I think we fundamentally agree. UConn has challenges and we certainly don’t have the BCS or P5 moniker like RE had during his 1.0 term.We had two things almost twenty years ago when we started that we don't have now. We had fans who thought this would be fun, who didn't have to sit through 12 years without a winning season, and we had a conference tie in that meant if we won our conference, which didn't have any traditional superpowers, we would play in a Top 4 bowl. Neither of those are there now.
NO ONE IS SAYING WE WOULDN'T BENEFIT FROM A BETTER COACH. CERTAINLY I'M NOT SAYING THAT. But the question remains as to what we will accomplish with a better coach, and we're nowhere near where we were in terms of either attracting that guy or keeping him after some initial success. (And yes, I'd take initial success.)
Yes he is.Ok, let the insults fly while you’re backtracking, that’s all you have. Troll
Agree with everything except the shortsightedness of BC. This was intentional so they could (paraphrasing) "remain the face of college athletics in New England". In some fantasy world they thought, in 2011, they were the face of New England college sports. We shall see as the dominos fall over the next decade where BC ends up if the ACC falls apart. They bring absolutely no value to that conference now. They are equivalent to Wake Forrest (or Vandy in the SEC).
Not saying this will happen, but if the ACC gets poached by a SEC / Big10 mega conference and the leftover northeast schools (Cuse, Pitt, BC, Rutgers, Maryland, etc.) need a new home in the NEW New Big East, I hope UConn gets the last laugh and boxes out BC. F them.