- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 8,306
- Reaction Score
- 22,873
I do.You have no idea how many people outside of Connecticut believe that ESPN favors us greatly
I do.You have no idea how many people outside of Connecticut believe that ESPN favors us greatly
Largely agree, but, the ACC could pull off a coup of sorts by offering us a full share, including football, right now. We don't have to worry about Fox looking to protect its big east TV deal. As long as ESPN is willing to write the check, they could make this happen.That's a lot of AAC energy, depending on how many defections come from the ACC. If we joined only to see a bunch of desired rivals
scatter to the Big 12/SEC/Big 10, it could be a death blow. Very difficult environment to navigate proactively.
Largely agree, but, the ACC could pull off a coup of sorts by offering us a full share, including football, right now. We don't have to worry about Fox looking to protect its big east TV deal. As long as ESPN is willing to write the check, they could make this happen.
Then we are faced with the choice of a seven year partial phase in deal with the big 12 or a full deal with the ACC. At that point, I think we'd jump on the ACC deal, notwithstanding the risk of membership changes in 2027 if ESPN doesn't renew their deal.
The ACC, which currently is being written off for dead comes off, looking like a boss by stealing a big 12 target from it at the 11th hour. I'm not saying it'll actually happen, but, it's not totally without some logic to it.
I missed the part where the ACC has offered us anything and frankly don't care. All they can do now is screw up the deal we're working on with a more stable conference. And that's probably the goal. They had their chances and did nothing for us.While we don't have any real leverage to impose any demands, we should request that written into the agreement (if one is offered0, if, prior to football joining as a full member, if the ACC offers full membership, they B-12 would need to match football's start date.
Well, if ESPN pays for UConn to move to the ACC, you have to think it increases the chances they renew the ACC's deal and incentivize the retention of some could-go, could-stay schools that fit well with UConn, like Syracuse, Pitt, BC (sucks, but it's true), and maybe Duke and Louisville. As long as you have that core or something close to it, I think we do okay there. Our fans will be engaged. (There's almost no way NC or Virginia will stay - too valuable options for the SEC and Big 10.)Largely agree, but, the ACC could pull off a coup of sorts by offering us a full share, including football, right now. We don't have to worry about Fox looking to protect its big east TV deal. As long as ESPN is willing to write the check, they could make this happen.
Then we are faced with the choice of a seven year partial phase in deal with the big 12 or a full deal with the ACC. At that point, I think we'd jump on the ACC deal, notwithstanding the risk of membership changes in 2027 if ESPN doesn't renew their deal.
The ACC, which currently is being written off for dead comes off looking like a boss by stealing a big 12 target from it at the 11th hour. I'm not saying it'll actually happen, but, it's not without some logic to it.
It's also an identity move. Basketball was once the ACC brand which it diluted by chasing football schools. The addition of UConn would allow it to reassert that brand and arguably buttress it a bit from defections of schools like UNC and Virginia who have good basketball traditions. It would infuriate FSU and Clemson, but at this point, why would the rest of the ACC give two craps about what they think?I agree with your logic. The ACC is toast without some assertive action to stabilize. They made their brand weaker with the recent additions.
The ACC has had two decades for assertive action that would make all the sense in the world for them and they've done nothing but continue to weaken their brand.I agree with your logic. The ACC is toast without some assertive action to stabilize. They made their brand weaker with the recent additions.
They've taken a lot of assertive steps. The raid of the big east ended up killing it as a football league. Ironically, it also ended up killing those teams, which in turn diluted the ACC brand. Their West Coast plus SMU additions were assertive, dumb, but assertive.The ACC has had two decades for assertive action that would make all the sense in the world for them and they've done nothing but continue to weaken their brand.
That ain't happening. The ACC at best would give us the Cal/Stanford 10 mollion deal and add the rest of our pro rata share to appease FSU/Clemson.Largely agree, but, the ACC could pull off a coup of sorts by offering us a full share, including football, right now. We don't have to worry about Fox looking to protect its big east TV deal. As long as ESPN is willing to write the check, they could make this happen.
Then we are faced with the choice of a seven year partial phase in deal with the big 12 or a full deal with the ACC. At that point, I think we'd jump on the ACC deal, notwithstanding the risk of membership changes in 2027 if ESPN doesn't renew their deal.
The ACC, which currently is being written off for dead comes off looking like a boss by stealing a big 12 target from it at the 11th hour. I'm not saying it'll actually happen, but, it's not without some logic to it.
I agree it's not happening, I just see some logic to it.That ain't happening. The ACC at best would give us the Cal/Stanford 10 mollion deal and add the rest of our pro rata share to appease FSU/Clemson.
ACC is run by a bunch of arrogant es that simply don't see the big picture. The fact that they added SMU, Cal, and Stanford before UConn tells you all you need to know about them. Once we are in the B12, you will see Yormark running circles around them with everything.They've taken a lot of assertive steps. The raid of the big east ended up killing it as a football league. Ironically, it also ended up killing those teams, which in turn diluted the ACC brand. Their West Coast plus SMU additions were assertive, dumb, but assertive.
I agree, though, that I expect them to be passive regarding the big 12 possibly adding us.
Well that's pretty cryptic.
ACC is run by a bunch of arrogant es that simply don't see the big picture. The fact that they added SMU, Cal, and Stanford before UConn tells you all you need to know about them. Once we are in the B12, you will see Yormark running circles around them with everything.
Well that's pretty cryptic.
From the looks of things, the B12 is also ran by a bunch of arrogant fools who can't see the big picture Yormak is pitching them.ACC is run by a bunch of arrogant es that simply don't see the big picture. The fact that they added SMU, Cal, and Stanford before UConn tells you all you need to know about them. Once we are in the B12, you will see Yormark running circles around them with everything.
it's really infuriating. he single handedly saved the conference from oblivion but now the big12 admins are right back up on their high horses being stubborn and acting like they know better than him. Yormark should be able to do whatever the hell he wants at least until the NEXT tv deal expires in 2040 or thereabouts.From the looks of things, the B12 is also ran by a bunch of arrogant fools who can't see the big picture Yormak is pitching them.
There was a major shakeup at the top of ESPN very recently (announced over this past weekend). The new guy in charge is a Holy Cross (undergrad)/UMass (grad school) alum. I doubt it does much for us but a substantial part of the old guard that helped keep us out is gone.ACC is run by a bunch of arrogant es that simply don't see the big picture. The fact that they added SMU, Cal, and Stanford before UConn tells you all you need to know about them. Once we are in the B12, you will see Yormark running circles around them with everything.