Connecticut is the largest state without a top 5 conf school

[UPitt]

This would be quite a feat to pull off since the private colleges are so small. Nationally, private schools make up less than 15% of all schools.

I think the power elite in the northeast come from private schools, which is why funding for public schools in the northeast is so low. In NY state, I once wrote down the names of US senators since the 60s, governors since the 60s, state house and senate leaders, majority and minority, since the 80s... and not a single one of them went to public school. Bruno, Silver, Clinton, Moynihan, McCall, Skelos, Pataki, Cuomos, D'Amato, Hillenbrand, Spitzer, etc.

This is why the state gives $50 million to Canisius and st. John's Fisher (for a new law school) while slashing tens of millions from state school and (ironically) U. Buffalo Law.

There is a real issue in the northeast. Outsiders are totally incredulous at the way things are run here. They can't believe it.

I think northeast private schools do have an impact on the lack of large land grant universities in the northeast. Many states rely on large land grant universities to be the best form of higher education within the state. States in the northeast recognize the presence of very good private schools and thus do not provide the same support to create large land grant universities. More students may still attend public schools in the northeast, but the need for a large land grant university that excels in research is not as required. The best graduating HS seniors each year in the northeast have more options and are more likely to go private, leaving the public schools with lesser students. In states that lack as many top notch private schools, the large land grant universities can recruit better students and thus bring in more research money. I also think many of the northeast states, including PA, prefer smaller schools. PSU and Pitt are not state schools, as the PA state school system is made up of many smaller schools.

 

[UConn990411]

I think Pitt, WVU, and Rutgers should shoulder the blame for turning down the TV contract, but at the time it looked like the right thing to do with the Pac 12 recently signing a huge contract. In hindsight, these schools were wrong for turning down the deal.

Wasn't your pres the one leading the charge to turn down the ESPN contract, while negotiating to get Pitt into the ACC at the same time?

All of these presidents are scumbags, but Mr. Nordenberg is in a league of his own.

 

[The Viking]

Alsacs, you've got to be kidding me. The orange has been batting it's eyes at the ACC since '03, hell maybe before that even, who knows.

If the Big East and ESPN agreed to the deal, and the ACC came calling and had a contract $1 more than the Big East contract, they would have jumped ship faster than a Bernie Fine handy. Hell if the ACC was offering a million less a year, the orange may have still jumped.

 

[alsacs]

Alsacs, you've got to be kidding me. The orange has been batting it's eyes at the ACC since '03, hell maybe before that even, who knows.

If the Big East and ESPN agreed to the deal, and the ACC came calling and had a contract $1 more than the Big East contract, they would have jumped ship faster than a Bernie Fine handy. Hell if the ACC was offering a million less a year, the orange may have still jumped.

In 1991 Syracuse AD Jake Crouthamel asked the ACC to take Syracuse football as a member and leave its basketball in the Big East. The ACC declined the offer and Syracuse remained in the Big East till the ACC expansion in 2003 and 2011.

The ACC was appealing because of stability it was a marriage of convenience for both sides. Crouthamel in 2004 told Mike Tranghese at Big East meeting which minutes are online somewhere he would retire as SU AD if the conference went to 16 members 8-8 football/basketball. The Big East did it anyway and Crouthamel retired and Dr. Gross became SU AD in 2005. The Big East leadership never knew how to market the conference and take advantages it truly had. All the Big East cared about was having Syracuse, UConn, Pittsburgh, Louisville fill up the Dunkin Donuts Center for Providence College rather than work hard at marketing the conference. Syracuse always valued the Big East for basketball, and Jim Boeheim was adamantly opposed the first time in 2003 to Syracuse going to the ACC, but once realignment happened and the Big East conference became a walking 16 team Frankenstein that was happy to keep the status quo rather than helping the football schools more it turned Syracuse w/Jim Boeheim's blessing into looking for an all-sports conference.

If the ACC lost Maryland and more schools to the B1G which likely would have happened because the Big East would have had security of 14 million dollars a year and all the ACC was getting was 15 million. I don't believe Syracuse would have jumped to the ACC if the ACC was poached by the B1G. Why do I say this? Because, I believe Syracuse had more influence within the Big East than it will have in the ACC ever.

I could have seen Georgia Tech and Maryland being B1G teams 13-14. The ACC would be weakened there and if the Big XII had to add members because of SEC/B1G/Pac12 expansion they would have gone after Florida State, Clemson, Miami, NC State rather than add WVU or TCU. Then the ACC would be down to UNC, Duke, UVA, VPI to be chopped between the B1G/SEC. Boston College and Wake Forest would have petitioned to join the Big East IMO.

My point is that ESPN isn't as much to blame rather than Pitt/Rutgers/WVU/ND who were instrumental in declining that ESPN offer of over 1 Billion dollars. I feel bad for UConn as a SU fan I know you guys don't believe it, but blaming ESPN the most isn't correct IMO when there are others more to blame.

 

[specialisthusky]

The problem is UConn can't do anything to Pitt RU WVU and ND. You, and many others, have suggested the original suit against the ACC hurts UConn in CR because of Blumenthal's involvement. Everyone here blames those 4 teams and understands the damages they caused our school, but as many are so quick to point out litigation is the worst possible means and will effectively trap UConn in the AAC forever.

ESPN is equally blamed in my opinion because of their role in underwriting the destruction after these teams gave them the oppurtunity to, and their ignorance to the damges this was causing their instate University. The focus of hatred is on ESPN because many believe UConn, through the State, can challenge ESPN and its role in this through the tax breaks.

 

[alsacs]

The problem is UConn can't do anything to Pitt RU WVU and ND. You, and many others, have suggested the original suit against the ACC hurts UConn in CR because of Blumenthal's involvement. Everyone here blames those 4 teams and understands the damages they caused our school, but as many are so quick to point out litigation is the worst possible means and will effectively trap UConn in the AAC forever.

ESPN is equally blamed in my opinion because of their role in underwriting the destruction after these teams gave them the oppurtunity to, and their ignorance to the damges this was causing their instate University. The focus of hatred is on ESPN because many believe UConn, through the State, can challenge ESPN and its role in this through the tax breaks.

The lawsuit hurt you guys in the minds of ACC fanbases, and probably ticked off a couple of ACC leaders because they were individually named. Instead of being upset at the ACC I would blame the Big East schools that decided not to take the ESPN deal. The ACC did what it had to do for survival and while I understand the anger for being passed over, but the level of blame at ESPN is pretty high IMO. The tax breaks are something your state does to keep jobs that help the CT economy they have nothing to do with Collegiate Athletics.

I don't see those four schools taking as much blame as ESPN gets, but you would know more as I don't read a lot of threads.

 

[RU]

If the Syracuse fan says it enough he may start to believe his bull. SU had its bags packed and was ready to step all over the rest of the Big East on its way out the door in 2003 until they were left at the alter because of the politics in Virginia but he insinuates SU is an innocent bystander in the CR mess. It was beautiful looking at the carnage on the SU boards the day the ACC took VT instead of SU. What the Big East should have done then was kick those scumbags to the curb and let them rot in Conference USA. Now they're going to rot in the ACC. Moreover, Pitt didn't act alone when the ACC and ESPN were planning to finish off the Big East once and for all. SU is as much to blame as anyone. If Pitt and SU hadn't left, we'd still have Boise and might have TCU.

 

[The Viking]

It's hard to have a stable conference when schools like BC and Cuse are trying like hell to get out. Two northeast schools trying to take a reverse underground railroad to General Lee's backyard is enough to give instability to a conference any minute of the day unless the BE tied up a monster deal.
And no, 11 mil a year is not a monster deal that would keep Cuse tied to the Big East. As I said before, the university and fanbase was happy as hell to get yet another invite 8 years later.
Cuse batting its eyes at the ACC from day 1 always gave the impression the BE was always one Swofford phone call away from imploding.

 

[alsacs]

If the Syracuse fan says it enough he may start to believe his bull. SU had its bags packed and was ready to step all over the rest of the Big East on its way out the door in 2003 until they were left at the alter because of the politics in Virginia but he insinuates SU is an innocent bystander in the CR mess. It was beautiful looking at the carnage on the SU boards the day the ACC took VT instead of SU. What the Big East should have done then was kick those scumbags to the curb and let them rot in Conference USA. Now they're going to rot in the ACC. Moreover, Pitt didn't act alone when the ACC and ESPN were planning to finish off the Big East once and for all. SU is as much to blame as anyone. If Pitt and SU hadn't left, we'd still have Boise and might have TCU.

LOL, Newsflash I never said Syracuse wasn't interested in the ACC in 2oo3 go re-read my post. Our AD in 2003 saw the writing on the wall with the Big East leadership and wanted a marriage of convenience. I know the only reason the ACC was interested in Syracuse was because of Miami, but I doubt you know that.

Second, its your genius of an ex-AD along with Nordenberg that didn't want the Big East to take the ESPN 1 billion dollar offer that is a fact and can't be disputed. LOL kick Syracuse to curbs and depend on Rutgers? Tell me RU fan what Big East Championship have you won in any sport? I ask because I don't believe Rutgers wins championships in anything. Atleast WVU has rifle shooting what sport does RU excel in? Football? Rutgers is the definition of mediocre. You guys have 1 BIG win in your entire history in 2006 against Louisville because the freaking UL kid went offsides and gave RU a 2nd chance. UConn has accomplished more in 9 years in the Big East Football than Rutgers has in its existence. Hell since 2004 which is the Golden Age of Rutgers Football who has more BE football titles Syracuse or Rutgers? The answer is Syracuse during our worst era and your best era you still have been nothing but mediocre in the weakest BCS conference. Go leave your TV on at home before you go to your next RU game and win some important games.

 

[UConn9604]

My point is that ESPN isn't as much to blame rather than Pitt/Rutgers/WVU/ND who were instrumental in declining that ESPN offer of over 1 Billion dollars. I feel bad for UConn as a SU fan I know you guys don't believe it, but blaming ESPN the most isn't correct IMO when there are others more to blame.

I think that ESPN is precisely at fault here. ESPN presented an offer to the Big East, and the Presidents turned it down to look to the open market.

What happened next? Well, many of us believe that ESPN contacted the ACC and urged them to continue ripping the Big East apart, limb from limb, rather than let that property seek higher value from someone else.

Sure, if Pitt and 'Cuse were truly committed to the Big East, they would have ignored the overtures from the ACC and continued on to open bidding. That would have forced ESPN to either give up the Big East or pay match another network's offer -- but why bother paying more when you can just rip off a few parts that you want and pay less for the rest?

Our biggest complaint, I suppose, is that we weren't one of the parts that they wanted.

 

[alsacs]

It's hard to have a stable conference when schools like BC and Cuse are trying like hell to get out. Two northeast schools trying to take a reverse underground railroad to General Lee's backyard is enough to give instability to a conference any minute of the day unless the BE tied up a monster deal.
And no, 11 mil a year is not a monster deal that would keep Cuse tied to the Big East. As I said before, the university and fanbase was happy as hell to get yet another invite 8 years later.
Cuse batting its eyes at the ACC from day 1 always gave the impression the BE was always one Swofford phone call away from imploding.

I understand your points and agree to disagree in 1991 when the ACC was expanding the first time with Florida State the ACC took a vote between SU and FSU the vote was 4-4, but SU AD Jake Crouthamel wasn't interested in leaving the Big East basketball league and the ACC didn't want hybrid members so FSU got the call. SU realized the Big East office was more interested in keeping the status quo rather than helping the football schools so when Miami was leaving they decided for their future survival to latch on. When VA Gov. Marc Warner got VPI in SU went back to the Big East with its tail in between, and while they kept their options remained in the Big East. When the ACC was stuck at 11 teams SU never tried to get that 12th slot like BC did and groveled their way into the ACC the following year. While SU wasn't innocent its actions didn't kill the Big East. The Big East died when the schools declined the 1 billion dollar offer from ESPN and the ACC struck in September 2011. During that entire time the B1G expanded with Nebraska and Rutgers was playing footsy with the B1G that entire time. The Big East died because they didn't take the ESPN offer and the ACC had to expand to get more money for a bad extension with ESPN.

 

[frankthetank]

I think northeast private schools do have an impact on the lack of large land grant universities in the northeast. Many states rely on large land grant universities to be the best form of higher education within the state. States in the northeast recognize the presence of very good private schools and thus do not provide the same support to create large land grant universities. More students may still attend public schools in the northeast, but the need for a large land grant university that excels in research is not as required. The best graduating HS seniors each year in the northeast have more options and are more likely to go private, leaving the public schools with lesser students. In states that lack as many top notch private schools, the large land grant universities can recruit better students and thus bring in more research money. I also think many of the northeast states, including PA, prefer smaller schools. PSU and Pitt are not state schools, as the PA state school system is made up of many smaller schools.

Here's where the real gap is between the Northeast and the rest of the country with respect to the strength of public universities: serving the large "upper tier" (those that are in the 75th percentile or higher for test scores and high school ranks) outside of the top 1%. All across the country, those that can get into an Ivy League-caliber school generally end up attending an Ivy League-caliber school. So, it's not so much the very top of the elite where you see the gap in private versus public (as the vast majority of them go to the elite privates).

The big difference is that mass number of high achievers that just missed or were at least in striking distance of getting into Ivy League-caliber schools disproportionately go to public flagship universities outside of the Northeast, while they disproportionately go to private schools in the Northeast. As a proxy, just look at the schools ranked #26 through #75 in the U.S. News rankings (these aren't the very toughest schools to get into like the Ivies, but you still need excellent test scores and grades to get into them). 11 of the 13 Big Ten public schools are within that band. In fact, public universities in all regions in the country are well-represented... except for the Northeast. Depending upon your definition of the Northeast, the only Northeastern publics in that range are Penn State, Pitt, Rutgers, UConn and Maryland (and PSU, Pitt and Maryland are more Mid-Atlantic with stronger histories of public university support). That's a very low number compared to every other region. However, what you do see in the Northeast in the #26-75 range of the U.S. News rankings are a lot of relatively large private schools with over 8000 undergrads (i.e. BC, NYU, BU, Syracuse, Fordham, Northeastern), which aren't nearly as common in the rest of the country.

So, it's really the BC/NYU/BU/Syracuse-type schools that disproportionately draw the non-Ivy upper tier in the Northeast, whereas the equivalent types of students generally go to Big Ten schools in the Midwest, the UC system in California, UT or Texas A&M in Texas, etc. This is probably what truly contributes to the tepid support of public universities in the Northeast. That non-Ivy upper tier greatly populate the top 25% or so of income earners, which is a large critical mass of people that vote with very high frequency, make up a disproportionate percentage of the residents of swing district "purple" suburbs, and are more likely to be politically active. Since those people are exactly who the Big Ten churns out probably better than anyone, it's not a surprise that political and financial support for public flagships in the Midwest is fairly high. In contrast, those people attended the larger private universities in much greater numbers in the Northeast, so they have no kinship to the public universities in the states that they live in. Even if UConn itself actually does well in drawing that upper tier group within its home state of Connecticut, it might not be getting the benefit of a multiplier effect of other upper tier people moving to the state that attended similarly-situated public institutions and, as a result, would be more sympathetic to supporting public universities (in contrast to a place like Chicago where it seems like everyone that moves there went to a Big Ten school or how Atlanta is a center for both SEC and ACC grads).

 

[alsacs]

I think that ESPN is precisely at fault here. ESPN presented an offer to the Big East, and the Presidents turned it down to look to the open market.

What happened next? Well, many of us believe that ESPN contacted the ACC and urged them to continue ripping the Big East apart, limb from limb, rather than let that property seek higher value from someone else.

Sure, if Pitt and 'Cuse were truly committed to the Big East, they would have ignored the overtures from the ACC and continued on to open bidding. That would have forced ESPN to either give up the Big East or pay match another network's offer -- but why bother paying more when you can just rip off a few parts that you want and pay less for the rest?

Our biggest complaint, I suppose, is that we weren't one of the parts that they wanted.

The Pitt/SU point is perfectly legitimate and I won't defend it. We honestly don't know how many schools the ACC talked with from the Big East, but its safe to say it was more than just Pitt and Syracuse.
ESPN is at fault IMO, but I think if the Big East took the offer that was good, but not great the conference would have survived. However, because the Big East Commissioner was a tool and couldn't get the teams to accept the offer the conference was ripe for the picking. Think of the ESPN offer like MLB teams locking players before they get to FA and leave some money on the table, but get good security. Like the Cubs-Anthony Rizzo contract while Rizzo got 41 million dollars over 7 years the Cubs probably saved some money in the long term and Rizzo left money on the table, but reasoned 41 million is good enough. Or other MLB contracts like Goldschmidt-Diamondbacks contract, or the Rays-Longoria contract. The Big East got greedy and it killed the conference when the ACC took SU/Pitt.

 

[RU]

Typical SU fan. Your years of unwarranted superiority complex isn't going to go over well in the ACC. I know; I live half way between C'ville and Chapel Hill and had kids at both schools. I didn't care why SU was being looked at by the ACC. What SU did was stab the league in the back TWICE and should've been thrown to the curb after the first time. You along with Pitt are responsible for Boise and TCU reneging on their commitment to the Big East. It was the league presidents who voted to turn down the ESPN deal, not the ADs but it was Nordenberg and Gross who secretly negotiated with ESPN behind the backs of the rest of the league. If that's not back-stabbing, I don't know what is. Bottom line, Pitt, SU and ESPN are responsible for the demise of the Big East.

 

[upstater]

So, it's really the BC/NYU/BU/Syracuse-type schools that disproportionately draw the non-Ivy upper tier in the Northeast, whereas the equivalent types of students generally go to Big Ten schools in the Midwest, the UC system in California, UT or Texas A&M in Texas, etc. This is probably what truly contributes to the tepid support of public universities in the Northeast. That non-Ivy upper tier greatly populate the top 25% or so of income earners, which is a large critical mass of people that vote with very high frequency, make up a disproportionate percentage of the residents of swing district "purple" suburbs, and are more likely to be politically active. Since those people are exactly who the Big Ten churns out probably better than anyone, it's not a surprise that political and financial support for public flagships in the Midwest is fairly high. In contrast, those people attended the larger private universities in much greater numbers in the Northeast, so they have no kinship to the public universities in the states that they live in. Even if UConn itself actually does well in drawing that upper tier group within its home state of Connecticut, it might not be getting the benefit of a multiplier effect of other upper tier people moving to the state that attended similarly-situated public institutions and, as a result, would be more sympathetic to supporting public universities (in contrast to a place like Chicago where it seems like everyone that moves there went to a Big Ten school or how Atlanta is a center for both SEC and ACC grads).

As someone that went to one of those schools, I'm going to disagree a little bit. Many students at those schools might have difficulty getting into their state school. Lots of stories of kids getting rejected by, say, UConn but getting into NYU, Cuse or Boston U. BU is now maybe a bit more difficult, but even the average SAT and admissions #s at UConn are higher than Cuse.

I also think the reason for more top private schools being in the NE (and these are mainly liberal arts colleges) is simply history. They have been around a long time and have big endowments.

I agree with you when it comes to state support in general in the northeast, but would point out that Connecticut is in the second quintile when it comes to support per student for higher education (and the study I read took cost-of-living into account).

 

[alsacs]

Typical SU fan. Your years of unwarranted superiority complex isn't going to go over well in the ACC. I know; I live half way between C'ville and Chapel Hill and had kids at both schools. I didn't care why SU was being looked at by the ACC. What SU did was stab the league in the back TWICE and should've been thrown to the curb after the first time. You along with Pitt are responsible for Boise and TCU reneging on their commitment to the Big East. It was the league presidents who voted to turn down the ESPN deal, not the ADs but it was Nordenberg and Gross who secretly negotiated with ESPN behind the backs of the rest of the league. If that's not back-stabbing, I don't know what is. Bottom line, Pitt, SU and ESPN are responsible for the demise of the Big East.

LOL your a typical RU fan who doesn't know his facts correctly. First, Boise State never committed to the Big East UNTIL AFTER SYRACUSE AND PITT announced they were gone? How the hell did Syracuse leaving for the ACC cause Boise to renege if they never joined the conference while Syracuse was a member?

Second, TCU would have reneged in a cocaine heartbeat when the Big XII lost Texas A&M and Missouri. Syracuse had nothing to do with that and if you think TCU would stayed in the Big East over the Big XII with Pitt and Syracuse your crazy.

Third, it was Rutgers joining the B1G that destroyed Boise State/San Diego State remaining committed to the Big East football.

Fourth, Pernetti was one of the four people who were against taking the ESPN offer and he was probably who convinced your President to vote against the offer.

Finally, how the hell did Gross secretly negotiation with ESPN? My god it wasn't with ESPN it was with the ACC and it wasn't behind anyone's back because the conference leadership never got anyone to sign a GOR. Syracuse was one of the 12 schools who wanted to take the ESPN offer. Also, talk about throwing stones in glass houses Rutgers obviously signed a non-disclosure agreement with the B1G and has been playing footsy with B1G since the conference added Nebraska.

Now go and win a conference championship in any sport before you talk about national championships.

 

[zls44]

"Oh, great, a Syracuse-Rutgers fight on the Boneyard." - NOBODY, EVER

 

[CL82]

I understand the anger at ESPN because they have given the ACC more money, but we have Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, West Virginia, and Notre Dame to blame for the Big East blowing up NOT ESPN.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleg...05/26/for_big_east_where_is_all_this_leading/

The Big East got greedy and turned DOWN 1 BILLION dollars. How much is enough? The Big East would have paid the football schools 11 million per year if the Big East had taken that deal its likely Syracuse, Pittsburgh never leave. Notre Dame continues the status quo, and the ACC becomes vulnerable to poaching from the B1G beyond just Maryland. UConn's current situation is not ESPN's fault as much as its greed from former Big East schools in that May 2011 meeting. Tim Pernetti and Steve Pederson should be bigger villains to you guys than they actually are and not ESPN. ESPN tried to give the Big East a good contract, but greed caused the conference to fall apart. ESPN did subsidize ACC expansion, but ESPN couldn't tell the ACC who to add beyond telling them who they would pay more for we don't know for sure if ESPN didn't say we would pay more for UConn than Pitt, but because Pitt got selected by the ACC its ESPN's fault.

Also, in retrospect those school leaders were flat out idiots because even if the Big East when on the open market ESPN would have had an option to match any offer. I doubt NBCSN or FOX would have offered significantly more, and the lack of loyalty the Big East showed ESPN in declining that offer to go on the open market was stupid. If I have a client I have done business with for a long time and they make me a good offer I won't complain if instead of charging them 500 dollars I charge them 350 because its a healthy compensation and is a sign of good faith.

Its sad, but everything in that article basically happened, all because Pitt and Rutgers wanted more.

ESPN doesn't bankroll the demise of the Big East and it doesn't happen. It is as simple as that.

 

[husky91]

Mike Tranghese destroyed the BE, not ESPN. Guy is an imbecile. When the future pointed to superconferences 15-20 years ago this genius didn't go all sports and instead added small private Bball schools.

ESPN doesn't bankroll the demise of the Big East and it doesn't happen. It is as simple as that.

 

[noeynox]

Come on, man. The Big East was founded as a basketball conference, as commissioner he could have never tossed aside the basketball schools. Besides the Big East was destroyed by the school president themselves. They hard zero loyalty to each other.

 

[husky91]

Lots of examples over the years where companies reinvented themselves during changing times and thrived. Not the BE. #Failure

Come on, man. The Big East was founded as a basketball conference, as commissioner he could have never tossed aside the basketball schools. Besides the Big East was destroyed by the school president themselves. They hard zero loyalty to each other.

 

[Jimdish255]

Come on, man. The Big East was founded as a basketball conference, as commissioner he could have never tossed aside the basketball schools. Besides the Big East was destroyed by the school president themselves. They hard zero loyalty to each other.

True that. And the fact that other conferences were OK with our success in BB, but when the BE began to make strides in FB it was time to pick off some coaches, and then the schools themselves. They weren't going to sit idly by while a NE Conference surrounding NYC became a major player again.

 

[Thirdelement]

Sure, lots of blame to go around and there were a lot of deception by a number of Big East schools. ESPN played a major role as well in so many ways including taking every opportunity to downplay any Big East football accomplishment,... Personally, I don't think Pitt got selected over UConn because of better athletic performance, better fan support, better school, or better financial performance. What Pitt brought to the party that UConn did not was a long term football relationship with Notre Dame which was crucially valuable to the ACC as we have come to find out in hindsight. That was the trump card.

​

I agree with this. I have to wonder if during the expansion round that brought Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC if one of the factors considered was what schools would be attractive to ND. I think most ND fans would agree that USC and Navy are the series we are most invested in continuing. I think that Pitt falls into the next grouping, along with Michigan State. I don't know if Pitt fans feel the same. Maybe the Pitt poster could offer his thoughts. I do know that moving half of our schedule to the ACC becomes easier to tolerate knowing that some of those games will be against Pitt.​

 

[upstater]

​

I agree with this. I have to wonder if during the expansion round that brought Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC if one of the factors considered was what schools would be attractive to ND. I think most ND fans would agree that USC and Navy are the series we are most invested in continuing. I think that Pitt falls into the next grouping, along with Michigan State. I don't know if Pitt fans feel the same. Maybe the Pitt poster could offer his thoughts. I do know that moving half of our schedule to the ACC becomes easier to tolerate knowing that some of those games will be against Pitt.​

I really couldn't disagree more with this. The idea ND cared blows my mind. I'm trying hard to find anything written on this board in recent years with which I can disagree more.

1A. DeLeone is a great coach
1B. Bernie Fine doesn't like boys
1C. BC was right not to hire Calhoun

Surely, the idea that Pitt lured ND is 1D among these other arguments.

 

[CL82]

Even if UConn itself actually does well in drawing that upper tier group within its home state of Connecticut, it might not be getting the benefit of a multiplier effect of other upper tier people moving to the state that attended similarly-situated public institutions and, as a result, would be more sympathetic to supporting public universities (in contrast to a place like Chicago where it seems like everyone that moves there went to a Big Ten school or how Atlanta is a center for both SEC and ACC grads).

Frank I'm seeing a trend in your posts. You underestimate UConn, even if it takes multiple assumptions to do so.