Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 850 | The Boneyard

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

UConnTrumbull said:


Obviously doesn’t mean anything but the national narratives are changing. The Duke win reverberated across the CFB landscape. Gotta end the season on a high note.
Expand ...

From Don Amore's article in the Courant:

"In the ACC, it could be like this nearly every week. UConn would reverse the conference’s faded men’s basketball brand, put its women’s basketball back on the national map, and would be competitive, viable in football."

 
.-.
UConnTrumbull said:


Obviously doesn’t mean anything but the national narratives are changing. The Duke win reverberated across the CFB landscape. Gotta end the season on a high note.
Expand ...

The biggest problem with UConn to the ACC is that the ACC grabbed SMU for no media revenues and Stanford and Cal for half media revenues. Would UConn join for no media revenues or half?
 
UConnJim said:
The biggest problem with UConn to the ACC is that the ACC grabbed SMU for no media revenues and Stanford and Cal for half media revenues. Would UConn join for no media revenues or half?
Expand ...
Well, it's not like it's for forever.
 
UConnJim said:
The biggest problem with UConn to the ACC is that the ACC grabbed SMU for no media revenues and Stanford and Cal for half media revenues. Would UConn join for no media revenues or half?
Expand ...
I think the biggest problem is that we add nothing to the ACC Network. SMU, Stanford and Cal brought new subscribers. Maybe Benedict can propose to put the women's basketball games on ESPN+, like the AAC was going to do. (Sorry to the women's basketball fans, but UConn has to get creative like SMU did). Now is the time for Benedict to reach out.
 
UConnJim said:
The biggest problem with UConn to the ACC is that the ACC grabbed SMU for no media revenues and Stanford and Cal for half media revenues. Would UConn join for no media revenues or half?
Expand ...
This has been the issue on both the B12 and ACC situations. Both conf have been willing to deeply discuss taking UConn, but they want us for a deal that is much closer to the SMU model than this state is willing to commit too. Basically UConn needs to take its value add to the conf and give it to the hold out voters- it’s brutal.

Seems like we will have to wait for the SEC/B1G to do their next move and then hope for a good outcome in the ensuing reshuffle.
 
Last edited:
Exit 4 said:
This has been the issue on both the B12 and ACC situations. Both conf have been willing to deeply discuss taking UConn, but they want us for a deal that is much closer to the SMU model than this state is willing to commit too. Basically UConn needs to take its value add to the conf and give it to the hold out voters- it’s brutal.

Seems like we will have to wait for the SEC/B1G to do their next move and then hope for a good outcome in the ensuing reshuffle.
Expand ...
Why couldn't we just take an annual media payout equal to our current BE payout for the first few years? I don't know if this has been discussed, unless the ACC/B12 are unwilling to even give us what equates to 15% of a full share
 
.-.
Exit 4 said:
Both conf have been willing to deeply discuss taking UConn, but they want us for a deal that is much closer to the SMU model than this state is willing to commit to. Basically UConn needs to take its value add to the conf and give it to the hold out voters- it’s brutal.
Expand ...
Where did you get this info from? That the state was unwilling to commit to the financial model? This doesn't make sense when we are only getting $10 million from the Big East and $500,000 from CBS Sports.
 
cellocgg said:
Why couldn't we just take an annual media payout equal to our current BE payout for the first few years? I don't know if this has been discussed, unless the ACC/B12 are unwilling to even give us what equates to 15% of a full share
Expand ...
This has always been my way of thinking too. Even if it’s break even you are at the table. Incremental raises every year. Plus you get CFP money which cancels out travel more or less.
 
jostar1 said:
Where did you get this info from? That the state was unwilling to commit to the financial model? This doesn't make sense when we are only getting $10 million from the Big East and $500,000 from CBS Sports.
Expand ...

If the offer is literally the SMU model but with a smidge of $ vs none, can the state take it? Politically and fiscally its a problem.

The B12 process broke down in part because of this proposal. The ACC situation is better, but also similar...have many votes, but financially the deal stinks.
 
bendm said:
Heck Yes to the latter.
Expand ...
Here's the problem. I have no doubt that UConn can be competitive in men's and women's basketball as UConn has the history and devotes the resources to compete. In football, without a massive annual cash infusion, UConn would not be competitive year in and year out in the ACC. To put things in perspective, UConn would need to double to triple the pay for the head coach to get to the average ACC head football coach.

For UConn to take a no media revenues deal, donors would have to step up to fund the football program to become competitive. I would think UConn would need to raise $25 to $30 million in incremental donations per year to take the no revenue deal. SMU raised $200 million from donors to take the no revenue deal.
 
Exit 4 said:
If the offer is literally the SMU model but with a smidge of $ vs none, can the state take it? Politically and fiscally its a problem.

The B12 process broke down in part because of this proposal. The ACC situation is better, but also similar...have many votes, but financially the deal stinks.
Expand ...
Do you have insider information that this is what happened? Because my opinion is that UConn would take it.
 
Reasonably, we should be willing to move for a deal that is fiscally equal (setting the BE departure fee aside temporarily) with incremental increases up to a full share (to eventually cover the departure fee) of conference revenue.

Knowing the reaction that we've seen from some fans, many politicians and many state citizens who are not fans on other issues, there will be sone push back on anything less than a full share immediately (which would be completely impossible under any conditions).
 
Last edited:
.-.
UConn shouldn’t have to take the same deal as SMU. We have something that they need, which is another premier men’s basketball program to rejuvenate their flailing conference and a women’s basketball program that will add significant value to the women’s side at a time when women’s basketball is gaining popularity very quickly. We should definitely get a better deal than any of the recent low budget offers other schools have had to take. It doesn’t have to be a full payout or anything close to it, but it shouldn’t be nothing. Anything over 15 million should get our serious attention, but realistically we are going to need 25 million or more to compete on a somewhat level playing field. Aside from NIL, which I think we can handle, we need to be able to pay good coaches and retain them. I don’t think it will be that much more fun to be in a power conference if we lose our successful coaches every three years.
 
There's no reason we shouldn't accept less than a full share to start, but I would demand there be incentives for winning things. We shouldn't take a partial share and then get nothing for winning the conference or a natty.
 
After one good win, people here are talking about shares in a power conference? I don't see an invitation forthcoming any time soon. One game makes no difference. They can still say UConn got lucky. Remember the Rice and Delaware games? The tobacco road schools supported UConn to the ACC in the past. Those opposed to UConn likely still remain opposed to UConn and it is unlikely I would guess that UConn would receive yes votes from Cal or Stanford. Also remember who is plotting against UConn behind the scenes at all times, Yes, of course, ESPN. For those arguing UConn shouldn't take the same deal as SMU. I would guess UConn would jump at the chance of an ACC invite and work out some deal if one were to come.
 
jostar1 said:
Do you have insider information that this is what happened? Because my opinion is that UConn would take it.
Expand ...
I hear things. And look, from my POV, what I have heard fits well with what the public has seen. UConn has support within the ACC, but does not have all the votes and the offer is just a few notches above the SMU deal. This is a state institution. Coming into the ACC to have all your economics doled out to FSU/Clemson for a seat at the table is not easy to accept. Moreover, it means real deficits for a decade ahead for the seat.

On the B12, we had the slot during the P12 meltdown, but then it was lost to AZ/AZ st/Utah decision. Were we used by the B12 to unlock the four P12 schools? -IDK. I think it was a bit of both, get the four P12 schools or get UConn/Colorado and if UConn's feelings are hurt in the process - oh well. That said, the recent talks have been all about an SMU type offer from the B12 and from what I hear this administration is not really interested. This is why conversations ended abruptly last September - remember that?

Might be acceptable to take a super low dough deal from the ACC because you cozy the school up with UNC, Duke, UVA and other peers UConn would love to have. Its harder to take that deal from the B12 when you have even more travel and limited academic prestige gain to boot (yes these are still universities here- not pro leagues).

Its easy to sit here a say the state should accept anything it can get. The problem is the discussions have been terribly one sided. Both the ACC and B12 have given us serious considerations, but only under economics that are akin to the SMU deal. The SMU deal is a large political football in this smallish state. If accepted, the Gov will need to sell it as there will be questions.

Btw, from what I hear, both offers would allow us to retain post season financial gains on even footing. Its the regular season (base media contracts) where we get virtually nothing.
 
buddy said:
After one good win, people here are talking about shares in a power conference? I don't see an invitation forthcoming any time soon. One game makes no difference.
Expand ...
Good thing it's not just about 1 game, right? We have more ACC football wins over the last 2 years than FSU (3 vs 2) and are going bowling for the 2nd straight year and 3rd time in the last 4 years. Our basketball teams are both ranked in the top 5. At #4, we are ranked higher than all 3 ACC men's teams. At #1, our women are of course ranked higher than all 5 of the ACC schools. Nick Saban giving us some love. Rat Face Coach K giving us some love. It's a little more than just a delusional fan base hoping for an invite. There are some external forces working in our favor. No clue if it will translate to anything, but nothing wrong with a little hopeful optimism around here. Based on your comment that I included, you could use a little too. Talking about shares in a conference is no different than talking about what you'd do with lottery winnings. Maybe the chances aren't very good, but it's fun to discuss and imagine. You, good sir, need to take a gummy and, as Frankie said in the 80's, relax.
 
.-.
Another reason why the SMU deal is a no go is because there is no more CFP money to give out.

SMU was willing to take no media money because they had oil money donors willing to cover the funding but also because they knew the CFP deal was coming up for renewal and they would be coming out ahead just with the CFP money.

That is not the case for us. There is no adjustment to the CFP pool until at least 2027 and even then the overall pool is not getting bigger. We need to get some TV money like Stanford and Cal to make financially viable otherwise you are asking the school to find a P4 program on internal money alone.
 
jostar1 said:
That's why I said that Benedict should propose to put all of the women's basketball games on ESPN+.
Expand ...
Our deal with SNY ended last year. Where women's basketball goes is up to the conference media deal now (whether it's Big East with Fox SPorts, Peacock, TruTV, CBS etc or the ACC/Big 12 with ESPN family and subordinates).
 
Exit 4 said:
If the offer is literally the SMU model but with a smidge of $ vs none, can the state take it? Politically and fiscally its a problem.

The B12 process broke down in part because of this proposal. The ACC situation is better, but also similar...have many votes, but financially the deal stinks.
Expand ...
So the state would cut off its nose to spite its face. That makes zero fiscal or practical sense. Our current tv deals are what stinks. A partial ACC deal could be more valuable but we’d say no based on what? Principle? As long as the hypothetical ACC offer is worth as much as our various current deals we’d have to take it for the other benefits that come with being in a power conference. It would be grossly negligent to refuse.
 
Last edited:
bendm said:
So the state would cut off its nose to spite its face. That makes zero fiscal or practical sense. Our current tv deals are what stinks. A partial ACC deal could be more valuable but we’d say no based on what? Principle? As long as the hypothetical ACC offer is worth as much as our various current deals we’d have to take it for the other benefits that come with being in a power conference. It would be grossly negligent to refuse.
Expand ...
I would like to join a P4 conference, but you are only looking at the revenue side. The cost of running a P4 football program would double or triple what is currently spent. Given the athletic department is ~$30 million in the red each year, how does UConn spend another $25 to $30 million?
 
UConnJim said:
I would like to join a P4 conference, but you are only looking at the revenue side. The cost of running a P4 football program would double or triple what is currently spent. Given the athletic department is ~$30 million in the red each year, how does UConn spend another $25 to $30 million?
Expand ...
If that were the case, why did UConn pursue a Big 12 invitation?
 
UConn Dan said:
Our deal with SNY ended last year. Where women's basketball goes is up to the conference media deal now (whether it's Big East with Fox SPorts, Peacock, TruTV, CBS etc or the ACC/Big 12 with ESPN family and subordinates).
Expand ...
I know that.

I am proposing some out-of-the box thinking on UConn's part to get some interest from ESPN and the ACC. It could be part of a discussion.

That is what SMU did. They did some out-of-the box thinking and came up with the suggestion to the ACC that they would take no media money. No other school had done that before. Obviously, UConn can't do that.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,935
Messages
4,545,623
Members
10,427
Latest member
CarloPFF


Top Bottom