Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[Storrs South]

 

[Storrs South]

 

[buddy]

Connecticut governors making public statements about UConn in conference realignment is always so cringe.

I don't mind him making a statement, but the one he made was just dumb. I would have liked to hear a statement of how he is in talks with ESPN regarding UConn's future.

 

[CL82]

I don't mind him making a statement, but the one he made was just dumb. I would have liked to hear a statement of how he is in talks with ESPN regarding UConn's future.

Or something like “the University of Connecticut competes against the very best institutions in the country both academically and athletically. We have a proud tradition of success both on the field and the basketball court and in the classroom. I fully expect that we will to continue to compete at the highest levels.”

 

[shizzle787]

They are getting raided lol.

 

[Billy Jack]

Remember, the B1G added rutgers. UCONN has many of the pieces which make it an attractive addition including state flagship, academics, power buget, market and multiple championships in multiple sports. The winning could and most certainly would come later just as it did when it joined the BCS Big East.

You’re not being objective. Rutgers is the flag ship of a state with almost 10 million people vs UConn in a state with about 40% of NJ’s population. Rutgers is AAU and has a research budget that is much larger than UConn’s. The B1G is a research consortium as well as a sports conference, which is why they value AAU and research $$$. The B1G did a study 20 years ago of universities which are most similar to B1G universities. Rutgers was at the top of the list. They had been bird dogging Rutgers for a long time before they invited them. Twenty years ago we were just bringing our football into 1A and weren’t even in Big East Football yet. We were playing catch up and in many ways we still are.

With all that said, if the B1G were making its decision today, I don’t know that Rutgers would get an invite. The emphasis seems to have shifted from a school’s market to its brand. If a school can deliver eyeballs to regardless of its market size, that seems to be what matters most. Our football program doesn’t deliver that.

 

[Billy Jack]

FSU is in the realignment discussion without a recent winning record

We have no idea who’s in the conversations that matter. Social media and sports writers can put out all kinds of speculation, but those aren’t the conversations that matter.

 

[CL82]

You’re not being objective. Rutgers is the flag ship of a state with almost 10 million people vs UConn in a state with about 40% of NJ’s population. Rutgers is AAU and has a research budget that is much larger than UConn’s. The B1G is a research consortium as well as a sports conference, which is why they value AAU and research $$$. The B1G did a study 20 years ago of universities which are most similar to B1G universities. Rutgers was at the top of the list. They had been bird dogging Rutgers for a long time before they invited them. Twenty years ago we were just bringing our football into 1A and weren’t even in Big East Football yet. We were playing catch up and in many ways we still are.

With all that said, if the B1G were making its decision today, I don’t know that Rutgers would get an invite. The emphasis seems to have shifted from a school’s market to its brand. If a school can deliver eyeballs to regardless of its market size, that seems to be what matters most. Our football program doesn’t deliver that.

Rutgers got the Big Ten invite solely because it allowed the Big Ten to charge a tier 1 premium for households within the NYCDMA. No one in the big 10 was interested in RU for its research prowess, or for “looking like a big 10 school“, which, having been on campus often, I can tell you it does not. As you allude to, the fact that New Jersey has the population density of New Delhi also enhanced its application. The Rutgers invite was a money grab pure and simple. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but let’s not pretend it was something else.

 

[dayooper]

Rutgers got the Big Ten invite solely because it allowed the Big Ten to charge a tier 1 premium for households within the NYCDMA. No one in the big 10 was interested in RU for its research prowess, or for “looking like a big 10 school“, which, having been on campus often, I can tell you it does not. As you allude to, the fact that New Jersey has the population density of New Delhi also enhanced its application. The Rutgers invite was a money grab pure and simple. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but let’s not pretend it was something else.

There are are reasons, but they really aren’t Rutgers related. The size of the state, NYC eyeballs and AAU status are most definitely factors, but so is the fact that they play right next door to NYC. There are so many alumni in the area. Michigan, OSU, PSU and Indiana all gave huge alumni bases in NYC. These are the donating kind of alumni. Being able to hold events before and after games is a huge benefit to these schools. And if you don’t think OSU and Michigan carry more weight than some of the other schools, you would be mistaken.

 

[Chin Diesel]

What is this supposed to accomplish?

 

[Kolumbo]

You’re not being objective. Rutgers is the flag ship of a state with almost 10 million people vs UConn in a state with about 40% of NJ’s population. Rutgers is AAU and has a research budget that is much larger than UConn’s. The B1G is a research consortium as well as a sports conference, which is why they value AAU and research $$$. The B1G did a study 20 years ago of universities which are most similar to B1G universities. Rutgers was at the top of the list. They had been bird dogging Rutgers for a long time before they invited them. Twenty years ago we were just bringing our football into 1A and weren’t even in Big East Football yet. We were playing catch up and in many ways we still are.

With all that said, if the B1G were making its decision today, I don’t know that Rutgers would get an invite. The emphasis seems to have shifted from a school’s market to its brand. If a school can deliver eyeballs to regardless of its market size, that seems to be what matters most. Our football program doesn’t deliver that.

My comment regarding rutty was addressing the level of football success, but I agree with your assessment. Still, UCONN checks all the other boxes and will B1G come begging for us? No. But UCONN is still worthy of a look by the big conferences.

 

[CL82]

What is this supposed to accomplish?

Double dog daring the Big Ten to invite us?

 

[jostar1]

Or something like “the University of Connecticut competes against the very best institutions in the country both academically and athletically. We have a proud tradition of success both on the field and the basketball court and in the classroom. I fully expect that we will to continue to compete at the highest levels.”

That sounds like Susan Herbst.

 

[Kolumbo]

What is this supposed to accomplish?

Humor. I think people are taking the twitter far too seriously.

 

[CL82]

That sounds like Susan Herbst.

No. If it was a Herbst quote it would be something like “we are winning winners who win at winning and there is no such thing as a white Husky.”

 

[SU1968]

That part is actually not true as I have recently found out.

Agree. The ACC GoR says any new school must sign the GoR to be accepted. That would not affect the status of current members.

 

[Ha Who]

What is this supposed to accomplish?

I suppose it is better than suing the P5 conferences

 

[Waquoit]

What is this supposed to accomplish?

I like that the governor sounds like a fan while showing that the state has UConn's back. When has the grown-up approach worked lately? Not when BE 1.0 was melting down. Besides, what he said is true. BCU and SU have admitted as much.

 

[businesslawyer]

What is this supposed to accomplish?

Make some people on the Boneyard who think social media words are meaningful happy. Not a thing else.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

Many of you are too wrapped up in his tweet. He was answering a question from someone, nothing more. I think it was a cheeky poke at BC and any other school who doesn't want us invited to their party. Good answer.

 

[Rufus]

USC will want to play at Rutgers and Maryland as much as possible. Why? USC alumni in NYC and DC - these games will be part of a fundraising effort for USC with their alumni. Same with the other B1G schools. This is a money move in more ways than one.

Another thought - Look at what B1G baseball can become now. I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see B1G games played at USC and UCLA between other B1G schools in March especially. Minnesota vs. Michigan played @ USC, for example. Maybe B1G schools can spend money on domed baseball and softball fields too.

 

[freescooter]

Basketball home attendance dropped from a peak of 13,800 in the old Big East days to a low of 7,800 in the AAC. That was a huge loss. Back in the Big East, we drew 10,300 per game this year. While joining the Bug XII would have some benefits, the administration is not going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg a 2nd time in pursuit of the football dream that could very quickly become AAC Part Deux.

Stop. It was dropping BEFORE the AAC. Don’t be disingenuous. 2006 it was 13948. 2009 12,518. 2011 it was 11,259. So that’s a drop of almost 3000 while we were still in the Big East. Over 5 years. You might actually check before stating “facts”

 

[freescooter]

The lack of football didn’t prevent Villanova from winning 2 of the past 6 national championships. It didn’t prevent Gonzaga from getting to 2 of the past 5 title games. It didn’t stop Loyola (Chi) from getting to the Final Four 4 years ago. There’s no way that the lack of a football program will kill a good basketball program.

Attendance didn’t drop just because some of the teams were below par, seasons, by the way, for which there were expectations going in but injuries helped to ruin. A big factor in the massive decline in attendance was the fact that the games were against opponents no one cared about and half the fans didn’t recognize.

Regardless of how good basketball is in the Big XII - and I agree that it has been very good in recent years - the same problems would exist as was the case in the AAC. There would be no meaningful rivalries and no tradition. The opponents wouldn’t be bringing any fans with them because of the distance - as opposed to Big East games when attendance is/was bolstered by fans of the opponents buying tuckers. The trips are too long and wear down the team to a greater degree than opponents in a conference which is centered much closer to most of those other members.

It would be a different story in the ACC where membership would make much more sense. Everyone would be in the same time zone. Trips would generally shorter. And you actually find alums of many of those colleges here in CT or within driving distance. The ACC includes some traditional rivals, names that are recognizable to just about everyone in CT, and schools which might even be attended by other members of the same family.

A little further information that suggests that other factors were in play. By 2013, the last year in the Big East, attendance was down to 10,728. One could argue that bad basketball, having a team that lost to Northeastern and Wagner in the same season had as much to do with the decline as being in the AAC. If UConn had been a National Championship contender, Elite 8, even Sweet 16 over that period, attendance might have stabilized around the 10,000 mark, where it was arguably heading anyway. Oh, and all my figures come from the NCAA attendance reports which are published annually. And our last year in the AAC when we started, you know, winning, attendance went up by about 1000 per gave average.
So to summarize, you cherry picked data ignoring the larger trends, ie that attendance had been heading south for a number of seasons, and that people don’t go to watch losing teams, in order to argue that some extraneous variable, the AAC, caused the decline. You were probably an English major.

 

[freescooter]

The lack of football didn’t prevent Villanova from winning 2 of the past 6 national championships. It didn’t prevent Gonzaga from getting to 2 of the past 5 title games. It didn’t stop Loyola (Chi) from getting to the Final Four 4 years ago. There’s no way that the lack of a football program will kill a good basketball program.

Attendance didn’t drop just because some of the teams were below par, seasons, by the way, for which there were expectations going in but injuries helped to ruin. A big factor in the massive decline in attendance was the fact that the games were against opponents no one cared about and half the fans didn’t recognize.

Regardless of how good basketball is in the Big XII - and I agree that it has been very good in recent years - the same problems would exist as was the case in the AAC. There would be no meaningful rivalries and no tradition. The opponents wouldn’t be bringing any fans with them because of the distance - as opposed to Big East games when attendance is/was bolstered by fans of the opponents buying tuckers. The trips are too long and wear down the team to a greater degree than opponents in a conference which is centered much closer to most of those other members.

It would be a different story in the ACC where membership would make much more sense. Everyone would be in the same time zone. Trips would generally shorter. And you actually find alums of many of those colleges here in CT or within driving distance. The ACC includes some traditional rivals, names that are recognizable to just about everyone in CT, and schools which might even be attended by other members of the same family.

A little further information that suggests that other factors were in play. By 2013, the last year in the Big East, attendance was down to 10,728. One could argue that bad basketball, having a team that lost to Northeastern and Wagner in the same season had as much to do with the decline as being in the AAC. If UConn had been a National Championship contender, Elite 8, even Sweet 16 over that period, attendance might have stabilized around the 10,000 mark, where it was arguably heading anyway. Oh, and all my figures come from the NCAA attendance reports which are published annually.

As to Villanova, another way to look at it is 32 of the last 35 NCAA basketball champs played FBS football. So maybe it does matter. Factors like bigger and better athletic departments, facilities, training, support all contribute. The fact that an outlier won a couple of times is just that. An outlier won a couple of times. B

 

[HuskyDogArt]

Probably not. They're thrilled to be out of the AAC

Are we thrilled to be out of it? To me, Hell YES!