It is a postulated extreme to reinforce the more conservative thesis of that section (hence the word "survive"), which is that conference affiliation is mush less important to the women's basketball program than the other two sports. Admittedly John's didn't write with much clarity. but the final statement about being a true independent was. "'I don't know if that would be possible, to be honest with you,' Auriemma said." John will go for the rhetorical flourish over conveying "facts on the ground" so you have to read between the lines a little bit. This isn't much different from when John makes a comment about recruiting or other subject matter with some fun embellishment, UConn fans take him literally and freak out, and then Jim and/or Rich have to make a blog post stating what the facts actually are to settle the fan base down. Don't get caught up in John's independent talk. See the real thesis behind what he wrote. I think John brings a nice contrasting style to the beat, but his writing is not meant to be taken literally like an expert witness. Treat him like a poet.
UConn will be in a conference and that conference will have a conference tournament. How successful UConn will be in the short and long term in a conference outside the Big 4 conferences is debatable, but UConn will be in a conference.
UConn will be in a conference and that conference will have a conference tournament. How successful UConn will be in the short and long term in a conference outside the Big 4 conferences is debatable, but UConn will be in a conference.
So what does this mean?
"In fact, the Huskies probably would also survive as an independent, a fact that Auriemma alluded to a few weeks ago."