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

[CTFAN4LIFE]

You are moving the goalposts my friend. You originally said that the sole reason why Connecticut wasn't admitted to the ACC was because they sued the conference collectively, the programs, individually, and individual school officials individually. I pointed out that there were five programs in total who were part of that suit two of which ended up in the ACC. If your premise was correct, neither Pittsburgh nor Virginia Tech would be in the ACC.

In any event, regarding the latest evolution of your position, if Pitt was so desirable, they would've been the original choice, not the replacement for Connecticut after Boston College indicated it wanted to be "the New England" school.

Again, those are just facts. I'm not sure why it's got your panties in a bunch.

You're confusing me with someone else as that was my first post on this.

 

[CL82]

You're confusing me with someone else as that was my first post on this.

Ah you are right. Sorry about that.

 

[CL82]

You’re LAWST. It’s also discussed, as nauseum on a long running thread here.

https://archive.ph/uM9cR

“

After playing the public game last year — Gov. Dannel P. Malloy even got into the act — UConn didn’t want to be portrayed as groveling again. Different UConn sources insisted Herbst and Manuel “worked their humps off,” and any suggestion otherwise is “absolute bull.” They called presidents, ADs, industry powers, politicians. How much so? When Miami President Donna Shalala didn’t return calls, there supposedly was even last-minute talk of getting her former boss Bill Clinton (a Jim Calhoun admirer) to facilitate a call.”

Thanks for going to get this. I think this might be revisionism, however, given that they were "working their butts off" from the Virgin Islands watching a woman's basketball tournament when Louisville got the spot to the ACC.

That said, we still come back to the fact that two of the five plaintiffs in the lawsuit are in the ACC. So, definitionally, being a plaintiff in the suit did not prevent anyone from going to the ACC. You understand that, right? You seem to be working pretty hard to dance around that undeniable fact.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Ah you are right. Sorry about that.

I like my goalposts stationary, lol.

 

[ZooCougar]

Not to mention Pitt was a top 25 football program for oh I don't know 50 years.

That Unc doesn’t remember it so it never happened. Stop crafting narratives.

 

[ZooCougar]

Thanks for going to get this. I think this might be revisionism, however, given that they were "working their butts off" from the Virgin Islands watching a woman's basketball tournament when Louisville got the spot to the ACC.

That said, we still come back to the fact that two of the five plaintiffs in the lawsuit are in the ACC. So, definitionally, being a plaintiff in the suit did not prevent anyone from going to the ACC. You understand that, right? You seem to be working pretty hard to dance around that undeniable fact.

The only revisionism is between your ears. Go back and review Key Tweets in 2012.

Myself and others have already explained Pitt and Virginia Tech to you. I don’t want to explain Dick Blumenthal to you since I’ll probably get banned.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Could you expound on that a little? On the surface it sounds nutty without your rationale.

The raid was timed to cause the maximum amount of damage. The Big East had signed a lousy TV contract in the late 90's because Miami was on probation and looked to be on its way to the Death Penalty, and the rest of the league was at its nadir competitively in football, and other than UConn and Syracuse, basketball had declined too. When the Big East was coming back to negotiations with ESPN, Miami and BCU worked with the ACC and ESPN, sharing confidential information, to undermine the Big East's negotiating position.

Tranghese found out and went public. With the raid, the Big East was about to get thrown out of the BCS. The Catholics would have left, we would have had to join CUSA, and Calhoun and Auriemma would likely have hit the road. The lawsuit saved the league, and kept the Big East as a BCS conference. The conference had a great run in the 2000's until 2012. UConn won 2 championships and made another Final Four, in addition to a Fiesta Bowl. That lawsuit was the best thing that happened to us.

Since then? We got raided again at the next TV negotiation in 2011. At one point, it looked like the Big 12 might merge into the Big East. The threat of a lawsuit played a role in getting Rutgers, WVU, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville and the Catholics a soft landing. UConn ended up on the outside, and we should have rattled some cages. Part of the reason we ended up on the outside was that the old line ACC schools told UConn's administration that our invitation to the ACC was imminent. Louisville out-hustled us. It had nothing to do with the lawsuit.

Since then, every serious lawsuit against the NCAA or college athletics has won. While @ZooCougar has made multiple posts trying to make this thread political, how about this for politics? Alston, the case which basically annihilated the legal foundation of the NCAA's ability to be a monopoly, was a unanimous decision. The most divided court since before the Civil War ruled 9-0 that the NCAA/BCS/CFP/P4 is a living, breathing, anti-trust violation. Just like Blumenthal said it was in 2003.

Zoo and I have been having the same argument for 23 years, and I can't think of an argument that has been decided so decisively in the history of the internet.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

You’re LAWST. It’s also discussed, as nauseum on a long running thread here.

https://archive.ph/uM9cR

“

After playing the public game last year — Gov. Dannel P. Malloy even got into the act — UConn didn’t want to be portrayed as groveling again. Different UConn sources insisted Herbst and Manuel “worked their humps off,” and any suggestion otherwise is “absolute bull.” They called presidents, ADs, industry powers, politicians. How much so? When Miami President Donna Shalala didn’t return calls, there supposedly was even last-minute talk of getting her former boss Bill Clinton (a Jim Calhoun admirer) to facilitate a call.”

From your link:

And old grudges over Richard Blumenthal’s lawsuit against the ACC in 2004? Only fragments, I’m told.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Thanks for going to get this. I think this might be revisionism, however, given that they were "working their butts off" from the Virgin Islands watching a woman's basketball tournament when Louisville got the spot to the ACC.

That said, we still come back to the fact that two of the five plaintiffs in the lawsuit are in the ACC. So, definitionally, being a plaintiff in the suit did not prevent anyone from going to the ACC. You understand that, right? You seem to be working pretty hard to dance around that undeniable fact.

Louisville had screwed over Virginia Tech immensely worse at the end of the Metro Conference than anything UConn did to any of the Big East schools.

Conference Wars, Part 3: 1994-2000

In the aftermath of their 1994 rejection by the Big East, the Hokies put on a brave face, but truth be told, no one was sure what Virginia Tech's ultimate conference fate would be.

virginiatech.sportswar.com

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Notre Dame advocates for Notre Dame.

AZ ‘s first law of conference advocacy in 2026
A teams advocacy is directly proportional to the necessity of that conference’s success for its own survival.
The days of collegiality are long gone.