Non-Key Tweets | Page 1068 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

Hoophound said:
CT has long been a soccer and lacrosse hot bed and UConn should absolutely be a power in those sports. Not only is the talent there, but the fan interest. You may be right, we may not push those sports, but UConn not excelling in those sports is a disservice to all of us.

I'm all for spending on football, but allocate funds and cut other stuff to do it. Kids in CT are good at soccer and lacrosse and people actually like those sports. They are also growing sports that will generate more and more interest. Obviously, its more complicated than that, but there is a lot of talent in the region. Lacrosse is particularly good in CT.
Expand ...

Men's College soccer doesn't matter and it's 100% a waste of resources. It's become a landing spot for foreign players who couldn't get contracts with pro clubs abroad.

The best Americans don't even bother with college soccer. They go to an Academy and then sign a contract. If you end up in college then you are really no longer a pro prospect. Yeah, yeah a few get drafted every year but most get cut or sent down the MLS Next.

Lacrosse would be kind of like hockey for UConn. There are lots of local players, but it's not like everyone is standing around hoping UConn would add it. They will all end up at the usual Lacrosse schools and life will be perfectly fine.

I like Lacrosse, I played in high school and club in college. But in this era where we have NIL and revenue sharing, let's be reasonable and acknowledge that adding yet another niche and expensive team sport is probably an awful idea that should never see the light of day.

Now if some rich alumni want to get together and fully fund it with an endowment and it's not hurting Basketball and Football then fine. Well first we should try to convince them to donate that money to basketball and football.
 
bendm said:
Yeah the BIG played hard ball with the latest PAC additions but they had all the leverage. Same with the PAC additions to the ACC but I don’t think the PAC additions to the BIG12 have a waiting period, so it depends on the situation. Either way UNC will be able to choose which conference they want so I’d expect a full revenue share immediately.
Expand ...

The people who continually dismiss UNC because "they suck at football" have an astonishingly poor understanding of the value of the brand. If there is anyone left that can write their own ticket it's Notre Dame and UNC.
 
ZooCougar said:
Lacrosse would be kind of like hockey for UConn. There are lots of local players, but it's not like everyone is standing around hoping UConn would add it. They will all end up at the usual Lacrosse schools and life will be perfectly fine.

I like Lacrosse, I played in high school and club in college. But in this era where we have NIL and revenue sharing, let's be reasonable and acknowledge that adding yet another niche and expensive team sport is probably an awful idea that should never see the light of day.

Now if some rich alumni want to get together and fully fund it with an endowment and it's not hurting Basketball and Football then fine. Well first we should try to convince them to donate that money to basketball and football.
Expand ...
Benedict has consistently said publicly that if someone wants to write that big check - he’s all ears. If not, it’s not on the table.
 
ZooCougar said:
Men's College soccer doesn't matter and it's 100% a waste of resources. It's become a landing spot for foreign players who couldn't get contracts with pro clubs abroad.

The best Americans don't even bother with college soccer. They go to an Academy and then sign a contract. If you end up in college then you are really no longer a pro prospect. Yeah, yeah a few get drafted every year but most get cut or sent down the MLS Next.

Lacrosse would be kind of like hockey for UConn. There are lots of local players, but it's not like everyone is standing around hoping UConn would add it. They will all end up at the usual Lacrosse schools and life will be perfectly fine.

I like Lacrosse, I played in high school and club in college. But in this era where we have NIL and revenue sharing, let's be reasonable and acknowledge that adding yet another niche and expensive team sport is probably an awful idea that should never see the light of day.

Now if some rich alumni want to get together and fully fund it with an endowment and it's not hurting Basketball and Football then fine. Well first we should try to convince them to donate that money to basketball and football.
Expand ...
I'm curious to see what percentage of college players by sport get a shot at the pros. We know college is the minor league for football and basketball. Most other sports are there for kids to play for a degree. I'd imagine that is the case for soccer but I have no idea. Soccer, hockey, lacrosse, I wouldn't say they are a waste of resources but with NIL yes, there is a major conflict now. SEC schools for the most part don't have soccer, hockey or lacross. Baseball and track & field are their big non-revenue sports for men.
 
Kolumbo said:
I'm curious to see what percentage of college players by sport get a shot at the pros. We know college is the minor league for football and basketball. Most other sports are there for kids to play for a degree. I'd imagine that is the case for soccer but I have no idea. Soccer, hockey, lacrosse, I wouldn't say they are a waste of resources but with NIL yes, there is a major conflict now. SEC schools for the most part don't have soccer, hockey or lacross. Baseball and track & field are their big non-revenue sports for men.
Expand ...

It’s not the case. And it’s a total waste. It’s also poor quality soccer.

It’s exactly not the minor league for pro soccer. It’s essentially a dead end. Pro soccer has pro minor leagues. At the age you graduate college you should be an established professional in that sport.

Imagine if every NFL had a U-20 team, a U-17 and so on. That’s what pro soccer all around the world has.
 
ZooCougar said:
It’s not the case. And it’s a total waste. It’s also poor quality soccer.

It’s exactly not the minor league for pro soccer. It’s essentially a dead end. Pro soccer has pro minor leagues. At the age you graduate college you should be an established professional in that sport.

Imagine if every NFL had a U-20 team, a U-17 and so on. That’s what pro soccer all around the world has.
Expand ...
Maybe you misunderstood me. I said that it is likely the case with soccer that kids are there to play for a degree and you said it is not the case. Then you said soccer is not the minor league for pro soccer.

Outside of football and basketball, kids are there to play for a degree. So if it is a waste for soccer, then it is a waste for all other sports outside of football and basketball. So what, do away with NCAA sports altogether? Georgetown, Vermont, Marshall, and UConn of course have won national championships in soccer. That's a big deal for those schools, their students, alumni, etc.
 
I can’t see a scenario where men’s soccer goes away anytime soon. Rizza Center plus 2k fans a game plus history. Like to see them start winning more. We’ll probably live to see a bunch of disruption tho.
 
ZooCougar said:
The people who continually dismiss UNC because "they suck at football" have an astonishingly poor understanding of the value of the brand. If there is anyone left that can write their own ticket it's Notre Dame and UNC.
Expand ...
I see lots of talk of the UNC brand, but what does that mean? Jordan? Carolina Blue? Olympic sports? Basketball blueblood? Good academics? A bit of all of that?
 
Mike75 said:
I see lots of talk of the UNC brand, but what does that mean? Jordan? Carolina Blue? Olympic sports? Basketball blueblood? Good academics? A bit of all of that?
Expand ...
80% MJ and the rest you can divide up however because nobody actually cares about it.
 
It's all about the

Argylle GIF by Regal
 
Kolumbo said:
I'm curious to see what percentage of college players by sport get a shot at the pros. We know college is the minor league for football and basketball. Most other sports are there for kids to play for a degree. I'd imagine that is the case for soccer but I have no idea. Soccer, hockey, lacrosse, I wouldn't say they are a waste of resources but with NIL yes, there is a major conflict now. SEC schools for the most part don't have soccer, hockey or lacross. Baseball and track & field are their big non-revenue sports for men.
Expand ...
I read somewhere that less than 2% of d1 basketball players play in the NBA. So if it is a minor league it is a pretty poor one. Even if you include the G and oversees it’s probably less than 5%. And probably an ever lower number who actually make a career out of it. I’ve seen 1.6 to 1.75% which is similar with football. I really don’t know about other players in the major pro leagues. Hockey lets draft picks play on college teams which might skew the numbers a bit. Baseball I really don’t know but guessing the minor league system discourages many top
prospect from going to college programs.

Bottom line is if you are going to college with your only goal is to get to the pros, regardless of sports, you might want to rethink your goals. If you are a school and are supporting a sport mainly to get guys to the pros, you should probably reassess.
 
Mike75 said:
I see lots of talk of the UNC brand, but what does that mean? Jordan? Carolina Blue? Olympic sports? Basketball blueblood? Good academics? A bit of all of that?
Expand ...

And more.
 
That Guy said:
Exactly. It's the flagship university of a southern state that the SEC doesn't yet have a footprint in, and on top of that, it's the 9th most populous state in the country. It makes perfect sense why the SEC would want them.
Expand ...
This is the answer right here.

I really think people don't understand how history plays into the present. The SEC is a southern league. North Carolina is part of that south.

Virginia is a tweener and that's why I think they end up in the Big Ten. Just not quite southern enough.

For us, meanwhile -- well, we got screwed when the B1G chose Rutgers. We are an asterisk at this point because we don't fit in anywhere outside the old Big East.
 
Purple Stein said:
This is the answer right here.

I really think people don't understand how history plays into the present. The SEC is a southern league. North Carolina is part of that south.

Virginia is a tweener and that's why I think they end up in the Big Ten. Just not quite southern enough.

For us, meanwhile -- well, we got screwed when the B1G chose Rutgers. We are an asterisk at this point because we don't fit in anywhere outside the old Big East.
Expand ...
You fit in perfectly with The ACC. The problem is that every time you should have been added someone’s agenda kept you out.

Opportunity #1

BC played protectionist to be “ New England’s Only P5 Team” Instead of enhancing their own standing in college sports with this move, they ended up minimizing their own fading brand by snuffing out a potential interesting rivalry.

Opportunity #2

FSU and Clemson, annoyed with a supposed lack of football credibility in the conference, flirt with The Big 12, and wrest control of expansion from The Tobacco Road Mafia. UConn is the early leader until the supposed stronger football choice in Louisville is made by The Noles and Tigers. UConn Football had not gone of the cliff at this point. One could argue that UConn could have brought comparable football, along with superior basketball. Dumb move IMO.

Opportunity #3

The desperate money grab that was Stanford, SMU, and Cal. Could The Huskies have brought a similar offer to the table? Should they have? JMO but UConn brings enough to a conference that they shouldn’t have to buy their way into it on a completely unreasonable deal. That said these are strange times.
 
UConn from 2000-2013 (Louisville joined ACC in 2014) had not won a game with a team that was in the ACC that had a winning season...had 5 wins (Duke, Duke, Wake, Wake, Maryland)..11 losses. All of UConn's ACC losses, however, were to an ACC team that had a season's end winning record.

Interestingly, UConn's lowest winning percentage 2000-2013 against conferences was the ACC...had .500 against the Big Ten (4 games) and SEC (4 games)...and .600 against the Big 12 (6 games). Of those 25 games, only the win over South Carolina, 7-6, was over a team with a season record above .500.

I think it may be that the lack of wins that get you noticed may have hindered UConn...beating winning teams gets more respect.
 
billybud said:
UConn from 2000-2013 (Louisville joined ACC in 2014) had not won a game with a team that was in the ACC that had a winning season...had 5 wins (Duke, Duke, Wake, Wake, Maryland)..11 losses. All of UConn's ACC losses, however, were to an ACC team that had a season's end winning record.

Interestingly, UConn's lowest winning percentage 2000-2013 against conferences was the ACC...had .500 against the Big Ten (4 games) and SEC (4 games)...and .600 against the Big 12 (6 games). Of those 25 games, only the win over South Carolina, 7-6, was over a team with a season record above .500.

I think it may be that the lack of wins that get you noticed may have hindered UConn...beating winning teams gets more respect.
Expand ...

You’re missing a win against Virginia or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
218
Guests online
1,535
Total visitors
1,753
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
163,951
Messages
4,376,494
Members
10,168
Latest member
CTFan142
Top Bottom