One bowl in the last seven year's? That's a convenient break point isn't it? Why stop there why not say 2 bowls in the last 8 years, or 3 in the last nine. or 4 in the 10 years, or 5 bowls in the last 11 years?
Keep in mind that UConn only became a full 1A program in 2002. Two years later we went to our first bowl game. That is stunning. UConn football is in a down period after two horrific hire but had great success including two conference championships (2007 and 2010) and a BCS bowl (The Fiesta Bowl 2010.) We were selling out the Rent and football was turning a profit.
The logic behind dropping football down to an independent would also support dropping basketball to the A-10. Basketball has had two season without a NCAA tournament in a row (barring a miraculous run this year) and can't even fill our 10k seat home arena, never mind the XL. We have had more 20 point losses than any other year in program history. So should we commit to being a mid major? Of course not, it is a ridiculous premise, every bit as silly going independent in football.
As other posters have noted, the new Big East isn't the Big East we remember. Syracuse is in the ACC with Pitt and BC. Rutgers in the Big 10 and West Virginia is in the Big 12. Cinci, USF and UCF, of course are still in the conference formerly known as the Big East but now called the American.
Going independent is a death sentence not just for the football program but for the athletic program as well. Football is where the mega conferences make their money. The American and the new Big East have tiny media contracts that mean that eventually they will lose the ever escalating athletic department arms race. There may not be more expansion for the P-5 conferences but UConn is smart to make itself a candidate for as long as it can.
You make a very good counterpoint, and yes, it was convenient to only go back to the last seven years, however, in the last 7 years for men's basketball, we have seen 2 national championships, which was the basis for comparison. I am fully aware that the new Big East is not the same conference we were once a part of from a competition standpoint, but from a recruiting and geographic standpoint, it absolutely is. My concern with the whole issue at hand is what our likely options are at this point. Holding out hope for an invite to the ACC, Big 10, or Big 12, seems less likely than getting an invitation to the new Big East.
Since I'm only trying to look at this from an economical standpoint, the most money that the athletic department can likely generate would be going independent for football and trying to schedule the likes of Alabama, OSU, Auburn, Clemson, etc., and securing the basketball teams in a more logical geographic conference that has more natural and existing rivalries (Providence, St. John's, Villanova). The change for basketball would almost immediately see an increase in ticket revenues from the last two seasons, because let's face it, no one wants to watch this team play ECU on a Wednesday night. I'll be honest, I don't know the TV contract dollars in the American versus the new Big East.
