Candid Coaches: Is it better for UConn to stay in the Big East or try to join the Big 12 or ACC?

[Tampahusky]

All true. But it also won't be the PAC10. It'll still be a viable conference, albeit having to take a haircut $-wise. Still, it's more than UConn is making. And if it comes to the point where P4 becomes P3, it's probably better to be inside the P4 than outside.

Personally I’m not worried how much we make a year as a school, let school board figure out finances. All I know it feels real good right now to be in the Big East and on top of the basketball world.

 

[CL82]

Personally I’m not worried how much we make a year as a school, let school board figure out finances. All I know it feels real good right now to be in the Big East and on top of the basketball world.

School board?

 

[GotNets?]

Let's have a list of coaches and how they voted, please. It's hard enough in this environment to believe someone who looks you in the eye with their name tag on. The bottom line remains - football dies if we stay in the BE. Further, there will be a distinct and growing shortage of funds to operate our athletic department. The BE is fine for all the other members. But staying put there for UConn hurts the entire athletic department, not just football. Sure the BIG would be the grand slam option. We would just have to convince the BIG that we won't screw it up like Rutgers has. This is unlikely, however.

Other than that, I think even if we end up in a depleted ACC, we would be better off. No doubt FSU and Clemson want out of the ACC.
Their boards show disdain for the ACC given that it will pay them about $30mm less than Vanderbilt gets this year. They have 7 votes to terminate the ACC's GOR and they only need one more. There is rank bitterness at FSU, Clemson and others over the performance of some of our former conference mates. FSU and Clemson see the SEC members getting nearly double the conference payout than the ACC pays. So the ACC will be much different soon enough IMO. A reconstituted ACC can have the best BB in the country as well as a lower tier of football, but still profitable. I do think the prestige league of 28 teams (see thread herein) is possible, but more likely I see 18-20 member SEC and BIG conferences. That leaves a lot of teams on the outside looking in. If we are good at one thing, it is being on the outside looking in...

Who is the most likely candidate to be the 8th vote to cancel the grant of rights in the ACC? And who are the current 7 for that matter?
FSU
Clemson
Miami
UNC
UVA
NC State
VA Tech

Is that right? Would Dook go along?

 

[JeepCSC]

It’s pure internet speculation that 8 would dissolve the conference/GOR. Considering the threshold for inviting Stanford/Cal is 13, I imagine the actual threshold for dissolution is not 8.

 

[metsfan2323]

Only difference is Jim Mora may not have agreed to coach a team in the AAC, and we’d be stuck with some Bob Diaco retread.

There is no way Jim Mora came here because we are independent. Being independent was not a "step up" for football, that's just a delusion of some people on this board who think it makes us similar to Notre Dame.

 

[CL82]

There is no way Jim Mora came here because we are independent. Being independent was not a "step up" for football, that's just a delusion of some people on this board who think it makes us similar to Notre Dame.

I think people on the board have said that the schedule is better as an independent. I agree, although as consolidation keeps happening I wonder if we will be able to sustain it.

 

[metsfan2323]

I think people on the board have said that the schedule is better as an independent.

Is it really though or is that just fantasy. After this year our home schedule takes a dip and it stinks not competing in a conference and that will get amplified when the playoffs expand and we are not competing for the G5 auto bid.

For comparison, Temple's schedule this year is pretty solid:

Akron
@Rutgers
Norfolk State
Miami
@Tulsa
UTSA
@North Texas
SMU
@South Florida
Navy
@UAB
Memphis


and BTW UCONN's body bag games on the road against Clemson and Michigan were unwatchable.

 

[CL82]

Is it really though or is that just fantasy. After this year our home schedule takes a dip and it stinks not competing in a conference and that will get amplified when the playoffs expand and we are not competing for the G5 auto bid.

For comparison, Temple's schedule this year is pretty solid:

Akron
@Rutgers
Norfolk State
Miami
@Tulsa
UTSA
@North Texas
SMU
@South Florida
Navy
@UAB
Memphis


and BTW UCONN's body bag games on the road against Clemson and Michigan were unwatchable.

To be honest, I'd rather have our schedule this year.

 

[RioDog]

To be honest, I'd rather have our schedule this year.

Ditto that.

 

[Blades]

To be honest, I'd rather have our schedule this year.

Or probably this year below too. Rather than vs. what's left of the imploded AAC, or as Matt puts it vs. C-USA. But it is interesting how certain fans/writers like to cherry pick facts to make a flawed point, which this tweet isn't.

 

[JeepCSC]

The discussion is concerning AAC and Independence at the point you left right? At the point of leaving, you had OOC teams, Temple, Navy, and 3 bubbling powers in Houston, Cincy, and Central Florida. I get the coaching was crappy, and I get basketball needed a jolt and you had no idea when the next round of conference musical chairs would begin. But with hindsight, I think it would have been beneficial for UConn to wait one more cycle.

 

[History Geek]

....But with hindsight, I think it would have been beneficial for UConn to wait one more cycle.

Actually, that's what I thought when the news broke that we were headed to the Big East. Now with hindsight, indy football/Big East in most other sports was absolutely the right move. And not because it helped men's hoop win natty #5. The overall health of the entire AD is much better.

For now. The current setup will only be sustainable for a while longer. We need Px cash ASAP. We need to be sitting a seat at the grown-up table when CR music is reaching its crescendo. That's going to be in about 8-10 years I think.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

ESPN is now paying ACC schools for doing nothing. These linear deals are completely unsustainable for ESPN. If ESPN can't find a buyer for ESPN, there is a meaningful chance that Disney spins ESPN out with these terrible contracts, and ESPN just defaults on them.

Do any UConn fans think that playing for free in the ACC is a better solution than the Big East?

 

[noeynox]

ESPN is now paying ACC schools for doing nothing. These linear deals are completely unsustainable for ESPN. If ESPN can't find a buyer for ESPN, there is a meaningful chance that Disney spins ESPN out with these terrible contracts, and ESPN just defaults on them.

Do any UConn fans think that playing for free in the ACC is a better solution than the Big East?

CFB playoff money combined NCAA tournament money would probably be more than they get now.

But forget them ACC hates UConn its personal. Seriously fluck em.

 

[JohnFSilver]

ESPN is now paying ACC schools for doing nothing. These linear deals are completely unsustainable for ESPN. If ESPN can't find a buyer for ESPN, there is a meaningful chance that Disney spins ESPN out with these terrible contracts, and ESPN just defaults on them.

Do any UConn fans think that playing for free in the ACC is a better solution than the Big East?

No.UConn adds real value. I get that the value is locked, but the ACC even considering SMU is an abject joke.

 

[CL82]

No.UConn adds real value. I get that the value is locked, but the ACC even considering SMU is an abject joke.

Why? It adds $30+ Million per school to the pie.

 

[JohnFSilver]

Why? It adds $30+ Million per school to the pie.

I doubt the $30m per school (cal/Stanford/smu aren’t worth $10M per school per year.

And, at end of day, they just cut the lie too much.

Lastly, what are you going to do with the money?

Better facilities? Higher pay? Amenities?

 

[CL82]

I doubt the $30m per school (cal/Stanford/smu aren’t worth $10M per school per year.

And, at end of day, they just cut the lie too much.

Lastly, what are you going to do with the money?

Better facilities? Higher pay? Amenities?

Oh well, the reporting is that all three candidates will get a full share from ESPN, so that's some thing north of 30, million per school. And SMU isn't taking a dollar of that so that's immediately 30 million more for the conference.

Somehow, I suspect, they'll be able to find a way to spend it.

 

[billybud]

The in footprint rate, is a component of the over all ESPN contracted rate.

So if the ACC has a conference member within a state, ESPN bills the TV provider the higher billable rate for the ACCN. The rate charged to the TV subscriber will not change, the rate charged by ESPN to the Carrier will move to their prior agreed upon contract terms. In non ACC member states ESPN gets about $.10 per ESPN household. In member states ESPN gets $.73 per ESPN household. That does not sound like a lot of money until it's viewed against California with 13.2 million households and Texas with 10.2 million households. Those 2 states provide the ACC & ESPN with revenue opportunity.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Now this period also coincides with David Benedict's arrival so I wouldn't necessarily attribute that entirely to AAC --> Big East move. It probably is a combination of

1) Having a competent Athletic Director
2) Donations now being included in Basketball ticket prices
3) The move to the Big East increasing interest in athletics including increase basketball ticket sales & general donations due to increased interest in the entire AD

Some possible additional considerations?:

Acknowledging economic ups and downs and the worst of the pandemic:
4) General higher S&P and NASDAQ performance since 2016
5) CT & US demographics, and increasingly more affluent UConn alumni and other supporters (versus pre-2000s) potentially enabling higher tax-deductible donations

Related consideration?:
6) UConn Foundation - improved relationship-building and more professional, targeted, proactive solicitation even in the last decade.

 

[king conn]

The in footprint rate, is a component of the over all ESPN contracted rate.

So if the ACC has a conference member within a state, ESPN bills the TV provider the higher billable rate for the ACCN. The rate charged to the TV subscriber will not change, the rate charged by ESPN to the Carrier will move to their prior agreed upon contract terms. In non ACC member states ESPN gets about $.10 per ESPN household. In member states ESPN gets $.73 per ESPN household. That does not sound like a lot of money until it's viewed against California with 13.2 million households and Texas with 10.2 million households. Those 2 states provide the ACC & ESPN with revenue opportunity.

Is it state or TV market?

I find it hard to believe cable companies in Houston, San Antonio etc are going to pay the higher amount just because of SMU, who they don't care squat about and might as well be in Oklahoma because it's so far away

 

[huskidork]

the big east is nice, but if you think long term it's the most viable option for us you are just wrong, P4 schools will be and are making WAY more than us like 10-15x rn, we're not gonna be able to compete long term.

 

[billybud]

Is it state or TV market?

I find it hard to believe cable companies in Houston, San Antonio etc are going to pay the higher amount just because of SMU, who they don't care squat about and might as well be in Oklahoma because it's so far away

State...Pitt brings in Pennsylvanai, Syracuse New york etc...

ESPN doesnt have contracts with local staions/markets...the ACCN is carried by Comcast (Xfinity), Dish, DTV, Fios, Hulu, Youtube, Altice, etc.

The ESPN contracts dictate thar there are "in footprint" and "out of footprint" carriage charges and that a state with an ACC program is considered "in the footprint".

 

[superjohn]

the big east is nice, but if you think long term it's the most viable option for us you are just wrong, P4 schools will be and are making WAY more than us like 10-15x rn, we're not gonna be able to compete long term.

There won't be a P4 long term in football.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

the big east is nice, but if you think long term it's the most viable option for us you are just wrong, P4 schools will be and are making WAY more than us like 10-15x rn, we're not gonna be able to compete long term.

Are you basing this on continued growth of linear television contracts? If you believe those will keep growing, you are just wrong.

 

[JohnFSilver]

The in footprint rate, is a component of the over all ESPN contracted rate.

So if the ACC has a conference member within a state, ESPN bills the TV provider the higher billable rate for the ACCN. The rate charged to the TV subscriber will not change, the rate charged by ESPN to the Carrier will move to their prior agreed upon contract terms. In non ACC member states ESPN gets about $.10 per ESPN household. In member states ESPN gets $.73 per ESPN household. That does not sound like a lot of money until it's viewed against California with 13.2 million households and Texas with 10.2 million households. Those 2 states provide the ACC & ESPN with revenue opportunity.

Not that simple.

Espn isn’t just going to give people money if you add a school in state. There are protections. If not, why is Buffalo not in the Big 12?

 

[billybud]

It is that simple...that is the ESPN contract...for the ACCN

Does Big 12 have a network?

 

[JohnFSilver]

It is that simple...that is the ESPN contract...for the ACCN

Does Big 12 have a network?

It isnt.

 

[billybud]

According to John Skipper, who negotiated the contracts for ESPN...re adding Cal teams..

“The ACC Network has contracts with all the distributors that pay an in-conference fee and pay an out-of-conference fee based on state,” Skipper said. “And that is not negotiable. That is enforceable. And suddenly all of those subscribers—it’s a declining universe—there’s still 15 million subscribers in that footprint, give or take, and they would suddenly be paying a couple of bucks a year for the ACC Network.”

 

[billybud]

It isnt.

yada, yada...I'll take ESPN's version over your opinion.

Ex President of ESPN...or your off the top of your head musing ?