.
Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.
- Thread starter ZooCougar
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2016
- Messages
- 4,423
- Reaction Score
- 22,997
GCU cutting its men's volleyball program one year after making the 2024 Final Four. Non-rev sports are going to get slaughtered over the next couple years.
contiguous until it wasnt. UCLA and USC
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 28,947
- Reaction Score
- 42,771
Sometimes I think Kolumbo gets his info from a Sports Illustrated from 1985.
Ya think? Thus Colorado and Arizona. Of course contiguity trumps markets and brands and research. That's why UConn isn't in the Big Ten. Syracuse sucks and there is no other NY program worthy.
Come on Zougar. Sometimes I think you seriously don't get sarcasm.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,002
- Reaction Score
- 15,267
Remember when we thought this mattered? Like, UConn doesn’t connect to New Jersey, so no. UConn isn’t AAU, so now. UConn is a land grant research institution….it never mattered.
UConn met every criteria for getting into these conferences except the one that kept them out…no one wants us in their league.
CL82
NCAA Woman's Basketball National Champions
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 62,112
- Reaction Score
- 238,306
I feel like this summarizes every conference realignment negotiation we've ever had:
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 4,511
- Reaction Score
- 12,197
Yeah, it's really bizarre. In fairness, we went through a self-inflicted period ot total incompetence in football that certainly did not help our cause. P, Diaco and Edsall 2 is a hell of a string of misses.
A lot of things did matter that don't know. Things change. Location was and is still a major factor. At first conferences were created by region but that no longer matters. Then markets became more important. See Exhibit A, B, and C: Ruttie
I think AAU is still a factor. All Big Ten schools are research powerhouses. If the Big Ten wants a non-AAU program, it will suddenly get an invite. Oregon is probably the weakest link in terms of size and research, but it has football and Nike.
UConn is just not large enough. Enrollment, ranking, national titles, yes. Supposed market (I think they look at a map and see a small square), endowment, research, UConn falls short. I think if God forbid UConn and UMass merged, and maybe Buffalo, to create Northeast University, or UConnNYMass, the Big Ten would swoop in pronto. The founders didn't foresee the CR mess.
Waquoit
Mr. Positive
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 35,519
- Reaction Score
- 97,567
Our FB "competence" had nothing to do with our being frozen out.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 28,947
- Reaction Score
- 42,771
If your football team is really good then none of that matters.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 24,550
- Reaction Score
- 64,363
of course it did
Waquoit
Mr. Positive
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 35,519
- Reaction Score
- 97,567
Pitt, Cuse and Rutgers were no better than us. Yet here we sit.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 28,947
- Reaction Score
- 42,771
We don't serve ranch dressing with our pizza and it confuses them.
It matters. See Rutgers. There is no football program out there that is so good that none of the other stuff doesn't matter. Even Oregon is AAU.
It had to be because Pitt and cuse have a much longer history prior to selling out and being outkasts. rutgers is the anomaly of anomalies. Even the Architect has no idea about rutgers
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2013
- Messages
- 3,265
- Reaction Score
- 11,120
Those schools didn't sink to the depths of being in the 100-130 power rating for ~ 10 years. If we stayed up in the 40-60 range like we were under RE1, then we'd have been in a P4 years ago.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,002
- Reaction Score
- 15,267
No. Like, all these things they say. If money was there and they wanted UConn, they would be in.
SUNJ sucks
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 28,947
- Reaction Score
- 42,771
It matters. See Rutgers. There is no football program out there that is so good that none of the other stuff doesn't matter. Even Oregon is AAU.
It had to be because Pitt and cuse have a much longer history prior to selling out and being outkasts. rutgers is the anomaly of anomalies. Even the Architect has no idea about rutgers
Rutgers is a red herring and everyone knows why they were added.
When your football team is really good then many blemishes don’t seem that bad. And there are multitude of examples to support this.
Edit: You’re hilarious. You used Rutgers as evidence to the contrary and then in the next paragraph you say it’s an anomaly.
Your second paragraph is more correct.
what do you mean, "No... If money was there." What money? What do you think drives money?
Rutgers is an anomaly because it is in the Big Ten for every reason in the book except athletic success. It is the prime example of evidence to the contrary. What do you find so amusing about that?
I think he means that if a conference wanted to add UConn and their media partner (ESPN, Fox) was willing to pay pro-rata to add UConn, we would be added.
Yes, I agree, and that is obvious. And what makes both the conference and media partner value a program?
The Big Ten added Maryland & Rutgers in 2014
The Big Ten added UCLA, USC, Oregon & Washington in 2024
What criteria did Maryland, Rutgers & UConn all meet which garnered the first 2 an invite but not UConn? I suggested UM and RU had location and AAU but you said No.
KryHavok
Oh yes, UConn IS a BB blueblood!
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2023
- Messages
- 1,034
- Reaction Score
- 4,289
At the risk of being flippant, what those 2 schools had was a name that didn't have the word "Connecticut" in it. Other than that, all 3 schools are large land grand schools having solid academics and good sports programs (with some of us having more championship trophies for our school to show). AAU is the cherry on top, but it's the excuse to keep a school out rather than a criterion to bring a school in. If they wanted to reach into New England, we'd be in, irrespective of that AAU tag.
Part of the problem is that the metrics keep changing. And UConn is never on the right side of the metrics. When Rutgers was added to the Big 10, the metric was cable boxes. They were AAU and contiguous also, so they were acceptable. As we later found out, the Big 10 had been in contact with Rutgers for years telling them what they needed to do. Maryland had location, AAU, contiguous, wanted out of the ACC, and was a partner for Rutgers. The Big 10 did require AAU and contiguous back then. Not now. And cable boxes are not a metric now with the Big 10.
One constant, has been UConn's lack of football history and success. When the ACC added BC, Miami, Syracuse and Pitt, those schools had a history of football. There are name players you can associate with those schools---Doug Flutie, Donavan McNabb, Jim Brown, Dan Marino, etc,
And lack of football success kept us out of the ACC when they added Louisville over UConn.
When the ACC added SMU, SMU had a wealthy booster, so they cut the deal of taking no money from the ACC for 10 years. Plus they added the Texas market for the ACC Network. Similar to the addition of Rutgers to the Big 10, adding SMU was a plus due to the ACC having a conference network. UConn adds nothing to the ACC Network because the ACC Network is already on local cable companies, AND SMU had an acceptable football program.
Despite the changing metrics of cable boxes, AAU, contiguous state, ACC network--- the one continuous factor has been that UConn's lack of football success has been a problem with any conference. That is evident in the discussions last year that UConn had with the Big 12. They weren't going to add UConn right away; there was the 5 year runway plan for football.
One constant, has been UConn's lack of football history and success. When the ACC added BC, Miami, Syracuse and Pitt, those schools had a history of football. There are name players you can associate with those schools---Doug Flutie, Donavan McNabb, Jim Brown, Dan Marino, etc,
And lack of football success kept us out of the ACC when they added Louisville over UConn.
When the ACC added SMU, SMU had a wealthy booster, so they cut the deal of taking no money from the ACC for 10 years. Plus they added the Texas market for the ACC Network. Similar to the addition of Rutgers to the Big 10, adding SMU was a plus due to the ACC having a conference network. UConn adds nothing to the ACC Network because the ACC Network is already on local cable companies, AND SMU had an acceptable football program.
Despite the changing metrics of cable boxes, AAU, contiguous state, ACC network--- the one continuous factor has been that UConn's lack of football success has been a problem with any conference. That is evident in the discussions last year that UConn had with the Big 12. They weren't going to add UConn right away; there was the 5 year runway plan for football.
Last edited: