It's just people who don't want us making up reasons. You spend too much money guys. We don't want you because you don't spend enough money. If we do let you in were not going to spend any money on you and expect you to spend your own money to get better. But we have concerns you spend too much money.
Not for an article written in 2018…
It makes no sense. Green is green. A major donor of a university that props up a program can die and their kids could say screw it I want a yacht not club seats at a football game. It's no different than fears the state would pull back on funding.
Debatable. Have you ever heard Randy speak?
This feels illegal but it's probably not. It's surely a conflict of interest.
Bingo- the concern is the lack of big time athletics donors/fundraising (which is something UConn has struggled with for years). Relying on the state to fund improvements to facilities (look at how long its taken to do anything at The Rent, XL, Gampel as an example) rather than a large base of donors is one of many things that highlight the existing issue, along with the lack of initiative related to NIL and low fundraising amount as it relates to football.
Once they get the 12th vote, it will be unanimous. Only the B1G had negative votes when PSU was invited. All the other additions were unanimous.
The difference of course is the media money, of which UConn receives very little. If UConn joined the B12, it would instantly vault into the top quarter of the league in spending, even if it reduced it's university subsidy by $20m. And then if it became really aggressive in fake accounting, it would take all the branding revenue for the entire university and include that as athletics income. That's just one common trick. There are many more.
The vast majority of P4 schools rely on the state for facility improvements. Michigan does. Texas does. Donors don't pay for stadiums, except in the case of T Boone Pickens and the $450m he donated (then rescinded because he lost all his money, only to give it again a decade later). The bonding for those projects goes through the school, not the AD. So does the debt service. You won't see debt service for facilities on the AD's balance sheet. And if donors pony up for stadiums, the money never goes to the construction of the stadium itself. Instead, it becomes athletic donor revenue.
Yes. But most or all of it is to pay us. Maybe a little of it would go to the other schools to pay travel expenses. Adding UConn is supposed to be revenue neutral to the other schools.
There is only one or two left. They can’t do everything. And, there is no dedicated college football writer at any of the legacy papers.
My way of thinking is it is either tomorrow because they have the votes or "still working out the details" because BY doesn't have the votes and turns to hoping that Mora's boys change some minds by not being awful.
Hopefully don’t need to sweeten it if Yormark & Endeavor can convince 6 of them to join the 6 schools already on board. If they’re on the fence, the benefit of the doubt should go to Yormark.
Possible alternative consideration: After Big 12 presidents potentially just received media details, Endeavor’s reports, more information from UConn, etc, why would anyone reasonably believe undocumented rumors to be accurate? Alternatively, what’s the likelihood no university presidents would be compelled to share important updates with their respective board of trustees before any formal votes would occur? Bit early in the process? To be determined.
That wasn't an "unofficial" vote. Dodd got info about 8 schools.
It seems he's never had the votes to begin with. He's trying to persuade them
The loss of UConn on its channels really hurts espn hoops credibility.
Oklahoma State will vote no even if it's 15-1
Et tu, former Big East partner?
Okie really is one of those schools that is tied to being southwest football culturally.
