Irish fan on why UConn belongs in the ACC | Page 22 | The Boneyard

Irish fan on why UConn belongs in the ACC

Status
Not open for further replies.
btstimpy said:
Maryland Presidents have a misperception of their stature in the Academic arena all of the time. Dr. C. Daniel Mote was certainly confused. He never could get that place into the Top 50 academically. It's no surprise that his successor, Dr. Wallace Loh, is also confused.
Expand ...
I don't know stimpy. Maybe they are confused, but not about academic quality. I'm guessing they and most university presidents don't subscribe to your shortsighted and arbitrary view of academic quality. I'm fairly certain that Dr. Sullivan isn't that confused either.

Maryland and UConn do quite well even though they are not ranked in the top 50 by some rag. Your view of misperception is misplaced.
 
WingU-Conn said:
Because ND's decision to join the ACC hinges not on what's best for ND, but whether or not they get to keep playing Pitt.

LMAO.
Expand ...
More and more I think most of the UConn fans who live in bitterness choose not to see many things that are fairly obvious.

The move to being a half member of a conference in football was certain to cause us to lose football rivalries. The best for us in such a scenario was to keep a number of our football rivalries while continuing our hold over the northeast and extending our reach into the deep and lush recruiting grounds of the south, all while securing our basketball and non-revenues in the ideal situation.

The ACC was clearly far and away the best choice, and it became as close to perfect as we could expect with Pitt in the ACC. We have played Pitt 69 times. The only teams we have played more are Navy, SC, Purdue and Michigan State. As making the move to the ACC would mean the end, at least annually, of the Purdue and Michigan State rivalries, having Pitt as part of the ACC would go a long way toward easing the move.

It is no accident that DeLoss Dodds led the Big 12 in trying to land Pitt. They were going to use Pitt to try to get us to make the deal with them that we made with the ACC.
 
MSNDfan said:
It is no accident that DeLoss Dodds led the Big 12 in trying to land Pitt. They were going to use Pitt to try to get us to make the deal with them that we made with the ACC.
Expand ...

:eek::rolleyes:

2004: UConn over Pitt 29-17
2005: Pitt over UConn 24-0
2006: UConn over Pitt 46-45
2007: UConn over Pitt 34-14
2008: Pitt over UConn 34-10
2009: Pitt over UConn 24-21
2010: UConn over Pitt 30-28
2011: Pitt over UConn 35-20
2012: UConn over Pitt 24-17

Is this the Pitt team that Texas was dying to use as a lure for ND? A team that went 4-5 against a school that went full 85 scholarships for the first time a decade ago?

That only makes sense in the context of this:

2009: UConn over ND 33-30
 
MSNDfan said:
.

Here is what is pertinent about all this: ND coming aboard the ACC ended all possibility of anybody leaving, .
Expand ...

ND's giving up football independence by joining the ACC ( well with one foot in anyway ) indirectly helped the ACC in its leverage in getting a TV revenue contract that FSU and Clemson coould live with. This much is true. But it is MUCH more the case of the ACC's adoption by all its member schools with its recently enacted GOR provisions, binding on its member schools, that lessons the possibility of any ACC team leaving the ACC in the future... not so much ND's entry into the ACC.. The GOR is the glue for that.
 
upstater said:
:eek::rolleyes:

2004: UConn over Pitt 29-17
2005: Pitt over UConn 24-0
2006: UConn over Pitt 46-45
2007: UConn over Pitt 34-14
2008: Pitt over UConn 34-10
2009: Pitt over UConn 24-21
2010: UConn over Pitt 30-28
2011: Pitt over UConn 35-20
2012: UConn over Pitt 24-17

Is this the Pitt team that Texas was dying to use as a lure for ND? A team that went 4-5 against a school that went full 85 scholarships for the first time a decade ago?

That only makes sense in the context of this:

2009: UConn over ND 33-30
Expand ...

It makes sense in terms of ND's football history.

Because UConn has no football history, you may find the matter to be of no importance. But it matters.

And I would say that football history matters more to football fans than basketball history does to basketball fans.
 
.-.
WingU-Conn said:
Because ND's decision to join the ACC hinges not on what's best for ND, but whether or not they get to keep playing Pitt.

LMAO.
Expand ...
I know, its silly. The reality is ND saw the dominos falling all around them. They concluded ( correctly ) that they needed to find a home for their teams before the train left the station and they determined that the ACC was their best landing spot so they wanted to be sure the make up of that league would at least be something they could live with. ND did not want more of a southern tinge to the ACC.. they preferred an eastern tinge to it, so they did use their influence to try and shape the league they would soon be joining to include those schools that they had previous relationships with. ND had no previous relationships with the southern wing of the ACC. But they did with BC, Pitt, Miami, Syracuse from their BE days, going back several decades, as this ND fan correctly states in that respect, anyway.. So the negotiations for the shaping of the ACC from a predominently southern league to a much broader and more larger " Atlantic Coast " type league began to take shape.
 
Last edited:
MSNDfan said:
It makes sense in terms of ND's football history.

Because UConn has no football history, you may find the matter to be of no importance. But it matters.

And I would say that football history matters more to football fans than basketball history does to basketball fans.
Expand ...

We've got football history. I just gave you some. UConn actually won the BE when Pitt was in it. Pitt? Wallowing.
 
upstater said:
:eek::rolleyes:

2004: UConn over Pitt 29-17
2005: Pitt over UConn 24-0
2006: UConn over Pitt 46-45
2007: UConn over Pitt 34-14
2008: Pitt over UConn 34-10
2009: Pitt over UConn 24-21
2010: UConn over Pitt 30-28
2011: Pitt over UConn 35-20
2012: UConn over Pitt 24-17

Is this the Pitt team that Texas was dying to use as a lure for ND? A team that went 4-5 against a school that went full 85 scholarships for the first time a decade ago?

That only makes sense in the context of this:

2009: UConn over ND 33-30
Expand ...


No, it had more to do with ND playing Pitt 69 times and UConn once.
 
Yawkey Way said:
Yes, .. It was an unbridled and justifiable fear that the P5 train was leaving the station, and ND could not take the chance to be left behind doing the antiquated football independence gig any longer with the rapidly changing football landscape taking place all around them. So it made perfect sense for ND to find a league home, and the ACC in return got what it needed which was the ND brand to cut a good deal with the networks that later developed into a GOR deal.. all of which kept FSU and Clemson in the ACC, and prevented any poaching attempts as well as actual defections. ND in return kept their tv contracts, and some flexbility to keep about half their football schedule in their own domain, while the rest of their school teams came into the ACC as full members.
Expand ...

Here's a dime, go call your mother and tell her there are serious doubts about you being a college football fan.

Yawkey Way said:
ND's giving up football independence by joining the ACC ( well with one foot in anyway ) indirectly helped the ACC in its leverage in getting a TV revenue contract that FSU and Clemson coould live with. This much is true. But it is MUCH more the case of the ACC's adoption by all its member schools with its recently enacted GOR provisions, binding on its member schools, that lessons the possibility of any ACC team leaving the ACC in the future... not so much ND's entry into the ACC.. The GOR is the glue for that.
Expand ...

Sit back down Yawkey, that's the most intelligent thing you've said today.
 
.-.
upstater said:
We've got football history. I just gave you some. UConn actually won the BE when Pitt was in it. Pitt? Wallowing.
Expand ...
Now that's funny. For your sake, I hope you are joking. For UConn's sake, I hope no one in your administration or athletics department thinks that way, or at least has the good sense to pretend not to.
 
MSNDfan said:
Now that's funny. For your sake, I hope you are joking. For UConn's sake, I hope no one in your administration or athletics department thinks that way, or at least has the good sense to pretend not to.
Expand ...
He's not joking. We have two conference titles at the FBS level.
 
MSNDfan said:
More and more I think most of the UConn fans who live in bitterness choose not to see many things that are fairly obvious.

The move to being a half member of a conference in football was certain to cause us to lose football rivalries. The best for us in such a scenario was to keep a number of our football rivalries while continuing our hold over the northeast and extending our reach into the deep and lush recruiting grounds of the south, all while securing our basketball and non-revenues in the ideal situation.

The ACC was clearly far and away the best choice, and it became as close to perfect as we could expect with Pitt in the ACC. We have played Pitt 69 times. The only teams we have played more are Navy, SC, Purdue and Michigan State. As making the move to the ACC would mean the end, at least annually, of the Purdue and Michigan State rivalries, having Pitt as part of the ACC would go a long way toward easing the move.

It is no accident that DeLoss Dodds led the Big 12 in trying to land Pitt. They were going to use Pitt to try to get us to make the deal with them that we made with the ACC.
Expand ...

No bitterness here. You're just a blowhard who thinks we're stupid.

On what planet would ND be a member of any conference where they are unable, or Pitt is unwilling to schedule an OOC game with ND?

Rivalries are so important to ND that they gave up three of them (Purdue, Michigan St., Michigan) so they could join the ACC to play Pitt. Right.

And you aren't even guaranteed to play Pitt every year anyway, right?
 
WingU-Conn said:
No bitterness here. You're just a blowhard who thinks we're stupid.

On what planet would ND be a member of any conference where they are unable, or Pitt is unwilling to schedule an OOC game with ND?

Rivalries are so important to ND that they gave up three of them (Purdue, Michigan St., Michigan) so they could join the ACC to play Pitt. Right.

And you aren't even guaranteed to play Pitt every year anyway, right?
Expand ...

SAP but memories are short in this thread.

- Well, Penn State 'had to' drop both ND and Pitt when they joined the BUG.

- Only the Michigan rivalry was given up and it had already been scheduled to go on hiatus. Sparty and Purd are staying but they won't be annual.

-We're still quasi-independent as long as we retain our two Californian annual opponents while preserving the Oct/Nov dates.

-Pitt/BC/Syr were not the reason we moved Olympic sports to the ACC [Duke and FSU are greater] but they make the 5 game commitment palatable. I can imagine that's it's only a 3 or 4 game obligation since we would have been playing those three anyway.
 
MSNDfan said:
Now that's funny. For your sake, I hope you are joking. For UConn's sake, I hope no one in your administration or athletics department thinks that way, or at least has the good sense to pretend not to.
Expand ...

For all Pitt and Syracuse's history of playing football, you would think that both schools would not lose repeatedly for a decade to a school that had its full compliment of scholarships for the first time in 2004. This must mean that their football history is not quite as weighty as you think it is. Yale U. also has quite a football history.
 
.-.
NotreDameJoe said:
SAP but memories are short in this thread.

- Well, Penn State 'had to' drop both ND and Pitt when they joined the BUG.

ND and PSU had a 10 year rivalry during the 1980s, and hardly played each other at all before then. I would hardly call it deep and abiding. And PSU would have played Pitt regularly if Pitt didn't demand a decade's worth of home-and-homes. PSU offered them a 2-2 that was rejected. I'm not sure why any of this is relevant anyway.

- Only the Michigan rivalry was given up and it had already been scheduled to go on hiatus. Sparty and Purd are staying but they won't be annual.

The only reason that we're even discussing this is the idea that ND preferred to play ACC teams over B1G teams. It is really hard to make this argument when the B1G isn't offering ND partial membership while the ACC is. Assuming independence is a priority for ND, that fact alone explains ND's current scheduling.

-We're still quasi-independent as long as we retain our two Californian annual opponents while preserving the Oct/Nov dates.

-Pitt/BC/Syr were not the reason we moved Olympic sports to the ACC [Duke and FSU are greater] but they make the 5 game commitment palatable. I can imagine that's it's only a 3 or 4 game obligation since we would have been playing those three anyway.
Expand ...

The deal is great for ND. No one has said otherwise.
 
No they didn't.

If PSU wanted to keep playing ND out of conference they would have. NOTHING prevented them from doing so.

Don't give a if you're quasi-independent or not.
The idea that Pitt factored into the ND decision is a duck___ing joke.
 
Yawkey Way said:
I agree with this actually. I 've never met a BC fan in my life that considers Uconn a rival in anything. Football drives the financial bus in college sports, not basketball. Uconn has never beaten BC in football... ever. .
Expand ...
Well they'd pretty much have to play for that happen and BCU seems to have hit on the sole methodology to keep that undefeated streak intact. A cowardly methodology but a one that allows their fans to make that claim. The irony is that the lack of local rival has contributed to no one in Mass caring about BCU football. But the unbeaten streak is intact, Pyrrhic victory that that is.
 
.-.
upstater said:
For all Pitt and Syracuse's history of playing football, you would think that both schools would not lose repeatedly for a decade to a school that had its full compliment of scholarships for the first time in 2004. This must mean that their football history is not quite as weighty as you think it is. Yale U. also has quite a football history.
Expand ...
And what point do you think you are making?

If Yale were to leave the Ivy League and declare it will play scholarship sports, the ACC would add it in a heartbeat. The reasons would be: the school's endowment and academic rankings and powerful alums, the 61,000 seat Yale Bowl and Yale's now very old football history, and its location.

Football history matters. Stadiums matter. Number of D1 football recruits in the state and in bordering states matter.
 
CL82 said:
The irony is that the lack of local rival has contributed to no one in Mass caring about BCU football. .
Expand ...

While the hate comes thru loud and clear, it does have to at least be based on some reality for the hate... and there's plenty to hitch your wagon too if thats your thing re. coming up with a reason to hate BC... but football fan interest comparison shouldn't be one to hitch your wagon too, it seems to me... not when BC had a larger home attendance at its football games last season than Uconn football did. If you're telling me that " noone in Mass cares about BC Football " then what does it say about Uconn football, when BC football attendence ( not where it tneeds to be by any stretch ) was still higher last season than for that for Uconn football. Look, I don't make the specious and ridiculous claim that " nobody cares about Uconn football in Connecticut " ( clearly untrue as well ), so lets not state an equally ridiculous claim re. BC football interest in a state I've lived in for a lot of years and would tend to know the level of football interest in the state pretty well,... good, bad, or indifferent regarding it.
 
Last edited:
MSNDfan said:
And what point do you think you are making?

If Yale were to leave the Ivy League and declare it will play scholarship sports, the ACC would add it in a heartbeat. The reasons would be: the school's endowment and academic rankings and powerful alums, the 61,000 seat Yale Bowl and Yale's now very old football history, and its location.

Football history matters. Stadiums matter. Number of D1 football recruits in the state and in bordering states matter.
Expand ...

That is rich.
 
MSNDfan said:
And what point do you think you are making?

If Yale were to leave the Ivy League and declare it will play scholarship sports, the ACC would add it in a heartbeat. The reasons would be: the school's endowment and academic rankings and powerful alums, the 61,000 seat Yale Bowl and Yale's now very old football history, and its location.

Football history matters. Stadiums matter. Number of D1 football recruits in the state and in bordering states matter.
Expand ...

The ACC would add Yale in a heartbeat and Texas wanted Pitt in the B12 to lure ND. Yale's location is apparently a lure too!
 
MSNDfan said:
And what point do you think you are making?

If Yale were to leave the Ivy League and declare it will play scholarship sports, the ACC would add it in a heartbeat. The reasons would be: the school's endowment and academic rankings and powerful alums, the 61,000 seat Yale Bowl and Yale's now very old football history, and its location.

Football history matters. Stadiums matter. Number of D1 football recruits in the state and in bordering states matter.
Expand ...

I'd rather see Penn do this than Yale. Again, I like to visit Philly. But Yale would work as well as Princeton. Don't need Harvard. We already have a member in that town. They could try for a B1G invite. Cornell doesn't excite although they have good lacrosse. We play them all the time.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,336
Messages
4,565,407
Members
10,466
Latest member
agiglax


Top Bottom