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

[CL82]

He might be one of the reasons UConn is not in the Big 12, however. The publicity it generated could not have been good and only emphasized the cultural mismatch.

I guess that's a possibility, but the lawsuit was 23 years ago. It seems unlikely that it would be at the forefront of people's minds.

Some the big 12 did indicate that Connecticut as an East Coast institution might be a bad cultural fit for the big 12. I think it is more likely that the phrase cultural fit was a euphemism for something other than the lawsuit.

The truth is the criteria for getting into a conference has been a complicated target with a number of moving pieces that have changed for each opportunity. For the most part people don't actually want to spend the time to pay attention to those moving pieces. Instead, it becomes more convenient to say "they don't like us." Some of that is cognitive dissonance much like the student who says he got an F in a class because "the professor didn't like him" but ignores the fact that he didn't bother to turn in the final project.

 

[storrsroars]

Blumenthal is a generally unlikable blow hard, but he's probably not the reason that we aren't in the ACC.

I don't live in CT so don't know all the politics, but it would seem to me that a "If you want P4 football, dump Blumenthal" would be a winning R campaign strategy.

 

[king conn]

He might be one of the reasons UConn is not in the Big 12, however. The publicity it generated could not have been good and only emphasized the cultural mismatch.

The idea that the lawsuit affects anything possible with the ACC now is grasping at straws

This scenario however is the equivalent of the moon landing was filmed in a desert.

 

[RuffRuff]

He might be one of the reasons UConn is not in the Big 12, however. The publicity it generated could not have been good and only emphasized the cultural mismatch.

No one likes sue happy types. I'm sure politics has something to do with the B12. In a land of red, not sure they want a state with a blue haired congresswoman. B12 will never happen.

 

[KryHavok]

If anyone is claiming that the lawsuits had no bearing on why UConn has been kept out of the ACC, they really, really, really need to stop. They're wrong.

"But Pitt and Syracuse and Virginia Tech and..."

It was our lawsuit - we let Blumenthal make us the face of this thing and when it was dismissed the first time, he refiled it in Rockland or Vernon or whatever the town is called and he made the decision to add various ACC and school officials personally.

Surprisingly, they did not get over having processor servers pound on their doors, seeing their names in headlines and having to hire attorneys to answer the suit. It's almost like they were human or something and they remembered what we did.

I guess that's a possibility, but the lawsuit was 23 years ago. It seems unlikely that it would be at the forefront of people's minds.

Some the big 12 did indicate that Connecticut as an East Coast institution might be a bad cultural fit for the big 12. I think it is more likely that the phrase cultural fit was a euphemism for something other than the lawsuit.

The truth is the criteria for getting into a conference has been a complicated target with a number of moving pieces that have changed for each opportunity. For the most part people don't like actually want to spend the time to pay attention to those moving pieces. Instead, it becomes more convenient to say "they don't like us." Some of that is cognitive dissonance much like the student who says he got an F in a class because "the professor didn't like him" but ignores the fact that he didn't bother to turn in the final project.

I think certain aspects of both your points are true and not necessarily mutually exclusive to our current woes. Yes, there was the lawsuit, and yes it certainly did ruffle some feathers down there. And it's also true the all cretins crew were considering us (despite said prior lawsuit) before the Loservile screw job decision against us. Why? Because the salient point is they don't like us enough, partially due to past history and partially due to their stubbornness to accept the fact that while we won't dramatically increase their football prowess (neither would we be bottom dwellers), we would cement their status as an elite BBall league. I've said before, to understand the all cretins crew, one must be fluent in the language of stupid.

 

[CL82]

I think certain aspects of both your points are true and not necessarily mutually exclusive to our current woes. Yes, there was the lawsuit, and yes it certainly did ruffle some feathers down there. And it's also true the all cretins crew were considering us (despite said prior lawsuit) before the Loservile screw job decision against us. Why? Because the salient point is they don't like us enough, partially due to past history and partially due to their stubbornness to accept the fact that while we won't dramatically increase their football prowess (neither would we be bottom dwellers), we would cement their status as an elite BBall league. I've said before, to understand the all cretins crew, one must be fluent in the language of stupid.

Everything you said makes sense. My only comment is that the postmortem commentary after each expansion told a different story. For the Syracuse expansion, the BC athletic Director was directly quoted in the paper stating that Connecticut was the proposed edition with Syracuse until Boston College indicated that "it wanted to be the only New England team." similarly, the Louisville athletic Director said that Connecticut was not "penciled in, it was penned in" until they vigorously lobbied FSU to be the candidate.

Nowhere in those contemporaneous accounts, does anybody say, well we were still mad about the lawsuit. I guess you could speculate that they just kept that a secret, but that's conspiracy theory stuff.

It's just easier, if intellectually a little lazy, to say "well they were mad at Blumenthal." That doesn't really match the facts, but it's a convenient excuse.

(Full disclosure I'm not particularly a Blumenthal fan. I think the guy is an ass hat. That said, the reason we aren't in the ACC is likely due to factors other than him being an ass hat.)

 

[Windham4th]

I don't live in CT so don't know all the politics, but it would seem to me that a "If you want P4 football, dump Blumenthal" would be a winning R campaign strategy.

I always base my vote on which team's the candidates like.

 

[UConnJim]

Blumenthal took the lead on the lawsuit against the ACC, Miami, and BC and included DeFillpo of BC, Swofford from the ACC and three faculty members of ACC schools who were officers of the ACC and from NC State, Virginia, and Clemson. In 2011, Shalala of Miami, Leahey and DeFilippo of BC, and Swofford of the ACC were all in the same role and the three faculty members were still at their schools and the Virginia rep was President of the ACC as she was in 2010/2011. I would think that the memories of those who were sued by Blumenthal were still fresh and certainly didn't help UConn's cause.

 

[Stinger92860]

I think we can all agree that the lawsuit did not help our chances.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[Jbirdp5]

I love the one line dismissal of the fact that three of the plaintiffs of that suit are actually in the ACC. That pretty much directly were rebuts the presumption that being a plaintiff in that suit prevented you from being in the ACC.

Here's another fun fact, Connecticut was originally slotted to join the ACC with Syracuse and was only left out at Boston colleges request, not because they had a hissy fit over being named in that suit but because Boston College "wanted to beat the New England team."

Connecticut was also slated to join the ACC when Louisville got in. The switched to Louisville was only made after an FSU and Clemson power-play.

Those three statements are not speculation about people having hurt feelings over being served, but well documented facts.

But if you still think that the individuals named in the suit are actively preventing our admission to the ACC, maybe you will take some solace in the fact that of the eight people individually named in the suit, only two are actually still have any kind of active role in the ACC. One is BC president William Leahy, who is scheduled to step down this year and the other is Cecil Huey who's only affiliation with Clemson is as a professor, emeritus and engineering, and thus he not likely in a decision making capacity. So, if peoples hurt feelings over the lawsuit was really the impediment from our joining the ACC, I guess we'd be in this year.

Blumenthal is a generally unlikable blow hard, but he's probably not the reason that we aren't in the ACC.

@Fishy you made a valiant argument but this feels like check mate on the debate

 

[freescooter]

Blumenthal took the lead on the lawsuit against the ACC, Miami, and BC and included DeFillpo of BC, Swofford from the ACC and three faculty members of ACC schools who were officers of the ACC and from NC State, Virginia, and Clemson. In 2011, Shalala of Miami, Leahey and DeFilippo of BC, and Swofford of the ACC were all in the same role and the three faculty members were still at their schools and the Virginia rep was President of the ACC as she was in 2010/2011. I would think that the memories of those who were sued by Blumenthal were still fresh and certainly didn't help UConn's cause.

Companies sue each other all the time. And government entities get sued all the time. No big deal. If people made decision because someone sued them 10 years ago…sheesch!