I was always amused with the narrative that if BC went to the ACC, that the school would have little to no influence or power in a league allegedly run by the Tobacco Road school elements. I assume long timers here remember this claim, correct ? But then BC joins the ACC, and the narrative develops among many of the very same people that BC had enough influence and power in the ACC that apparently they could prevail upon the other ACC Schools, including the Tobacco Road schools ,to " keep Uconn out of the ACC ". Well, you can't have it both ways it would seem to me. Either BC is a non factor in the ACC, or they have enormous political power and influence in the ACC sufficient enough to single handedly keep Uconn out of the ACC. In my opinion however, BC does not not wield anywhere near this degree of power and influence in the ACC as has been claimed in some quarters... including the writer of this article. If the ACC ( or any other P5 League for that matter ) wanted Uconn in its league, BC could not stop this at all in my opinion.
There are several reasons that I won't rehash as to why UConn is not in the ACC. None of those reasons involve UConn as an academic or athletic institution.
It's too bad your school is intimidated by our potential in football if given access to a P5 schedule and money, but its certainly understandable based on our success in other sports.
Thanks for stopping by
Well, I'm no defender of BC's former AD, his deeds, nor his words... as he was a jerk.
But if you are asking me which AD did more harm to the Uconn football program, the BC AD ( DeFilippo ) or the Uconn AD ( Hathaway ), I think if Uconn fans are honest with themselves, Hathaway did far more damage. The BC AD didn't hire the old retread, over the hill, former Syracuse fired Coach Paul Pasqualoni. Even Diaco was shocked when he arrived at how the old PP had run the Uconn football program right into the ground during his tenure.... and at an all important league realignment period too. So in my view, Uconn football fans should be far more PO'd by what the Uconn AD did, than anything said or done off the field up in Chestnut Hill by the former BC AD there. But thats just my 2 cents worth here too.
Ok... fair enoughIt takes almost zero extra energy to hate both. We are not lifting sacks of stone blocks here.
Don't care one way or another if we ever play BC. Let's just beat SMU and avoid being further humiliated this season.
Well, I'm no defender of BC's former AD, his deeds, nor his words... as he was a jerk.
But if you are asking me which AD did more harm to the Uconn football program, the BC AD ( DeFilippo ) or the Uconn AD ( Hathaway ), I think if Uconn fans are honest with themselves, Hathaway did far more damage. The BC AD didn't hire the old retread, over the hill, former Syracuse fired Coach Paul Pasqualoni. Even Diaco was shocked when he arrived at how the old PP had run the Uconn football program right into the ground during his tenure.... and at an all important league realignment period too. So in my view, Uconn football fans should be far more PO'd by what the Uconn AD did, than anything said or done off the field up in Chestnut Hill by the former BC AD there. But thats just my 2 cents worth here too.
Yes, I agree that Hathaway absolutely did the most damage to UConn due to sitting on his laurels about most things, especially fundraising and compliance, and making 1 major, very horrendous hire in Coach Pasqualoni (its bad when the AD listens to clueless HS football coaches in a state where no more than 10 kids total gets D-1A football scholarships a year over educated college football insiders and a rival's school laughter when we hired their former, washed-up coach). Second, I would argue that Richard Blumenthal did the second most damage by making the lawsuit personal against BC and Miami. Everyone has sued everyone in conference realignment. That likely cost Miami's vote in any attempt in UConn joining the ACC. On the other side, BC, as you noted and the old BC AD DeFilippo admitted, the suit was just an excuse for BC to act like a good old Boston townie in keeping UConn out of BC's 'turf' instead of seeing the bigger picture in that any good college program is built around rivalries and BC and UConn would have been a good one and likely would have made both athletic departments better. Also, don't forget the other enemy that UConn had - NCAA President Emmert whose war against UConn (due the financial fiasco that was UConn 2000 that he managed and was called out on) and Calhoun (because Calhoun had the nerve to win a national title right after the Nate Miles suspension) hit UConn in the middle of realignment.
I hate BC as much as the next guy but there's an entire generation of UConn football fans who don't care one whit about BC and are probably even puzzled why this thread exists - this all happened before their time.
.
If you talk to the older, pearl clutchers, out in Worcester region of Massachusetts, they are still angry that BC doesn't play Holy Cross in Football any more. Those here that know BC's football history, know that Holy Cross and BC were football rivals for over 50 years. The biggest football game of the year for these 2 Private, Catholic Universities was their last game of the season... against each other. BC doesn't schedule this Catholic, Massachusetts based, school in football any more either. ( probably because of its non FBS status... but BC has played non FBS schools out of its region since the long time football rivalry with Holy Cross ended ) In time, only the over 50 aged Uconn football fans will care about the goings on up at Chestnut Hill, the same as the older Holy Cross football fans that continuously pine for the old days .. or what could have been...do still do to this very day as well. But the younger generations at Holy Cross ? They don't pay no mine at all to what BC does these days. They've moved past that hate, or even a concern.
Until we get out of this Shiite show of a conference and start playing a recognizable form of 1A football, I'm thinking BC High or Xaverian might be a better rival for us
Nope.When most Uconn football fans keep stating over and over again in public, and on messsge boards, and in newspaper columns, etc that they hate their current football conference ( but understandably so ) do potential football recruits hear this dislike for the conference ( called a " shiite conference", and worse ) that Uconn plays in, and by extension, may decide that they shouldn't then want to be in a school that plays in such a Conference they all hate there at the school as well ? Just asking, mind you. Are the very public complaints by Uconn fans with the AAC counterproductive to both short term and long term football program goals, in other words ? Does this effect the Uconn football recruiting in any way ?
Nope.