Cincy and Miami (FL) to play in 2014, 15

[Jimmy Serrano]

Respectfully disagree with that position. I stand behind no man in my hatred of BC for many many reasons but in the long run the rumored deal is good in the short-term for UConn. Besides, no matter where the neutral is played, most likely Gillette, UConn should have the upper hand in crowd size. Hopefully we will have moved on from the dumpster fire by then.

The state legislators (especially that goofball from East Hartford) getting involved in reducing the initial proposed UConn-ND deal is played a very, very big role in killing it.

It is a complete fantasy that we would have more fans in Gillette than BC.

 

[freescooter]

I don't particularly think our scheduling is awful going forward. Virginia, Tennessee BYU, Boise are all nice games. Rutgers is a regional rival,and those kind of games are always good I think. BC and UMass would be nice rivalries, too. One of the big things being lost in all the conference re-alignment is the regional rivalries that were so much a part of college football and really made the game interesting. I actually think in some ways the small colleges have some interesting ideas. the little 3 (Wesleyan, Williams , Amherst) the CBB )Colby Bates Bowdoin) are examples of competitions that make the season interesting even when a particular team is having an off year. The commander in Chief's trophy between Army, navy and Air Force is the only 1A series I can think of that is similar. Something like that with UConn, UMass and BC would be a fun event. It has no chance of happening but it would be great for New England College football just the same.

 

[ruskin]

It is a complete fantasy that we would have more fans in Gillette than BC.

If UConn program gets back on the upswing and it's an early season game I'd bet UConn fans would outnumber BCs. Would be nice to see who would be right.

 

[ruskin]

Not pride self-respect. Screw ND, BC and anyone else. If they won't play us home and home the heck with them. If you think like a loser than you are a loser!

The "only play P5 teams on our terms or not at all" is not a prescription to get into a P5 conference. Self-respect goeth before the fall.

 

[upstater]

I heard last week that a series of 4 games with BC was pretty close to getting done. Every other year starting in 2016, two in Chestnut Hill one at the Rent and one at Gillette with a 50/50 split. Did not post here since I was skeptical. Given the article today in the Courant giving BC MBB coach quotes who knows this may have legs.

Warde should be ridden out on a rail if he did that.

 

[upstater]

Respectfully disagree with that position. I stand behind no man in my hatred of BC for many many reasons but in the long run the rumored deal is good in the short-term for UConn. Besides, no matter where the neutral is played, most likely Gillette, UConn should have the upper hand in crowd size. Hopefully we will have moved on from the dumpster fire by then.

The state legislators (especially that goofball from East Hartford) getting involved in reducing the initial proposed UConn-ND deal is played a very, very big role in killing it.

Buffalo never ever took anything less than a 1 for 1 from UConn, and this was back when UConn was BCS.

 

[upstater]

The "only play P5 teams on our terms or not at all" is not a prescription to get into a P5 conference. Self-respect goeth before the fall.

?? I don't get it. UConn has been playing teams on a 1 to 1 basis for a long while now. What makes BC better than Tennessee, Michigan, Virginia, BYU, Boise St, Indiana, Maryland, etc.?

 

[ruskin]

?? I don't get it. UConn has been playing teams on a 1 to 1 basis for a long while now. What makes BC better than Tennessee, Michigan, Virginia, BYU, Boise St, Indiana, Maryland, etc.?

Certainly nothing makes BC "better". It's a unique situation. They're the closest FBS school to UConn. Depends on your point of view on what you want to "give up" to play them. I'd give up Stony Brook and Villanova, for starters. I find the lack of nonconf opponents on future schedules a little troubling. Again get the series started on their "terms" then be patient and let it turn into the 1-1 it should be.

 

[ZooCougar]

Warde should be ridden out on a rail if he did that.

I can't believe he would pass on that.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[ruskin]

Well done Medic. The Bobby Bowden 1970s-80s Florida State scheduling philosophy would suit UConn very well in these times.

 

[freescooter]

I personally don't get the value of playing a neutral site game against BC or anyone else, unless its a smaller neutral site game. Fenway or FauxYankee Stadium makes sense. Metlife or Gillette don't. Nothing says big time like 35-40,000 in a 70,000 seat stadium...Those venues are too big. did anyone watch Syracuse-USC at the meadowlands? Embarrassing for all concerned. UConn-BC, UConn-Rutgers, games like that need to be home-home. they'll sell out as home games. They will fill 65% of the seats, maybe, as neutral site games.

 

[huskymedic]

Well done Medic. The Bobby Bowden 1970s-80s Florida State scheduling philosophy would suit UConn very well in these times.

We have a national perception problem as a football program (and just not the past 3 years) - we need to earn respect and while "just win" sounds like a good way, it needs to be against brand names and sometimes may require a stretch in traditional geography and/or deal making.

I get all the arguments for and against anything past the traditional 1:1 (especially as it involves BC)- it's just my opinion.

 

[ZooCougar]

Buffalo never ever took anything less than a 1 for 1 from UConn, and this was back when UConn was BCS.

Hathaway.

 

[ZooCougar]

We have a national perception problem as a football program (and just not the past 3 years) - we need to earn respect and while "just win" sounds like a good way, it needs to be against brand names and sometimes may require a stretch in traditional geography and/or deal making.

I get all the arguments for and against anything past the traditional 1:1 (especially as it involves BC)- it's just my opinion.

I agree. Nothing ventured nothing gained.

 

[upstater]

Certainly nothing makes BC "better". It's a unique situation. They're the closest FBS school to UConn. Depends on your point of view on what you want to "give up" to play them. I'd give up Stony Brook and Villanova, for starters. I find the lack of nonconf opponents on future schedules a little troubling. Again get the series started on their "terms" then be patient and let it turn into the 1-1 it should be.

If you give up Villanova (and your free home games, no return), you also give up $50 x 30k and concessions + parking. Say another $15 ($15 parking per 3 people, $5 a head + $10 food & drink) x 30k. $1.5 to $2.5m minus Villanova's payout.

This is a board that constantly complains that the BE TV money is $1.7m more than the AAC payout money.

 

[upstater]

Hathaway.

Buffalo did the same with Pitt and Syracuse and other programs.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

If UConn program gets back on the upswing and it's an early season game I'd bet UConn fans would outnumber BCs. Would be nice to see who would be right.

I would guess about 50k (that's aggressive) would show with 20k UConn fans. Maybe. Might be closer to 40k with 15k our fans.

 

[ruskin]

If you give up Villanova (and your free home games, no return), you also give up $50 x 30k and concessions + parking. Say another $15 ($15 parking per 3 people, $5 a head + $10 food & drink) x 30k. $1.5 to $2.5m minus Villanova's payout.

This is a board that constantly complains that the BE TV money is $1.7m more than the AAC payout money.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish IMO -- better for brand to be playing real DI teams.

 

[ruskin]

I would guess about 50k (that's aggressive) would show with 20k UConn fans. Maybe. Might be closer to 40k with 15k our fans.

If it's the first game of the renewed rivalry, UConn has gotten better by then and has a coach the fanbase has connected with - a coach who will sell the value of this game to the fans the same way he hopefully will have sold the program by that point -- I believe UConn capable of doing much, much better than that.

 

[upstater]

Penny-wise and pound-foolish IMO -- better for brand to be playing real DI teams.

They are playing real D1 teams. Look at the schedule. Tennessee, Virginia, BYU, Boise St., all coming up. But if you get rid of the money games, you not only get rid of bowl-eligibility cinching wins, but also you crater your budget. Not to mention the precedence it sets when you're trying to schedule Tennessee in the future. Do you like watching Tennessee at the Rent? Or would you prefer a slate of San Jose State and Akron?

 

[hthusky74]

They are playing real D1 teams. Look at the schedule. Tennessee, Virginia, BYU, Boise St., all coming up. But if you get rid of the money games, you not only get rid of bowl-eligibility cinching wins, but also you crater your budget. Not to mention the precedence it sets when you're trying to schedule Tennessee in the future. Do you like watching Tennessee at the Rent? Or would you prefer a slate of San Jose State and Akron?

Well stated Upstater. If you cave in to BC, or any other team for that matter, you will have a big "L" imprinted on your forehead. Then all future negotiations with other teams will have us dealing from a position of weakness. The reason we are not in a major conference now is because Hathaway and the administration were a bunch of wimps and did not take forceful action. If we continue to display that big L on our foreheads you can forget about getting into a major conference. It's all a matter of perception and we are perceived as wimps. All we can do is turn Blumenthal lose on them in the courts. Wow, how impressive and effective that was. Best course of action, hopefully hire a quality coach, start winning some games again and continue scheduling as we have been. We have a lot of great teams on our future schedules. We need to be vigorous in continuing to schedule teams like that, but that doesn't mean we sell our soul to do it. As far as BC goes, I view them as a mid major and don't have much of an interest in seeing them play anyway.

 

[ruskin]

They are playing real D1 teams. Look at the schedule. Tennessee, Virginia, BYU, Boise St., all coming up. But if you get rid of the money games, you not only get rid of bowl-eligibility cinching wins, but also you crater your budget. Not to mention the precedence it sets when you're trying to schedule Tennessee in the future. Do you like watching Tennessee at the Rent? Or would you prefer a slate of San Jose State and Akron?

If there were more than ONE Tennessee coming to the Rent this would be a better point. And as good as BYU and Boise are, they are not P5s. Now if Rutgers is on it for 2016-17 as said, all the better. But right now I am not comfortable with the quality of our nonconf schedule going forward.

 

[upstater]

Well stated Upstater. If you cave in to BC, or any other team for that matter, you will have a big "L" imprinted on your forehead. Then all future negotiations with other teams will have us dealing from a position of weakness. The reason we are not in a major conference now is because Hathaway and the administration were a bunch of wimps and did not take forceful action. If we continue to display that big L on our foreheads you can forget about getting into a major conference. It's all a matter of perception and we are perceived as wimps. All we can do is turn Blumenthal lose on them in the courts. Wow, how impressive and effective that was. Best course of action, hopefully hire a quality coach, start winning some games again and continue scheduling as we have been. We have a lot of great teams on our future schedules. We need to be vigorous in continuing to schedule teams like that, but that doesn't mean we sell our soul to do it. As far as BC goes, I view them as a mid major and don't have much of an interest in seeing them play anyway.

This is precisely right. Buffalo was no doubt asked for a 2-for-1. They said NO. Uconn could then say, we won't play you, but Buffalo would then say, well, Syracuse and Pitt are coming in for games. Home-and-away, we'll be fine thank you. And besides, Alabama is paying us $1 million to whip our butts.

 

[ruskin]

If you cave in to BC, or any other team for that matter, you will have a big "L" imprinted on your forehead. Then all future negotiations with other teams will have us dealing from a position of weakness.

Uh, we're 0-9. The L thanks to Phil Austin, Hathaway, McHugh and P is clearly branded on the forehead. Scheduling like Bowden did at Florida State all those years ago -- and like Boise is doing now -- will get it it off a lot faster

 

[ruskin]

TBut if you get rid of the money games, you not only get rid of bowl-eligibility cinching wins

A good coach in the AAC with UConn's resources should have no trouble getting 6 wins.

 

[upstater]

I just looked at Bobby Bowden's first 10 years. He was doing home and homes each and every year with Florida. He had a home and home with Auburn as well. I looked through the records and saw them giving away home games to LSU. That's where he bowed down, to that one team.

BC is not LSU.

 

[freescooter]

Uh, we're 0-9. The L thanks to Phil Austin, Hathaway, McHugh and P is clearly branded on the forehead. Scheduling like Bowden did at Florida State all those years ago -- and like Boise is doing now -- will get it it off a lot faster

What is Boise doing now? they've signed on for a couple of neutral site games but mostly htye do home and home's. Oregon, OState, Virginia, us, Washington and Wash State. And they recently played Michigan State in a 1 off, but if you look at their schedule it isn't exactly murders row. They have Ol' Miss in a neutral site game next year I think. They hardly play anyone anywhere. You just don't do that these days. You maybe do it in a 1-off situation if it presents itself. But to be viewed as a success, you win the games you have on the schedule. And that gets you games in bowls against "name" teams and if you win those suddenly people start to take you seriously. You start getting ranked. Start getting ranked in the pre-season...but it starts with wins, something that has eluded us this year and been very hard to come by over the past 3 years.

 

[ruskin]

I just looked at Bobby Bowden's first 10 years. He was doing home and homes each and every year with Florida. He had a home and home with Auburn as well. I looked through the records and saw them giving away home games to LSU. That's where he bowed down, to that one team.

BC is not LSU.

You forgot Nebraska I believe. And Florida was already locked into that schedule.

Well looks like "anytime, anywhere" not the majority view.

 

[huskymedic]

What is Boise doing now?

The question isn't necessarily what they are doing now and in future schedules, it's what did they do before they were established as a national program. Wasn't very easy to get teams to go out and play on the blue field in Idaho so they went where they had to to build the credibility. Now Boise is much more selective.

It's only going to get harder to schedule quality FBS schools in the future.