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

[ZooCougar]

Kansas is already in the Big 12. They don’t have to justify anything.

They also have a Top 25 footballl program, they pay their coach more than we pay Hurley and are putting - couple hundred million into a stadium upgrade.

UConn struggles to get basic renovations and repairs at the Rent which is aging like warm milk and we have been bottom 10 bad for almost a decade.

If you want to know why we are left behind, point towards the Rent and the games there and you will have your answer. It’s Football, Football, Football and Football.

 

[UConnJim]

The ACCN broadcast 40 games per season and there are 90 total games among 15 teams. that's about 44% of games, meaning each team will feature in about 5 games on the network. But usually, the big matchups are on ESPN

If they can't reach big viewership on main ESPN channels then I doubt the ACC Network contributes much

Let me help you understand better.

Let's take BC.

In 2023, BC had 5 rated games, but one was on ABC vs. FSU, so the charts include 4 BC games.

In 2022, BC had 3 rated games, but one was against Clemson on ABC and 1 was on NBC/Peacock against ND. So, 2 rated games, one against Notre Dame.

In 2021, BC had 4 rated games.

In 2020, BC had 3 rated games, all on ABC, but 1 was against Clemson and 1 vs. Notre Dame, so 2 rated games including 1 against Notre Dame.

In 2019, BC had 1 rated game against Notre Dame on NBC.

So, in 5 years, BC had 16 games out of 60 rated (27%) and 13 rated games rated excluding Clemson and FSU including 2 against ND. Do you think that is representative of BC's overall TV ratings?

What about Syracuse? 20 games out of 59 rated (33.8%) and 15 games rated excluding Clemson and FSU including 2 against ND.

In other words, the graphs you displayed are cherry picked for many of the schools.

 

[Rufus]

The ACC Network ratings are so bad that ESPN does not share those figures with anyone. Funny how they share their other networks ratings.

 

[UConnJim]

UConn has NEVER committed institutionally to supporting the football program at a high level. And that statement INCLUDES our time in the Big East. The only exception to that maybe is Burton‘s contributions for the practice facility and locker room but guess what, everyone and their mother has an IPF and nice locker room these days. These are table stakes to even be able to play the game. We have completely failed at developing a reliable and noteworthy donor base to support the program on top of the funds received from the state and media contracts. You can’t just rely on your TV deal to fund the program- any serious program in 2024 has multiple sources income coming from high-end donors to fund everything from NIL to facility increases, salaries, etc.

Burton contributed $2.5 million to the practice facility that cost $50 million so the vast majority of the investment came from the state. The state payed for Rentschler Field at a cost of ~$90 million. And, the state has been subsidizing the athletic program to the tune of $20 million +/- per year. So, the state has made the investment into UConn football, but the athletic department has not invested wisely. The toughest question is should the AD shift some spending from non-revenue sports to football? Or, should we raise a much larger amount for the AD? I have never felt that the Athletic Department has done a good job of explaining the needs of the football program. Until Mora went on his rant last season about NIL, I never felt that anybody stood up and spoke for the football program.

I do think the Athletic Department has done a terrible job of selecting head football coaches: PP, Diaco, and Edsall 2.0 as they were all mistakes. Instead UConn could have hired up and coming coaches like Lance Leipold HC Wisconsin-Whitewater, Al Golden DC Virginia, Matt Rhule Assistant OL coach NY Giants, Joe Moorhead HC Fordham, Rhett Lashlee OC SMU, Bob Chesney HC Holy Cross, Curt Cignetti HC Elon, Ryan Day OC BC, KC Keeler HC Delaware, ... UConn football just needs to become competent and I don't think it's that hard to do with a decent football coach. I hope Mora is the guy.

 

[cellocgg]

Let me help you understand better.

Let's take BC.

In 2023, BC had 5 rated games, but one was on ABC vs. FSU, so the charts include 4 BC games.

In 2022, BC had 3 rated games, but one was against Clemson on ABC and 1 was on NBC/Peacock against ND. So, 2 rated games, one against Notre Dame.

In 2021, BC had 4 rated games.

In 2020, BC had 3 rated games, all on ABC, but 1 was against Clemson and 1 vs. Notre Dame, so 2 rated games including 1 against Notre Dame.

In 2019, BC had 1 rated game against Notre Dame on NBC.

So, in 5 years, BC had 16 games out of 60 rated (27%) and 13 rated games rated excluding Clemson and FSU including 2 against ND. Do you think that is representative of BC's overall TV ratings?

What about Syracuse? 20 games out of 59 rated (33.8%) and 15 games rated excluding Clemson and FSU including 2 against ND.

In other words, the graphs you displayed are cherry picked for many of the schools.

That chart includes all the rated games aired on the major networks. So only about a fourth of their overall games were big enough to even be given a Nielsen rating? Yes I would say that is pretty telling

 

[cellocgg]

The ACC Network ratings are so bad that ESPN does not share those figures with anyone. Funny how they share their other networks ratings.

ITT: Supposed UConn fans who want to join the ACC or B12 doing mental gymnastics to give imaginary value to the conferences they want to join so UConn cannot join

 

[Patman]

I think Yormark actually wants Big 12 hoops to be a thing on the East Coast. If Syracuse, UConn, and Pitt along with Louisville become available, that may be a package he could sell his members on, even if they don't love the idea of UConn football being included. I don't think the ACC is going to survive so, likely or not the Big 12 is probably going to be the only potential option for UConn.

what yormark wants is irrelevant. what his schools want is the only thing that is relevant.

 

[Patman]

Drew raises some very important points. UConn's Board of Trustees has to realize that a competitive football program will help improve the university on several fronts. Almost all of the nation's leading public research universities have FBS football programs and many of them are very competitive on the field.

that's cargo cult thinking because you didn't answer why big time football works. It works because it energizes people in engaging with the school. It never happens on its own.

 

[Hoophound]

How has Houston, Cincinnati, James Madison, Tulane, UTSA, etc etc etc competed in football without being in a big conference? Don’t just give me “well geography!” - they are paying coaches at the top top end of the G5 and have made an administrative commitment to being good in football. Tulane was a dead program until Dannen and Fritz arrived and massively upped the commitment to the program, including building a brand new OCS and significantly increasing the amount of funds allocated to the program for everything from the on-field staff, behind the scenes resources, recruiting budget, and everything in between.

UConn has NEVER committed institutionally to supporting the football program at a high level. And that statement INCLUDES our time in the Big East. The only exception to that maybe is Burton‘s contributions for the practice facility and locker room but guess what, everyone and their mother has an IPF and nice locker room these days. These are table stakes to even be able to play the game. We have completely failed at developing a reliable and noteworthy donor base to support the program on top of the funds received from the state and media contracts. You can’t just rely on your TV deal to fund the program- any serious program in 2024 has multiple sources income coming from high-end donors to fund everything from NIL to facility increases, salaries, etc.

From the moment the shovel went into the ground in East Hartford, this program was DoA because of the lack of vision and understanding of what was happening in college athletics. Being in the Big East certainly masked a lot of the lack of institutional understanding of and commitment to football, but the last 11 years have shone a light on just how badly managed the program is. Everything that we have won and accomplished in FBS from the sell out crowds to the Fiesta Bowl to the Myrtle Beach and Gasparilla Bowls have been done in spite of terrible football leadership, not because of it.

We failed because we made bad coaching hires and are not in a hotbed for talent. I don’t disagree that we should have done better, but we were a good program at a high level before.

I simply resent the national narrative that we can’t do it or that we need to prove something. No, we need money and good coaches. We’ve already shown that we can do it. People are always making up new reasons for us to be left out and acting like we’ve never shown any potential.

Meanwhile, we pile up basketball titles like cord wood and we’re told that’s not important either. The NCAA tourney is the biggest goldmine in college sports. We deserve a seat at the table.

 

[John]

We failed because we made bad coaching hires and are not in a hotbed for talent. I don’t disagree that we should have done better, but we were a good program at a high level before.

I simply resent the national narrative that we can’t do it or that we need to prove something. No, we need money and good coaches. We’ve already shown that we can do it. People are always making up new reasons for us to be left out.

We had 25,000 - 30,000+ season ticket sales on a regular basis for a number of years. The support base does exist here. The University has done a godawful promotion job on the program.

 

[CTBballfan243]

Let me help you understand better.

Let's take BC.

In 2023, BC had 5 rated games, but one was on ABC vs. FSU, so the charts include 4 BC games.

In 2022, BC had 3 rated games, but one was against Clemson on ABC and 1 was on NBC/Peacock against ND. So, 2 rated games, one against Notre Dame.

In 2021, BC had 4 rated games.

In 2020, BC had 3 rated games, all on ABC, but 1 was against Clemson and 1 vs. Notre Dame, so 2 rated games including 1 against Notre Dame.

In 2019, BC had 1 rated game against Notre Dame on NBC.

So, in 5 years, BC had 16 games out of 60 rated (27%) and 13 rated games rated excluding Clemson and FSU including 2 against ND. Do you think that is representative of BC's overall TV ratings?

What about Syracuse? 20 games out of 59 rated (33.8%) and 15 games rated excluding Clemson and FSU including 2 against ND.

In other words, the graphs you displayed are cherry picked for many of the schools.

I live in western ma and rarely see an news or anything regarding BC football. I would not n=know where to watch their games even if I wanted too (I don't).

 

[ZooCougar]

We had 25,000 - 30,000+ season ticket sales on a regular basis for a number of years. The support base does exist here. The University has done a godawful promotion job on the program.

UConn fans hate adversity.

I live an hour from Lawrence and went to tons of home openers when they were awful, which wasn’t that long ago. The stadium was always packed. Even when they played South Dakota.

 

[CL82]

Kansas is already in the Big 12. They don’t have to justify anything.

They also have a Top 25 footballl program, they pay their coach more than we pay Hurley and are putting - couple hundred million into a stadium upgrade.

UConn struggles to get basic renovations and repairs at the Rent which is aging like warm milk and we have been bottom 10 bad for almost a decade.

If you want to know why we are left behind, point towards the Rent and the games there and you will have your answer. It’s Football, Football, Football and Football.

I'd suggest that the criteria for realignment is always on a moving scale. No doubt, football played, and continues to play a role in Connecticut's conference struggles, but it isn't the alpha and omega of our realignment woes. Otherwise are fairly meteoric rise when joining DI/BCS football, which was kept by making a BCS bowl, would have been our ticket in.

I agree, though, that, currently, better football would help our case. But if conferences decide that they want us to be on the outside looking in, better football won't matter.

 

[ZooCougar]

I'd suggest that the criteria for realignment is always on a moving scale. No doubt, football played, and continues to play a role in Connecticut's conference struggles, but it isn't the alpha and omega of our realignment woes. Otherwise are fairly meteoric rise when joining DI/BCS football, which was kept by making a BCS bowl, would have been our ticket in.

I agree, though, that, currently, better football would help our case. But if conferences decide that they want us to be on the outside looking in, better football won't matter.

Wrong.

UCF didn’t rise because of basketball.

It’s the Alpha, Omega and every Greek letter in between.

 

[cellocgg]

I'd suggest that the criteria for realignment is always on a moving scale. No doubt, football played, and continues to play a role in Connecticut's conference struggles, but it isn't the alpha and omega of our realignment woes. Otherwise are fairly meteoric rise when joining DI/BCS football, which was kept by making a BCS bowl, would have been our ticket in.

I agree, though, that, currently, better football would help our case. But if conferences decide that they want us to be on the outside looking in, better football won't matter.

I don't think Football was the main reason; It's more the fact that we live in a part of the country where people don't really care about college athletics. People aren't die hard fans like they are for teams in other parts of the country (exception UConn basketball). UConn really is special in that it feels like the only big sports school in New England, and the fact that we are the sole school in this huge, densely-populated region is like sitting on a goldmine who's potential has yet to be revealed

You could physically switch UConn with Kansas and we would've been in a power conference a long time ago

 

[BlueHen]

We failed because we made bad coaching hires and are not in a hotbed for talent. I don’t disagree that we should have done better, but we were a good program at a high level before.

I simply resent the national narrative that we can’t do it or that we need to prove something. No, we need money and good coaches. We’ve already shown that we can do it. People are always making up new reasons for us to be left out and acting like we’ve never shown any potential.

Meanwhile, we pile up basketball titles like cord wood and we’re told that’s not important either. The NCAA tourney is the biggest goldmine in college sports. We deserve a seat at the table.

UConn athletics has been pretty successful. Multiple championships at MBB, WBB, Men's Soccer and Field Hockey come to mind.

The football team was successful as soon as it moved up to FBS. Unfortunately things took a terrible downturn after the Fiesta Bowl. I have no doubt that UConn can be successful at football.

 

[Buffett10]

When UConn gets into the top 25 I will call them a top program too. Kansas gives UConn a model which we can emulate.

Emulating 87 wins in 22 yrs isn’t what you want to be emulating especially when UConn has more wins in that span

 

[LoyalFanCT]

Emulating 87 wins in 22 yrs isn’t what you want to be emulating especially when UConn has more wins in that span

Maybe you can reconsider your comment when considering a weak football team, Kansas, became a top 25 program. That should be UConn's goal.

 

[Patman]

UConn fans hate adversity.

I live an hour from Lawrence and went to tons of home openers when they were awful, which wasn’t that long ago. The stadium was always packed. Even when they played South Dakota.

Agreed, UConn will only support winners because that's northeast culture. But I also agree with others that the athletic department in the Hathaway era had absolutely no idea what it was doing.

 

[CL82]

Wrong.

UCF didn’t rise because of basketball.

It’s the Alpha, Omega and every Greek letter in between.

Nope. Unless you think Rutgers was a football giant and thus deserving of big 10 membership.

 

[ZooCougar]

Nope. Unless you think Rutgers was a football giant and thus deserving of big 10 membership.

They were good enough to make the cut.

We have not been.

The Big 12 literally said football and the inability to compete in the football nil space was why they passed.

 

[Ha Who]

They were good enough to make the cut.

We have not been.

The Big 12 literally said football and the inability to compete in the football nil space was why they passed.

 

[CL82]

They were good enough to make the cut.

We have not been.

The Big 12 literally said football and the inability to compete in the football nil space was why they passed.

Yep that was one of about three different times we were up for consideration. There, they preferred to have an existing P5 team.

Rutgers has never made a BCS bowl game and isn't particularly good. What they did have going for them was the fact that the campus is located in the NYCDMA which meant that Big Ten network got on the basic tear at a premium in the NYCDMA. Additionally, the rest of New Jersey has roughly the population density of New Delhi and fortuitously is wedge between NYC and Philadelphia. For Rutgers it was all about demographics and geography.

 

[cellocgg]

They were good enough to make the cut.

We have not been.

The Big 12 literally said football and the inability to compete in the football nil space was why they passed.

This was never said

 

[ZooCougar]

This was never said

It was. By several Big 12 Presidents.