IF there is Big 12 Expansion

[J187Money]

What you are describing is keeping a "Nielsen Diary." These booklets are/were mass produced and distributed in select markets for use as an additional data point for local affiliates to set ad rates during sweeps periods. There are however device thingamajigges that are attached to TV's to meter usage. These "people meters", as they're called, are responsible for generating The Nielsen Ratings that everyone likes to reference. One single home's viewership will be considered representative of tens of thousands of homes featuring the same demographics within that area. If anybody here has these devices installed in their home, I suggest watching LOTS of UConn Programming. Things may have changed a bit technology wise over the last few years, but this is how it was done when I worked for NMR in Eastern PA, Southern NJ, and Upstate NY for many years in the 2000's.

There are diary markets and meter markets. Same with radio.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Agreed, but that's where the whole UConn as a favorite comes in.

And if UConn casts the deciding vote against the Big XII? No thanks. #2 doesn't technically force their hand. We'd be in the good graces of the B1G and not hated by the Big XII.

 

[Stinger92860]

And if UConn casts the deciding vote against the Big XII? No thanks. #2 doesn't technically force their hand. We'd be in the good graces of the B1G and not hated by the Big XII.

UConn does not have a vote, the AAC does.

 

[NYUConn]

UCmn does not have a vote, the AAC does.

That people think Warde can go rogue and vote how he or UConn want here is absolutely hilarious.

 

[HuskyHawk]

UConn does not have a vote, the AAC does.

I'm well aware of that.

 

[whaler11]

There are diary markets and meter markets. Same with radio.

I don't think they use diaries outside of sweeps anymore.

 

[J187Money]

I don't think they use diaries outside of sweeps anymore.

http://www.tvb.org/media/file/Local_Media_Market_Measurement_Types.pdf

4x a year for diary markets

 

[whaler11]

http://www.tvb.org/media/file/Local_Media_Market_Measurement_Types.pdf

4x a year for diary markets

Aka... sweeps

 

[J187Money]

Aka... sweeps

I wasn't arguing, just providing further detailed information.

 

[cttxus]

I know I've been beating the drum on this recently but, in light of our seemingly improving chances of getting a Big 12 invitation, if we do get an invitation will it require significant changes to our recruiting strategy and basic design philosophy and execution on Offense? If so, coach Patterson's departure could provide a way to begin that change sooner than later especially if, in the process, we can find someone to continue the great momentum he created with recruiting in North Texas.

In 2015, the (10) B12 member O's scored an avg of 35 pts/game (and gave up an avg of 32 pts/game on D). If you throw out the high and low scores on both sides of the ball, though, the averages are 36 pts/game scored on O, and 25/pts/game given up on D. This compares to UConn's 17.2pts/game on O and 19.5 pts/game on D.

 

[JSM1970]

We should be able to improve recruiting and the talent/depth on the roster, especially at the skill positions.

I know I've been beating the drum on this recently but, in light of our seemingly improving chances of getting a Big 12 invitation, if we do get an invitation will it require significant changes to our recruiting strategy and basic design philosophy and execution on Offense? If so, coach Patterson's departure could provide a way to begin that change sooner than later especially if, in the process, we can find someone to continue the great momentum he created with recruiting in North Texas.

In 2015, the (10) B12 member O's scored an avg of 35 pts/game (and gave up an avg of 32 pts/game on D). If you throw out the high and low scores on both sides of the ball, though, the averages are 36 pts/game scored on O, and 25/pts/game given up on D. This compares to UConn's 19.5pts/game on O and 17.2 pts/game on D.

 

[cttxus]

We should be able to improve recruiting and the talent/depth on the roster, especially at the skill positions.

Agree, but I have to think the basic design philosophy of the O would need to be seriously reviewed and possibly changed first, specifically to target and compete with some of the (currently) middle-of-the-pack B12 teams like WVU, TX, Tech, and K State.

 

[Dooley]

I know I've been beating the drum on this recently but, in light of our seemingly improving chances of getting a Big 12 invitation, if we do get an invitation will it require significant changes to our recruiting strategy and basic design philosophy and execution on Offense? If so, coach Patterson's departure could provide a way to begin that change sooner than later especially if, in the process, we can find someone to continue the great momentum he created with recruiting in North Texas.

In 2015, the (10) B12 member O's scored an avg of 35 pts/game (and gave up an avg of 32 pts/game on D). If you throw out the high and low scores on both sides of the ball, though, the averages are 36 pts/game scored on O, and 25/pts/game given up on D. This compares to UConn's 17.2pts/game on O and 19.5 pts/game on D.

Completely agree. While the KState fan on the other thread didn't exactly endear himself to us, he's not exactly wrong either. There is absolutely zero chance we will be able to compete by playing bend but don't break defense, punting on 4th and 1, running slow offense sets and calling TO at the end of the play clock because of continued confusion, etc. We will need to go uptempo. Scoring in the teens will lose 1000% of our games, even the ones against Kansas.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

In other words, we're currently in the Great Depression.

I'm curious as to what exactly would be our Pearl Harbor.

 

[cttxus]

Completely agree. While the KState fan on the other thread didn't exactly endear himself to us, he's not exactly wrong either. There is absolutely zero chance we will be able to compete by playing bend but don't break defense, punting on 4th and 1, running slow offense sets and calling TO at the end of the play clock because of continued confusion, etc. We will need to go uptempo. Scoring in the teens will lose 1000% of our games, even the ones against Kansas.

We'd have to compete off the field for recruits as well, right in the Big 12's own back yard, as we'd likely play an avg of 4-5 games per year there. What would UConn's value proposition to recruits be against the likes of UT, OK, TCU, Baylor, and even A&M, if the status quo on O is maintained? I can think of one thing for sure; playing on a perennially, highly-ranked D. Great, but then what?

 

[Dooley]

We'd have to compete off the field for recruits as well, right in the Big 12's own back yard, as we'd likely play an avg of 4-5 games per year there. What would UConn's value proposition to recruits be against the likes of UT, OK, TCU, Baylor, and even A&M, if the status quo on O is maintained? I can can of one thing for sure; playing on a perennially, highly-ranked D. Yes, but but then what?

In the past few days, I have begun thinking about this too. I think a B12 entry would put us towards the top of the ladder for potential skill position recruits in the northeast (anywhere from MD on up). WR/QBs/TEs/RBs all want to play B12 style football. If we can select a few a year that fits in well with our university culture and continue to shape a top defensive style, we can compete. Make no mistake, it will take a long time to recruit and implement the style of offense we will need to play to compete but the good news will be that we will be the only school running it east of WVU/Cincinnati. It will also mean a shift of OL recruiting. No more ground and pound run style of OL. We will need big but agile guys that can get downfield to block on screens and short throws. Not to mention, get down field for uptempo drives.

 

[History Geek]

In the past few days, I have begun thinking about this too. I think a B12 entry would put us towards the top of the ladder for potential skill position recruits in the northeast (anywhere from MD on up). WR/QBs/TEs/RBs all want to play B12 style football. If we can select a few a year that fits in well with our university culture and continue to shape a top defensive style, we can compete. Make no mistake, it will take a long time to recruit and implement the style of offense we will need to play to compete but the good news will be that we will be the only school running it east of WVU/Cincinnati. It will also mean a shift of OL recruiting. No more ground and pound run style of OL. We will need big but agile guys that can get downfield to block on screens and short throws. Not to mention, get down field for uptempo drives.

I wouldn't want a TOTAL shift in the types of offensive personnel we recruit. Yes, we need to be able to open it up more and have a good uptempo package when needed. However, our offense still has to work in November at home, when the wind and cold rain/snow is a-blowin'. Ball control ground and pound coupled with a smack-mouth D works well in those conditions.

 

[Dooley]

I wouldn't want a TOTAL shift in the types of offensive personnel we recruit. Yes, we need to be able to open it up more and have a good uptempo package when needed. However, our offense still has to work in November at home, when the wind and cold rain/snow is a-blowin'. Ball control ground and pound coupled with a smack-mouth D works well in those conditions.

Agreed - contrarian styles can be competitive if the right personnel is in place and execution is near perfect. But we would need to recruit speed skill positions to score points. Holding offenses like TCU and Baylor in the 30s would be quite a defensive feat and our current offense is more suited for games played in the teens and 20s.

 

[whaler11]

Y'all might be putting the cart before the horse...

 

[History Geek]

Y'all might be putting the cart before the horse...

True. Thanks for reeling me back in.

 

[Dooley]

Y'all

horse...

You were saying???

 

[whaler11]

I'm curious as to what exactly would be our Pearl Harbor.

Losing to Iowa State while Syracuse and Pittsburgh went poof in the night.

 

[JSM1970]

Maybe already covered, is it pretty high odds the 10 team CCG will not be approved, so B12 has to get to 12 for Champ game and then issue is do they feel they need to, and if so who? And only 2?

 

[businesslawyer]

Completely agree. While the KState fan on the other thread didn't exactly endear himself to us, he's not exactly wrong either. There is absolutely zero chance we will be able to compete by playing bend but don't break defense, punting on 4th and 1, running slow offense sets and calling TO at the end of the play clock because of continued confusion, etc. We will need to go uptempo. Scoring in the teens will lose 1000% of our games, even the ones against Kansas.

No. We have to get better, but we don't have to get faster If you reduce possessions in a game, you reduce points without doing anything else. Points per possession is a far more important metric than average points.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Maybe already covered, is it pretty high odds the 10 team CCG will not be approved, so B12 has to get to 12 for Champ game and then issue is do they feel they need to, and if so who? And only 2?

SEC announced they are against it. Big 10 is against it, which means the Pac 12 is probably against it. At this point, if the ACC can't pick its top two teams the way it wants, it might be against it too.