Why is this not open to speculation ? Why is there a certainty about this ? That it was a slam dunk that if BC did not express their resistance to Uconn, Uconn was going to get the votes for admittance to the ACC ? There is no evidence that I'm aware of that schools made it known that Uconn to the ACC was a slamdunk, absent the wishes of BC. It MIGHT be the case. But it certainly falls into the realm of some uncertainty and speculation at the very least, that absent BC's wishes, UConn was a slam dunk to the ACC.
Is BC's position on this STILL the reason TODAY that the other ACC schools have not decided to invite UCONN to the ACC ?.... as another Uconn poster said on here, " because there is still a statue of limitations in effect " ? as he said to " blackball Uconn from getting to the ACC , as a " promised agreement by the ACC to BC ? Is this what most Uconn posters here believe ? Just asking here, thats all...and trying to make sense of what I've been reading on here regarding this.
I have all the evidence I need.
A month before the whole Pitt/BC invitation came about, there was a Villanova insider on Rutgers' board who laid out what was going on in the ACC, and he said that Syracuse and UConn were the selections for expansion but that UConn was getting pushback from BC. He went on to describe how the ACC was considering Pitt as the replacement.
I paid this no mind even after Pitt and Cuse was selected, until the Boston Globe article in which BC's AD said he had blackballed UConn.
We heard numerous quotes in the press afterward about how appalled the Duke and UNC were at BC's blackball.
Subsequent to that, the former AD of ND and the AD of Virginia made noise that the ACC was not done and that it was looking at moving to 16. Articles appeared that Notre Dame and UConn would be added in weeks.
When the BG article appeared, BC's AD referred to ESPN engineering the whole thing. Multiple posters in ACC country close to the ACC said that several schools were livid, as was Swofford. The next day, BC's AD apologized to ESPN and the ACC schools and said he took everything back. On ACC boards, multiple posters reported that because the ACC was in damage control, and because of the mention of ESPN's involvement, further expansion was temporarily scuppered.
By the time the next expansion rolled around, there were other circumstances involved, like FSU needing more football heft, which explains Louisville. But even then BC opposed UConn on the basis of encroachment into its home region, according to newspaper articles from North Carolina. The AD Bates opposed UConn. This is an institutional imperative at BC.
So, although message boards are always filled with innuendo and lies, the newspaper articles printed in the Globe and the Carolina papers clearly show how BC's opposition was key to UConn's exclusion.
Heck, even 2 years ago, the Louisville AD said UConn's invitation had already been penned prior to the press he put on.
