Irish fan on why UConn belongs in the ACC

[itgoeslike]

Well, we'll just agree to disagree. I view JC's relationship with Uconn to be very strained in their parting. I think he had bigtime" trouble " with his former employer and for quite awhile, until the school and he finally had to sever their relationship. Heck, he'd stll be at Uconn if he had his way, as we all should be able to agree that he misses coaching. How do we know this ? Because he said he misses coaching thats why. So " yes " I do think JC had " trouble with the school " and the school for their part certainly had " trouble " in his off the court stuff as well. Otherwise, they'd have kept him on board, and let him go out on his terms in retirement, not theirs, and not on a time frame they essentially dictated to him... ye

Your knowledge of UConn is beginning to strain under the inaccuracy of the statement above. I am sure Upstater has already posted that Calhoun hasn't severed his ties with UConn and is currently an employee with a multiyear contract and an office in the AD. There were many contributing factors that led Calhoun to retire as coach and his health at the time likely played a role. But he retired on his terms. In fact, his timing was implemented to box ADWM into accepting his hand-picked successor. If he had done it differently, UConn might not be enjoying its fourth national championship. Also, it's hardly a surprise that a guy that competitive, with his health back, wouldn't be longing to jump back into the mix again. Look at Larry Brown.

 

[Yawkey Way]

, JC would never be interested in any BC position.

BC was not going to hire JC... for reasons best left unsaid now. So the rumors that surfaced that JC was interested in the BC Basketball opening was bogus from the getgo. I accept without qualification that JC's denial of such interest in the BC opening to be 100% accurate.

 

[itgoeslike]

My goodness, if you think that JC's relationship with the school is not strained, then I don't know what to say. If you believe that JC is happy that his school has assigned him to a desk job ( albeit drawing a salary ) and that he's not out there courtside Coaching at Uconn still, then thats that, and you've convinced yourself that things are just peachy between JC and the School.

JC may have not have always seen eye to eye with UConn's former AD, but this friction was also occurring when we were in a transition period in terms of leadership. JC, WM and SH are all on the same page with regard to UConn being the best it can be. He has been a tremendous asset in his current position.

 

[BC1978]

Well, apparently, we're getting into what you didn't want to get into. I mean, we are going back tom 2003-2004. Most of us don't link to this stuff because we've been through it and it is over and done with, but nothing will erase the posts from BOT members of other schools who made the accusations pointed and explicit. By now, UConn posters simply know this like the back of our hand. It was heading the reorg that was a problem.

Sure, I understand your points, as a Uconn fan. I also understand how groups, over a period of time, can develop a collective narrative which they fervently believe to be true.

I am not here to try to disprove your point because, as I said, it is like trying to prove a negative. You and I are have probably worked long enough in the professional world to know that accusations - whether from a Board member or a mail clerk - hardly constitute "facts" without more than words to back them up - especially accusations made in the heat of the moment. Now if someone had proof of meetings, etc. that would be a whole different matter, IMO.

All this, of course, is really secondary to the question I asked - again, why so little curiosity on the part of folks here regarding the timing of the other departures from the BE shortly after he media deal was rejected? That's my question.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Y Calhoun hasn't severed his ties with UConn and is currently an employee with a multiyear contract and an office in the AD. .

I realize all this. There are lots of schools still paying salaries and incomes to people that have strained relationships nontheless. Even Kansas allowed former Uconn AD Lew Perkins to keep his desk job and salary there for quite a bit after the school and he were at odds, but nobody claims their relationship was not strained. I'm also not attempting to make the point that JC and the school had major problems. .. my reply was in response to the description above that ( quote ) " JC had no troubles with the school ". My reply was essentially to state that he indeed did have some trouble with his administration. But if people think otherwise, and he had no " trouble " with his school's administration, then thats their opinion and assessments on that observation, and thats fine too.

 

[SubbaBub]

I understand , but again, your are glossing over my question. The point I raised was that several schools left the BE in a relatively short period of time after reportedly turning down what was reported to be a generous ESPN media offer.

I am NOT making a connection between the two. Fact is, I have no idea. I am only saying that in the BC case, it is accepted fact here that BC lied about its involvement with the ACC in the summer of 2003 when they were taking part in the BE reorg. There are no records of any discussions between BC and the ACC during the summer months that you can point to to support this. Only in the fall after BC said they were going to reengage the ACC according to the BE minutes. As I said, in the absence of critical facts, who said what to whom - and when, I cannot debate this with you as it is like trying to prove a negative.

Again, my only point was that I find it fascinating that this whole scrutiny by many here has never been applied to the events surrounding the other schools' departures from the BE shortly after the media deal was rejected.

If the intent is to compare the bad faith underhandedness of BC and Pitt, then yes, the two are comparable. I have no reason to believe Syracuse, which on more than one occasion stuck with it, was the catalyst for turning down the deal.

If you tell me the C7 was backchanneling with Fox at the same time, I'd believe that, too.

In summary, the timing for these defections was about as bad as can be foe the BE. I don't really blame any school for leaving, all had reasons Miami, VT, WVU, RU, SU, Pitt, UL at the time. What gives BC special distinction around here is that if the BE only lost Miami and VT it would have been fine.

Remember, Cuse stayed to rebuild, BC committed to rebuilding and exited the backdoor afterwards. Unlike in 2011with Pitt/Cuse/UL/WVU, no one else was leaving at that time. Now, add in the efforts to keep UConn out and ask why anyone around here gives a flip about what anyone from BC has to say about anything? It's a completely devoid organization.

 

[itgoeslike]

I realize all this. There are lots of schools still paying salaries and incomes to people that have strained relationships nontheless. Even Kansas allowed former Uconn AD Lew Perkins to keep his desk job and salary there for quite a bit after the school and he were at odds, but nobody claims their relationship was not strained. I'm also not attempting to make the point that JC and the school had major problems. .. my reply was in response to the description above that ( quote ) " JC had no troubles with the school ". My reply was essentially to state that he indeed did have some trouble with his administration. But if people think otherwise, and he had no " trouble " with his school's administration, then thats their opinion and assessments on that observation, and thats fine too.

I think you are inflating the "strain" and incorrectly associating it with the "school" instead of a select individual(s). In fact, it could be readily argued that it was the former AD who was forced out. . .

 

[Yawkey Way]

. What gives BC special distinction around here is that if the BE only lost Miami and VT it would have been fine.

.

There is just honest disagreement on this then... as in my assessment there is no way the BE was ever going to be viable in the changing college football landscape with the loss of Miami, let alone the loss of both Miami and VT. Additionally, the fact that you have confidence that the basketball people working out of Providence, Rhode Island would be even remotely capable of moving the dysfunctional BE league of basketball interest schools and football interest schools into a viable competitive football league is a confidence level in the BE not shared by me in the least. The notion that if Miami football and Virginia Tech left and that BE Commish Tranghese would make things " fine " if only the others just sat tight is mind boggling.

 

[BC1978]

When a BOT member goes online and reveals conversations, then you know the news here is more relevant than the news from the official media.

Regardless, we've gone over what Pitt did here repeatedly, but we've also noted that for some bizarre reasons, Pitt had help from a Catholic school, and without that help, the deal would've been struck, but we also realize that even with $13m from ESPN for each football team, that wouldn't have been enough to prevent Pitt and Cuse from bolting to $20-22m a year. We go back to 2004 because ND's vote essentially prevented the schools from splitting the BE's assets equitably, and we do believe that the football schools as constituted in 2005 might have stuck together with a $16-17m a year deal (a bump in the basketball package, since Cuse, Louisville, Pitt, UConn, Cincy, West Virginia, and maybe eventually Memphis, would have played each other 2x a year and driven up the bball money).

I do recall those online posts. From what I remember, that Board member bitterly accused BC of reneging on a "hand shake" to remain in the BE and move forward. Do I have that correct?

Good thing no other school has since reneged on a strong public commitment to their league (sarcasm included here).

Seriously, if I recall that post correctly, what the post did NOT speak to was when BC was back involved with the ACC. If I recall correctly, it only made the statement that BC reneged on the handshake WHEN it jumped to the ACC. That's different, IMO, than stating, for example, that BC had been secretly negotiating with the ACC over the summer of 2003 when it was at the same time involved with the BE reorg.

While certainly not pretty or elegant, BC would hardly be the first school to make a commitment to a conference only to abandon that commitment and jump when a better opportunity came. (SEE: every other school that has jumped conferences.)

That said, if someone can show me that such meetings did in fact occur during the summer of 2003, then I would probably concede your point.

 

[BC1978]

On point one, it wasn't about a handshake. It was publically calling the Pres. a liar because of double dealing with the ACC.

As for the earlier summer meeting, that's when the vote was taken by the football schools to split. It was going to be fait accompli with a split of the assets. Until ND weighed in,and none of the football schools expected that. The details were actually in the very same minutes as the Sept. meeting.

Well, again, with all due respect, simply calling someone a liar doesn't make it so. The BC President could have very well meant what he said when it was said. Things change. What was true in June might not be true in October. That's the way this process has worked.

If I also recall correctly, there wasn't a shred of proof that BC was double dealing with the ACC at the time of this so-called promise.

Again, if such proof exists, I will concede your point. Not based on someone's emotional accusations, however.

 

[Yawkey Way]

[quote="BC1978, post: 935978, member: 2669".

While certainly not pretty or elegant, BC would hardly be the first school to make a commitment to a conference only to abandon that commitment and jump when a better opportunity came. (SEE: every other school that has jumped conferences.)
.[/quote]

What if the ACC offered an invite to Uconn after Miami and VT left ? Would Uconn have declined ? Leave the BE ( and BC )behind ? If Uconn went to the ACC back then, it would hurt and damage BC football beyond repair potentially. And what about the development of a New England College football rivalry so needed in these parts ? Thapotential loss would not be good for the region. There could even be a lawsuit in the works, who knows. So for these reasons alone, my guess if Uconn was invited to the ACC, they would have turned it down and have worked alongside BC, Syracuse to make the BE stronger and better under the expert stewardship of then BE Commisioner Michael Tranghese. What do you think ?

 

[Fishy]

Fr. Leahy and Kenneth Shaw spoke the day after Miami and Virginia Tech were invited into the ACC and both promised that they would not negotiate or accept an invitation to the ACC while either was in his position.

Further, the presidents of the six remaining Big East clubs met and, again, Boston College and Syracuse pledged to remain in the conference.

And then Boston College called the ACC.

I don't really care that Boston College left - it hasn't worked out terribly well on the field for them. But BC fans have to admit that their school burned a lot of bridges on their way out the door.

 

[UConn9604]

If the intent is to compare the bad faith underhandedness of BC and Pitt, then yes, the two are comparable. I have no reason to believe Syracuse, which on more than one occasion stuck with it, was the catalyst for turning down the deal.

If you tell me the C7 was backchanneling with Fox at the same time, I'd believe that, too.

In summary, the timing for these defections was about as bad as can be foe the BE. I don't really blame any school for leaving, all had reasons Miami, VT, WVU, RU, SU, Pitt, UL at the time. What gives BC special distinction around here is that if the BE only lost Miami and VT it would have been fine.

Remember, Cuse stayed to rebuild, BC committed to rebuilding and exited the backdoor afterwards. Unlike in 2011with Pitt/Cuse/UL/WVU, no one else was leaving at that time. Now, add in the efforts to keep UConn out and ask why anyone around here gives a flip about what anyone from BC has to say about anything? It's a completely devoid organization.

I will never understand the emotional magnetic attraction that might cause a BC fan to come to this board. Makes no sense.

 

[BC1978]

Let's say it never happened. He should have resigned his position at the head long before announcing to everyone he was leaving for the ACC. By the way, are you saying he told everyone he was leaving without talking to the ACC first?

Upstater this response is to your question and Fishy's comment above.

Based on the September meeting minutes, BC indicated that they were unhappy with the new BE structure and would be reaching out to the ACC. Prior to then, other than maintaining connections, the ACC and BC would have had little to discuss or negotiate. The ACC was committed to an 11 team league and would play the ACCCG with 11 teams. No need to split the pot 12 ways when they could do it 11 ways.

It was in mid-September when the defining event occurred. Specifically, the ACC"s waiver to play a CG with 11 teams was denied - meaning the ACC would need a 12th team. IMO, that was when discussions began with the ACC. Not during the summer (when BC was working on the reorg) as there was nothing to discuss then.

In fact, the article pretty directly infers that BC was NOT having any discussions with the ACC prior to then. (See the Clemson AD's comments.)

And if BC didn't make the move in the fall, Syracuse was more than willing to take their place.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...nia-tech-championship-game-miami-and-virginia

 

[Yawkey Way]

I don't really care that Boston College left - it hasn't worked out terribly well on the field for them. .

BC has been to 2 ACC Championship games in football, and 1 ACC Championship Game in Basketball and lost to Duke in the ACC Championship game by 2 points at the buzzer since joining up with the ACC. These 3 games ( yes lost all 3 ) is still better than more than half the ACC teams have reached in Championship Games in the similar time frame since BC went to the ACC. So it not been all that shabby.

 

[UConn9604]

Well, again, with all due respect, simply calling someone a liar doesn't make it so. The BC President could have very well meant what he said when it was said. Things change. What was true in June might not be true in October. That's the way this process has worked.

If I also recall correctly, there wasn't a shred of proof that BC was double dealing with the ACC at the time of this so-called promise.

Again, if such proof exists, I will concede your point. Not based on someone's emotional accusations, however.

How's this? If you honestly think that BC did not reach out to the ACC between the "late September" period referenced by Fr. Leahy and October 1, and did nothing about this "speculation," then I don't know what to tell you.

In late September, the NCAA championships cabinet voted against allowing the ACC to hold a football championship game with only 11 schools. Press reports then suggested that this would cause the ACC to consider adding a 12th team, and speculation began that BC would be invited to join.

On Oct. 1, the Big East subcommittee working on reorganizing the conference met in Newark, and I told the group that given stories in the press and because of my continued unhappiness with the proposed league structure, I intended to find out if the ACC was in fact interested in BC, and then make a decision. I also said that I realized the Big East needed to know soon about BC's status so that the Conference could complete restructuring plans for action at the Nov. 4 meeting of league presidents.

On Oct. 12, we received and accepted an invitation to become a member of the ACC.

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chronicle/v12/o17/qa.html

 

[BC1978]

How's this? If you honestly think that BC did not reach out to the ACC between the "late September" period referenced by Fr. Leahy and October 1, and did nothing about this "speculation," then I don't know what to tell you.

In late September, the NCAA championships cabinet voted against allowing the ACC to hold a football championship game with only 11 schools. Press reports then suggested that this would cause the ACC to consider adding a 12th team, and speculation began that BC would be invited to join.

On Oct. 1, the Big East subcommittee working on reorganizing the conference met in Newark, and I told the group that given stories in the press and because of my continued unhappiness with the proposed league structure, I intended to find out if the ACC was in fact interested in BC, and then make a decision. I also said that I realized the Big East needed to know soon about BC's status so that the Conference could complete restructuring plans for action at the Nov. 4 meeting of league presidents.

On Oct. 12, we received and accepted an invitation to become a member of the ACC.

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chronicle/v12/o17/qa.html

Read my post above. I believe they did have discussions with the ACC in late September. Not during the summer when they were working on the BE reorg as they have been accused of here.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I will never understand the emotional magnetic attraction that might cause a BC fan to come to this board. Makes no sense.

For one, there is no discussion among BC fans anywhere regarding Uconn football. Plus, I have friends and relatives in Connecticut. There is more talk on BC football here than on most of the ACC football boards, and they're not knowledgeable on all the league realignments updates that Uconn fans seem to be able to post here. Plus, I havn't seen any Uconn posters at all on the AAC fan base sites, and havn't figured out why they are talking more re. ACC teams here like BC, Syracuse, Pitt, but not about their current league teams.

 

[BC1978]

It defies belief that he would make such a statement without talking to the ACC first.

Why? They didn't at the time say they were leaving the BE - only that they would reach back to the ACC to gauge their interest. Had they begun discussions with the ACC at that time? Maybe. But the timeline was clearly not what you suggested earlier - the summer, when they were working on the BE reorg. The Clemson AD's comments seemed to make that pretty clear.

 

[Fishy]

BC has been to 2 ACC Championship games in football, and 1 ACC Championship Game in Basketball and lost to Duke in the ACC Championship game by 2 points at the buzzer since joining up with the ACC. These 3 games ( yes lost all 3 ) is still better than more than half the ACC teams have reached in Championship Games in the similar time frame since BC went to the ACC. So it not been all that shabby.

If that's where you've set the bar for success, no problem.

 

[Fishy]

For one, there is no discussion among BC fans anywhere regarding Uconn football. Plus, I have friends and relatives in Connecticut. There is more talk on BC football here than on most of the ACC football boards, and they're not knowledgeable on all the league realignments updates that Uconn fans seem to be able to post here. Plus, I havn't seen any Uconn posters at all on the AAC fan base sites, and havn't figured out why they are talking more re. ACC teams here like BC, Syracuse, Pitt, but not about their current league teams.

Have you noticed that you're on a conference realignment message board on a UConn website?

 

[Yawkey Way]

Fr. Leahy and Kenneth Shaw spoke the day after Miami and Virginia Tech were invited into the ACC and both promised that they would not negotiate or accept an invitation to the ACC while either was in his position.
.

Court Documents and sworn testimony in Blumental lawsuit showed that former Uconn AD Lew Perkins contacted ACC Commish Swofford personally on behalf of Uconn after Miami left to determine Swofford's interest in Uconn to the ACC. Swofford told Perkins that Uconn was not a primary candidate. Blumenthal himself may have not known of this until after the lawsuit was launched. But Perkins was long gone once the depos and testimony began, as he left for the B12 out to Kansas. Swofford is mad to this day, as he was sued personally by the lawsuit that came out of Connecticut.. and he's well aware of Uconn's first contact by its school to determine the ACC's interest. So Uconn was doing one thing while feigning fidelity to the BE as well. All the schools were, just at different stages thats all, and mostly done by the chronolocical order of the college football pecking order.

 

[UConn9604]

Court Documents and sworn testimony in Blumental lawsuit showed that former Uconn AD Lew Perkins contacted ACC Commish Swofford personally on behalf of Uconn after Miami left to determine Swofford's interest in Uconn to the ACC. Swofford told Perkins that Uconn was not a primary candidate. Blumenthal himself may have not known of this until after the lawsuit was launched. But Perkins was long gone once the depos and testimony began, as he left for the B12 out to Kansas. Swofford is mad to this day, as he was sues personally by the lawsuit that came out of Connecticut. So Uconn was doing one thing while feigning fidelity to the BE as well. All the schools were, just at different stages thats all, and mostly done by the chronolocical order of the college football pecking order.

Cite?

 

[itgoeslike]

Guy doesn't even realize that JC is the point person for a lot of fundraising for the university, and that he has a good relationship with anyone other than Hathaway, who was fired by the very same people Calhoun supposedly has issues with, and his firing is partly a result of his poor relationship with Calhoun!

I agree. JC has been an asset for recruiting, fundraising, and elevating the UConn brand nationally. And while he's done a good job making it Ollie's team, I can't imagine KO not seeking out his perspective on a regular basis. The longevity and success of our high profile coaches are often inspiration for marginalization. I guess when you are the dominate program for two decades in 1 of 2 revenue sports, you have a target on your back. Here's hoping Coach Diaco earns a target on his back sooner than later.

 

[MSNDfan]

Court Documents and sworn testimony in Blumental lawsuit showed that former Uconn AD Lew Perkins contacted ACC Commish Swofford personally on behalf of Uconn after Miami left to determine Swofford's interest in Uconn to the ACC. Swofford told Perkins that Uconn was not a primary candidate. Blumenthal himself may have not known of this until after the lawsuit was launched. But Perkins was long gone once the depos and testimony began, as he left for the B12 out to Kansas. Swofford is mad to this day, as he was sues personally by the lawsuit that came out of Connecticut. So Uconn was doing one thing while feigning fidelity to the BE as well. All the schools were, just at different stages thats all, and mostly done by the chronolocical order of the college football pecking order.

I didn't know that about UConn, but it is no surprise. Once it was clear that Miami was gone to the ACC as soon as it could get an invite, BE football was in very serious trouble. Everybody was then looking for an exit.

And the football pecking order you mention - UConn was then at the BE bottom of it because it was brand new to the big time.