now? It wouldn't make them more money. The ACC contract goes through 2027, so they really won't gain anything. In fact, they may lose money in the deal. The Big East? Is that the same conference that just pushed you out? The very same that just brought in a whole bunch of smallish private schools very much unlike what UConn is and what it wants to be.
 
whaler11 said:
BYU's home schedule from Oct 1st on this year is:
Utah State, Nevada, UNLV and Savannah State.

They make a trip to Middle frigging Tennessee in November.

In 2013 they did get Georgia Tech and Boise State in October. From Oct 25th on - 1 home game. Idaho State.

Yeah that's something to aspire to. They have the advantage of having an ESPN deal.

UConn would be trying to schedule teams to come play on the road and your reward is SNY coverage.

This is what you want to aspire to?
Expand ...

It seems to me that Mr. Muntz is only interested in the health of the football team as far as it can benefit the basketball programs, disregarding that the football revenue also contributes to the health of UConn's other sports, that he does not seem to support. Although those other sports contribute to the health of the Institution as a whole...

I said it ad naseum back when the C7 split from the football schools. No school, that does not also sponsor FBS college football, has won an NCAA Basketball national championship since 1999 (UConn). Likewise, no school has won a national championship and at the same time been a member of a conference that does not sponsor an FBS football league. The last one was The Big East in 1985. While past performance does not guarantee future results, 16 and 30 years, respectively, can no longer be considered just a trend. It is getting closer and closer to a rule, especially considering the amount of money involved.

The Committee loves upsets in the first round. They may even enjoy a Cinderella getting through to the second week. When it comes to the Eight 8 however, the Committee wants nothing more than chalk. If chalk includes a mid-major, the hope is that they are playing a major name and lose. It's a good story but it doesn't sell T-shirts. Do you really think The Committee and the NCAA as a whole was jumping for joy when Stanford lost to Dayton? Not for a second.

I also don't believe it was a "mistake" that Wichita State was seeded in the toughest bracket. I absolutely believe that the Committee was rooting for St. Joes over UConn, only to be smacked down by Nova, who had no shot in NYC. I absolutely believe that the Committee over seeded UMass for the express reason to lose to either Tennessee or Iowa. That was quite possibly the easiest "upset" to pick in all the time I've been filling out a bracket (about 27 years). As far as the Committee goes now, the NCAA would like nothing more than 12 like minded Billy Packer types...and they almost got it right this year.
 
dayooper said:
Yes, but most of those 50-80 schools will be looking for home games. They want the money from their home gates, concessions and such. I know Michigan came in last year, but they tried like Hell to get out of it. Our former AD set up the home and home to get a somewhat larger school in for The Michigan Stadium rededication game. It was done at the last minute and UConn came through. That won't happen very often again. What you propose (playing MAC, Sunbelt at home) will kill UConn football. After all the improvements made and money invested bringing UConn football up to D1, you really want to do that?

Why do you think the ACC will take you in as a partial member? Because they did with ND football? As good as UConn has been (and is) in basketball, it has neither the 80+ years tradition, nor the national brand of Notre Dame football. You may say the NYC market. What good would that do them right now? It wouldn't make them more money. The ACC contract goes through 2027, so they really won't gain anything. In fact, they may lose money in the deal. The Big East? Is that the same conference that just pushed you out? The very same that just brought in a whole bunch of smallish private schools very much unlike what UConn is and what it wants to be.
Expand ...

Take my advice. Don't waste precious minutes of your life discussing this with him.

UConn accepting partial membership from the ACC is less likely than the ACC actually offering it.
 
ZooCougar said:
Dude, FOX can't force anyone to schedule us. FOX can't tell the BIg 12 and the PAC to rejigger their conference schedules to accomodate UConn so they can shoehorn us into the Big East. Not only that, UConn would still bolt to a P5 at first opportunity and that was the biggest reason they wanted nothing to do with us an Cincy.

The premise of going Indy in football to get into the Big East just doesn't hold any water. The scheduling alone would shut the possibility down, the fact that the Big East wants nothing to do with us kills it off completely.
Expand ...

Force??? I never said force. Pay is a different thing. They could pay those teams to schedule us and have our home/their road game on a fox network rather than those teams scheduling ESPN controlled and get those teams on ESPN networks. Look I get that it's long shot, and has many, many, many moving parts, but to speak in such absolutes that something WILL NEVER work is short sighted, when the plan according to most is to "win and hope" we get invited to a P5 conference. I hope to hell the UConn leaders aren't taking that approach are all exploring all options. The best option at the moment is to stay in the AAC. It is not the death knell Nelson predicts, but it is paying us chump change, and we will not be able to keep pace with our geographical rivals in terms of coaching salaries and facilities. And the notion that UConn gets money from sources other than TV money is short sighted as well cause guess what, so does everybody else.
 
noeynox said:
Force??? I never said force. Pay is a different thing. They could pay those teams to schedule us and have our home/their road game on a fox network rather than those teams scheduling ESPN controlled and get those teams on ESPN networks. Look I get that it's long shot, and has many, many, many moving parts, but to speak in such absolutes that something WILL NEVER work is short sighted, when the plan according to most is to "win and hope" we get invited to a P5 conference. I hope to hell the UConn leaders aren't taking that approach are all exploring all options. The best option at the moment is to stay in the AAC. It is not the death knell Nelson predicts, but it is paying us chump change, and we will not be able to keep pace with our geographical rivals in terms of coaching salaries and facilities. And the notion that UConn gets money from sources other than TV money is short sighted as well cause guess what, so does everybody else.
Expand ...

FOX will not pay anyone to schedule UConn in football. Maybe in 5 years time with multiple double digit win seasons. But even then no way.

They already overpaid for the Big East. I don't care what hoop school you add to the Big East. The net effect would be more lost money.
 
.-.
Drew said:
heres an article I read today that touches on UConn/Rutgers in the B1G and the FS1 TV deal for Creighton:

http://sports.omaha.com/2014/04/09/...sing-tv-ratings-rutgers-v-uconn/#.U0bK1oLXcgc
Expand ...
I never really understood the "recruiting ground" argument.

Hey New Jersey kid. Come to Rutgers and get pounded by 3 or 4 of the best teams in the country when the program couldn't hold its own vs. lesser competition.

Or

Hey Baltimore kid come out to East Lansing and play the best competition in America in front of your friends and relatives exactly twice over the next 4 years, if you play at all.

Air travel has made this land incredibly tiny. The Big Ten expanded the way it did for cable carriage fees and to get the Big Ten Network off the sports specific tier. They couldn't care less if anyone in Jersey or Washington watch.

I have no idea what the ACC's strategy was.
 
The ACC's objective in conference shifting in the past couple years, as far as I can tell, was to surpass the Big East as a basketball conference. They were successful.

Strategy? Tactics? Suspect.

They managed to pass what's still called the Big East in basketball, but they've fallen further behind the others in basketball, and created a new competitor in the AAC in basketball - that includes UCONN.
 
Husky25 said:
I never really understood the "recruiting ground" argument.

Hey New Jersey kid. Come to Rutgers and get pounded by 3 or 4 of the best teams in the country when the program couldn't hold its own vs. lesser competition.

Or

Hey Baltimore kid come out to East Lansing and play the best competition in America in front of your friends and relatives exactly twice over the next 4 years, if you play at all.

Air travel has made this land incredibly tiny. The Big Ten expanded the way it did for cable carriage fees and to get the Big Ten Network off the sports specific tier. They couldn't care less if anyone in Jersey or Washington watch.

I have no idea what the ACC's strategy was.
Expand ...

Michigan has benefitted already from UMD and Rutgers. Michigan has picked up several players from Virginia, one saying that The Big10 was in his back yard (UMD). I highly doubt Jabrill Peppers would have looked at UM if it weren't for the inclusion of Rutgers in the Big10. They just picked up a top CB from Virginia this year as well. Mid Atlantic players have been few and far between until the announcement of UMD and Rutgers to The Big10.
 
ZooCougar said:
Take my advice. Don't waste precious minutes of your life discussing this with him.

UConn accepting partial membership from the ACC is less likely than the ACC actually offering it.
Expand ...

The chance of UConn surviving on $2mm a year of TV revenue is less than the likelihood of you ever explaining a realistic path out of this death spiral.
 
.-.
dayooper said:
Michigan has benefitted already from UMD and Rutgers. Michigan has picked up several players from Virginia, one saying that The Big10 was in his back yard (UMD). I highly doubt Jabrill Peppers would have looked at UM if it weren't for the inclusion of Rutgers in the Big10. They just picked up a top CB from Virginia this year as well. Mid Atlantic players have been few and far between until the announcement of UMD and Rutgers to The Big10.
Expand ...

Seems somewhat anecdotal, but not entirely implausible I suppose. There is no true way of truly knowing, seeing as Michigan is the winningest program in NCAA history, is a national football brand, and is able to pull kids from all over the country with as little as a Brady Hoke phone call.

Still, it's a stupid premise, IMO, on which to base conference expansion.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The chance of UConn surviving on $2mm a year of TV revenue is less than the likelihood of you ever explaining a realistic path out of this death spiral.
Expand ...
Do you watch a lot of soaps, Housewives, Kardashians, etc?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The chance of UConn surviving on $2mm a year of TV revenue is less than the likelihood of you ever explaining a realistic path out of this death spiral.
Expand ...

Do you still not understand that we have other streams of money? Fallacy king.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The chance of UConn surviving on $2mm a year of TV revenue is less than the likelihood of you ever explaining a realistic path out of this death spiral.
Expand ...

Why do universities spend so much money on an investment (big time athletics) when most schools run from deficit? Why do universities participate in these athletic events (Big time basketball and football) that have so much liability involved with them? 50,000 - 120,000 people in an area that amounts to 2 city blocks is a huge risk. Why do they pursue these endeavors that usually fly in the face of the university mission (I know very few schools that have a mission statement that includes winning national championships). What is the purpose?
 
ZooCougar said:
Do you still not understand that we have other streams of money? Fallacy king.
Expand ...

It does seem like he is completely unaware of everything else.
 
ZooCougar said:
Do you still not understand that we have other streams of money? Fallacy king.
Expand ...

So we don't need any more money to stay competitive? Awesome!!!! We can stay in the AAC forever then.
 
.-.
ZooCougar said:
Do you still not understand that we have other streams of money? Fallacy king.
Expand ...
It's got to be done on purpose, right?

Notice that Mr. Muntz does not respond to any reasonable post from which he cannot create an opposing strawman?

Curious. Very curious.
 
Husky25 said:
Seems somewhat anecdotal, but not entirely implausible I suppose. There is no true way of truly knowing, seeing as Michigan is the winningest program in NCAA history, is a national football brand, and is able to pull kids from all over the country with as little as a Brady Hoke phone call.

Still, it's a stupid premise, IMO, on which to base conference expansion.
Expand ...

Could be. There some lower rated players and a couple that either never made it to campus or flamed out during the Rich Rod era. I think the biggest thing is branding. Seeing Michigan and the other Big10 schools talked about puts those schools in the mind of the players (just like the gen ed students).
 
Which bowls are we so desperate to get access to?

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/05/aac-announces-bowl-affiliations-for-2014-2019/

These are a bunch of minimum or near minimum payout bowls against mid-majors or the last eligible P5 teams, which will fairly often be replaced by at-large schools.

With 40 bowls, the chance of UConn not going to a bowl as an at-large is close to nil. The irony is, since UConn is in a southern mid-major conference, our conference mates will be more appealing as participants than UConn. Do you think the Florida bowls would pick UConn over the Florida schools?
 
Dude, UCONN won 9 games in 2003 as an Independent and did NOT go to a bowl game. Here was their schedule (MUCH better than what we would get today):

Indiana (Aug. 30)
Army (Sept. 6)
Boston College (Sept. 13)
Buffalo (Sept. 20)
Virginia Tech (Sept. 27)
Lehigh (Oct. 4)
North Carolina State (Oct. 11)
Kent State (Oct. 18)
Akron (Oct. 25)
Western Michigan (Nov. 1)
Rutgers (Nov. 8)
Wake Forest (Nov. 15)

You have BC and VT on the schedule because of old Big East obligations. Most ACC teams won't be able to fit UCONN on their schedule as OOC. UCONN could win 10 games as an Independent and not go to a bowl game and, therefore, remain irrelevant.

Why do we have to keep discussing this?
 
Husky25 said:
Seems somewhat anecdotal, but not entirely implausible I suppose. There is no true way of truly knowing, seeing as Michigan is the winningest program in NCAA history, is a national football brand, and is able to pull kids from all over the country with as little as a Brady Hoke phone call.

Still, it's a stupid premise, IMO, on which to base conference expansion.
Expand ...


Recruiting for major programs is now extra regional....of FSU's 11 projected defensive starters, 9 are from outside of Florida. The #2 QB is from New Jersey as is a starting O lineman and one of the tight ends.
 
.-.
billybud said:
Recruiting for major programs is now extra regional....of FSU's 11 projected defensive starters, 9 are from outside of Florida. The #2 QB is from New Jersey as is a starting O lineman and one of the tight ends.
Expand ...
How does that apply? FSU just won the national championship and have been prominent for 25 years. They are in the same position as Michigan.

How has playing in Chestnut Hill improved recruiting in Chapel Hill over the last decade?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
How many bowls were there in 2003? How many are there now?
Expand ...

Number of bowls has nothing to do with it. Which bowls would be willing to sign a contract with UConn for a guaranteed alliance?
 
it is just silly. You cannot make a reasonable case for football independence. Can't be done in the current environment. Reality is that even Notre Dame couldn't make a case for true football independence, and they are Notre Dame. They are now a sort of quasi-independent that will continue to pretend to be the same as the old Notre Dame. Except they have 5 guaranteed games every year instead of 8 like everyone else. And for much the same reason. They needed to lock down some games. Its also the reason Navy is willing to join the AAC after years of saying no to the Big East. The world has changed and independence is just not viable.

nelson, your earlier idea of playing football in the MAC while silly, made more sense than playing as an independent.
 
Husky25 said:
It's got to be done on purpose, right?

Notice that Mr. Muntz does not respond to any reasonable post from which he cannot create an opposing strawman?

Curious. Very curious.
Expand ...
Dude wants attention. He is bored.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,333
Messages
4,564,911
Members
10,464
Latest member
Rollskies27


Top Bottom