Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 799 | The Boneyard
.-.

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

Weird that they choose different windows for football and basketball attendance. In UConns case it costs them higher home attendance from 2009-2012
 
Rockford said:
I would think UConn would be very much one of the leading candidates-

for: State Flagship, academics, basketball, geography, northeast NYC Market, very good in all other sports including olympics...
Expand ...

Fail Charlie Brown GIF by Peanuts

I thought I was done having to post this after the Big 12 debacle
 
.-.
UConnTrumbull said:
And yet SMU got the nod
Expand ...
I think SMU got the nod for 3 reasons:

1) They were willing to take $0 media.

2) ACCN is still part of the cable bundle in local markets so getting the Dallas market meant more money. LT, you need brands not markets so ST thinking.

3) There was talk of reformulating the Pac 12 and SMU was rumored to be part of it so they took the school that might not be available. The perception is that the ACC can take UConn anytime they want. Again, ST thinking and I think part of the reason some of the ACC schools voted against the member adds.
 
UConnJim said:
I think SMU got the nod for 3 reasons:

1) They were willing to take $0 media.

2) ACCN is still part of the cable bundle in local markets so getting the Dallas market meant more money. LT, you need brands not markets so ST thinking.

3) There was talk of reformulating the Pac 12 and SMU was rumored to be part of it so they took the school that might not be available. The perception is that the ACC can take UConn anytime they want. Again, ST thinking and I think part of the reason some of the ACC schools voted against the member adds.
Expand ...
I don't think number 3 flies anymore. By all accounts, we were at the 5 yard line with the B12. If Colorado was the only mover... or Colorado/UA/ASU, but no Utah, it seems like we were next. Closer than SMU was to a destroyed Pac12. If the ACC was just waiting for a time when UConn could be off the board, that was the time. They still passed again (and again when they took Cal/Stamford/SMU).

I really believe that the only way UConn gets an invite to the ACC is if the conference is completely decimated. There would still be a handful of schools left, but not the marquee schools, and we'd be invited along with Memphis, Tulane, USF and other AAC teams we left. We'd still need to consider it, depending on football access and overall basketball quality. But it's not a no-brainer.
 
1...Football...

SMU finished in the Final AP Top 25...to join FSU, Clemson, NC State, and Louisville.

2...Carriage fees...

The ACC Network charges a subscriber fee of $1.30 a month if you are considered “in-conference” compared to 25 cents a month if you are “out-of-conference.” If there is an ACC school in a state the entire state is considered “in-conference”, as confirmed by former ESPN President John Skipper. Cable subscribers in Florida who receive ACC Network pay $1.30 a month regardless of whether they’re in Tallahassee, Miami, Jacksonville, or Orlando. Similarly, cable subscribers in New York City pay $1.30 a month for the ACC Network despite Syracuse being 4 hours away.

3...SMU plays with no ACC media distribution for 9 years...a real sweetener.
 
UConnJim said:
I think SMU got the nod for 3 reasons:

1) They were willing to take $0 media.

2) ACCN is still part of the cable bundle in local markets so getting the Dallas market meant more money. LT, you need brands not markets so ST thinking.

3) There was talk of reformulating the Pac 12 and SMU was rumored to be part of it so they took the school that might not be available. The perception is that the ACC can take UConn anytime they want. Again, ST thinking and I think part of the reason some of the ACC schools voted against the member adds.
Expand ...
 
.-.
As this story picks up more traction I'm more conflicted than ever on what we should do. But I don't think joining the ACC is the slam dunk decision that it used to be.

Would people really want to sign up for:

Stanford
Cal
SMU
Oregon State
Washington State

BC
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Memphis
UConn

Because that could be the ACC in 10 years.

Sure, if just FSU and Clemson leave then it makes sense. If 4 teams leave it makes sense. If 6 teams leave it might even make sense. But there's a good chance we'd be joining a sinking ship and get stuck with the other leftovers
 
JMick said:
As this story picks up more traction I'm more conflicted than ever on what we should do. But I don't think joining the ACC is the slam dunk decision that it used to be.

Would people really want to sign up for:

Stanford
Cal
SMU
Oregon State
Washington State

BC
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Memphis
UConn

Because that could be the ACC in 10 years.

Sure, if just FSU and Clemson leave then it makes sense. If 4 teams leave it makes sense. If 6 teams leave it might even make sense. But there's a good chance we'd be joining a sinking ship and get stuck with the other leftovers
Expand ...
I don't think it would look like that and I think USF is ahead of Memphis and SD St. would be in the mix. If you look at history, some of the schools we have been in a conference with in the past have been conference nomads, jumping ot the next option. Unfortunately, I think UConn may have to go that route. Most important is winning in whatever conference you are in to get into a better conference which was missed when UConn was in the AAC. For example:

Louisville: Kentucky IAC, Ohio Valley, Independent, Missouri Valley, CUSA, Big East, AAC, ACC

Cincinnati: Independent, MAC, Independent, Missouri Valley Conference, Independent, CUSA, Big East, AAC, Big 12.

TCU: Southwest, WAC, CUSA, MWC, (Big East), Big 12
 
UConnJim said:
I don't think it would look like that and I think USF is ahead of Memphis and SD St. would be in the mix.
Expand ...

I mean sure but it realistically could look like that. And is USF any better than Memphis? And do we really want to travel to the West Coast for basketball 5-6 times a year during conference play? The travel in the AAC killed us.

If Duke, Pitt, Louisville, Syracuse and BC are the core leftovers then you can make it work and it would be a fun conference. If even one of the first four aren't available then it falls off real quick.
 
JMick said:
As this story picks up more traction I'm more conflicted than ever on what we should do. But I don't think joining the ACC is the slam dunk decision that it used to be.

Would people really want to sign up for:

Stanford
Cal
SMU
Oregon State
Washington State

BC
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Memphis
UConn

Because that could be the ACC in 10 years.

Sure, if just FSU and Clemson leave then it makes sense. If 4 teams leave it makes sense. If 6 teams leave it might even make sense. But there's a good chance we'd be joining a sinking ship and get stuck with the other leftovers
Expand ...
Is that better than our situation now? What other options would we have? The FB equivalent of Moses in the desert ain't much fun!!
 
.-.
JMick said:
As this story picks up more traction I'm more conflicted than ever on what we should do. But I don't think joining the ACC is the slam dunk decision that it used to be.

Would people really want to sign up for:

Stanford
Cal
SMU
Oregon State
Washington State

BC
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Memphis
UConn

Because that could be the ACC in 10 years.

Sure, if just FSU and Clemson leave then it makes sense. If 4 teams leave it makes sense. If 6 teams leave it might even make sense. But there's a good chance we'd be joining a sinking ship and get stuck with the other leftovers
Expand ...
That would be awful for basketball. I think to "join the ACC" it should include at least:
Duke, Wake, Pitt, Cuse, BCU, and preferably a couple more publics like Va Tech and NC State.
 
Kolumbo said:
That would be awful for basketball. I think to "join the ACC" it should include at least:
Duke, Wake, Pitt, Cuse, BCU, and preferably a couple more publics like Va Tech and NC State.
Expand ...
Yeah and it's a catch 22 because I think to leave the big east we'd need assurances that the conference we join is the same conference year 1 as year 10. But that contractual agreement was the GOR. So if GORs mean nothing then we can't get those assurances.

I don't think the gamble is worth it. I'd rather have a dominant mens program in the big east without football than a mediocre football and basketball program in the "ACC"
 
AllHusky said:
Is that better than our situation now? What other options would we have? The FB equivalent of Moses in the desert ain't much fun!!
Expand ...
I'd rather have football be a dumpster fire as long as basketball is good, than kill the basketball program and play .500 football. I think an alternative will be that some teams join the big east and we do "independence" as a group thing. Either that or we challenge the NCAA and form a formal football only conference separate from the big east and Olympic sports
 
JMick said:
Would people really want to sign up for:

Stanford
Cal
SMU
Oregon State
Washington State

BC
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Memphis
UConn
Expand ...
Yes, particularly if it also meant more than tripping our existing media rights deal. But truth be told, I think that you moved more of the ACC out of that conference than there are slots available.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
93
Guests online
7,954
Total visitors
8,047
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,561
Messages
4,484,374
Members
10,357
Latest member
wynela


Top Bottom