Not sure I understand the stadium issue...

[WhartonHusky]

There is plenty of speculation about why the ACC and/or B1G have yet to come calling, and many of the reasons (football not strong enough, BC blocking, TV markets, new BB coach, AAU, etc) but I cannot for the life of me understand why the stadium size is called out as an issue.

Does anyone (I am speaking specifically about the B1G) believe that we wouldn't expand the stadium as a pre-condition for being offered a spot? Does anyone believe that we couldn't add more seats and fill more seats if teams like OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc were coming to CT to play the Huskies?

I have been a lifelong fan, and was a student when Calhoun took over the program. We sucked at first, but Big East b-ball was great and we believed that we could beat the likes of Cuse, GTown, Nova, etc. I went to every game and loved it.

Now I live in Fairfield Cty and get to campus 1-2x/year and get to the Rent 1x/year. I probably watch 75% of the games on TV. I have 2 small kids (girls) who aren't that into football, but I can tell you that if we were invited to B1G, I'd immediately buy season tickets and go to all the games -- and I know I am not alone. There are your additional seats. There are your additional season ticket holders. There is your additional revenue.

 

[upstater]

There is plenty of speculation about why the ACC and/or B1G have yet to come calling, and many of the reasons (football not strong enough, BC blocking, TV markets, new BB coach, AAU, etc) but I cannot for the life of me understand why the stadium size is called out as an issue.

Does anyone (I am speaking specifically about the B1G) believe that we wouldn't expand the stadium as a pre-condition for being offered a spot? Does anyone believe that we couldn't add more seats and fill more seats if teams like OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc were coming to CT to play the Huskies?

I have been a lifelong fan, and was a student when Calhoun took over the program. We sucked at first, but Big East b-ball was great and we believed that we could beat the likes of Cuse, GTown, Nova, etc. I went to every game and loved it.

Now I live in Fairfield Cty and get to campus 1-2x/year and get to the Rent 1x/year. I probably watch 75% of the games on TV. I have 2 small kids (girls) who aren't that into football, but I can tell you that if we were invited to B1G, I'd immediately buy season tickets and go to all the games -- and I know I am not alone. There are your additional seats. There are your additional season ticket holders. There is your additional revenue.

Good post, I don't think it's a big deal but when I went back to look at UConn's record against PC to shove it in the PC troll's face, I saw some good seasons for UConn upon joining the BE. We sucked later on, but at first UConn wasn't bad at all in the BE.

 

[Pudge]

We just went through a period of easy money. UConn Football, in parallel, was riding a nice momentum from 2004-2008. At the same time - with less advantages than us - Rutgers & Louisville ramped up & pushed ahead Stadium expansion plans. We also stood stagnant during that perid in Gifts & Fundraising. RU & UL did not.

The Stadium issue hurts us. We look less Bigtime. We lacked the leadership & vision that both those other schools - PLUS Cincinnati - had. I think we have a great football future. But, we are stumbling around now. The Stadium enhanced that perception.

 

[geordi]

There is plenty of speculation about why the ACC and/or B1G have yet to come calling, and many of the reasons (football not strong enough, BC blocking, TV markets, new BB coach, AAU, etc) but I cannot for the life of me understand why the stadium size is called out as an issue.

Does anyone (I am speaking specifically about the B1G) believe that we wouldn't expand the stadium as a pre-condition for being offered a spot? Does anyone believe that we couldn't add more seats and fill more seats if teams like OSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc were coming to CT to play the Huskies?

I don't understand it either. From what I remember, the potential to expand the Rent would only bring the stadium to 50,000 anyway. Any expansion further than that would almost be cost prohibitive. Maybe I'm wrong on that, and if anyone has other information, I'd be interested.

A 50,000 seat stadium would be the second smallest in the B1G and only Northwestern would be below that by less than 750. In the ACC, Puke and Wake at are 34K and 31K respectively. Bringing the Rent to 50K would only jump us ahead of BCU and Syracuse. Even going to 55,000, if that were possible, doesn't do much in relation to other teams in the respective leagues. I would think it would be a more negative statement on Connecticut football to have a 55,000 seat stadium that only draws 35,000 people.

 

[Chin Diesel]

The concept is there are two routes to go.

One path is planning for expansion and telling potential suitors, if you pick us we can quickly come up to your level. The has been Uconn's path the past few years.

The second path is the "Build it and they will come". As in build the expansion and show potential suitors that you are already at their level. This is the path of RU and L'ville.

So far the decision of RU and L'ville to expand upfront has worked better than Uconn's path.

 

[upstater]

The concept is there are two routes to go.

One path is planning for expansion and telling potential suitors, if you pick us we can quickly come up to your level. The has been Uconn's path the past few years.

The second path is the "Build it and they will come". As in build the expansion and show potential suitors that you are already at their level. This is the path of RU and L'ville.

So far the decision of RU and L'ville to expand upfront has worked better than Uconn's path.

Too simplistic. UL won because they were down south and FSU insisted on it. Plus BC doesn't like UConn. Rutgers won because it's in a big state with lots of eyeballs and a modicum of football talent that the B1G needs, and it's AAU.

Football stadiums might have factored in, but even if UConn had built out like RU and Ville, it would have lost out.

 

[Bootsthemonkey]

Too simplistic. UL won because they were down south and FSU insisted on it. Plus BC doesn't like UConn. Rutgers won because it's in a big state with lots of eyeballs and a modicum of football talent that the B1G needs, and it's AAU.

Football stadiums might have factored in, but even if UConn had built out like RU and Ville, it would have lost out.

Exactly

 

[06029]

Too simplistic. UL won because they were down south and FSU insisted on it. Plus BC doesn't like UConn. Rutgers won because it's in a big state with lots of eyeballs and a modicum of football talent that the B1G needs, and it's AAU.

Football stadiums might have factored in, but even if UConn had built out like RU and Ville, it would have lost out.

Simplistic is the notion that BC blocked Uconn by itself. It should be abundantly clear by now that more than a single small school blocked Uconn to the ACC. One time, maybe. Three times? Not even remotely possible.There are several schools that have Uconn issues in the ACC and it might even include some the schools people view as "friends" (Duke, UNC). The AAU is an easy out for the B1G and can deflect the underlying issues they might have.

All the expanding conferences know the teams, the TV numbers for each team, the fan base of each team and the projected incremental increase in revenue they bring to the table if added. I believe it to be that cut and dry. If RU and MD forces the B1G Network to be added to a huge number of cable subscribers, then that revenue increase wins. If SU was viewed as the best a team in the northeast to deliver a larger portion of the NYC market for FB and expand the ACC footprint, they win. The Pitt market added a PA presence and a major TV market. Lville, the incremental value must have been higher and it is a new market that does not overlap two existing markets.

This board is great at making compelling arguments for Uconn, as it should. Unfortunately, the bias makes it sound like a slam dunk and it clearly was not. No one on this board has all of the right data or the knowledge. Stadium size, not an issue if you sell it out every game no matter the team's record or the opponent. TV ratings, market size, market share, advertising demographics, target audience share, that matters way more. The current coach does not matter. The stadium size does not matter. The TV consultants analysis, that matters.

Uconn may need to become Boise for the next 5-10 years. Take about 8 Juco's every year, build a speed team with a nasty, nasty attitude and play anyone, anywhere and shock the hell out of the CFB world. Do the same for BB. Watch the national TV ratings grow. Win, win and win. If FB moves to an 8 or more team playoff system, Uconn will thrive.

 

[RioDog]

Uconn may need to become Boise for the next 5-10 years. Take about 8 Juco's every year, build a speed team with a nasty, nasty attitude and play anyone, anywhere and shock the hell out of the CFB world. Do the same for BB. Watch the national TV ratings grow. Win, win and win. If FB moves to an 8 or more team playoff system, Uconn will thrive.[/quote]

Truth.

 

[upstater]

Simplistic is the notion that BC blocked Uconn by itself. It should be abundantly clear by now that more than a single small school blocked Uconn to the ACC. One time, maybe. Three times? Not even remotely possible.There are several schools that have Uconn issues in the ACC and it might even include some the schools people view as "friends" (Duke, UNC). The AAU is an easy out for the B1G and can deflect the underlying issues they might have.

All the expanding conferences know the teams, the TV numbers for each team, the fan base of each team and the projected incremental increase in revenue they bring to the table if added. I believe it to be that cut and dry. If RU and MD forces the B1G Network to be added to a huge number of cable subscribers, then that revenue increase wins. If SU was viewed as the best a team in the northeast to deliver a larger portion of the NYC market for FB and expand the ACC footprint, they win. The Pitt market added a PA presence and a major TV market. Lville, the incremental value must have been higher and it is a new market that does not overlap two existing markets.

This board is great at making compelling arguments for Uconn, as it should. Unfortunately, the bias makes it sound like a slam dunk and it clearly was not. No one on this board has all of the right data or the knowledge. Stadium size, not an issue if you sell it out every game no matter the team's record or the opponent. TV ratings, market size, market share, advertising demographics, target audience share, that matters way more. The current coach does not matter. The stadium size does not matter. The TV consultants analysis, that matters.

Uconn may need to become Boise for the next 5-10 years. Take about 8 Juco's every year, build a speed team with a nasty, nasty attitude and play anyone, anywhere and shock the hell out of the CFB world. Do the same for BB. Watch the national TV ratings grow. Win, win and win. If FB moves to an 8 or more team playoff system, Uconn will thrive.

I don't think anyone here is making the case that BC blocked UConn by itself. I mean, even in my post, I mentioned FSU first. BC's constant obstructionism is definitely a factor.

I don't buy any of the arguments regarding eyeballs and Cuse/Pitt etc. Why? We already know BC obstructed UConn 2 years ago and one of the 2 others was PLAN B. You say it's as simple as incremental revenue, and yet we see schools go to war over these issues. The public comments from UNC/FSU were acrimonious in the extreme. There is no harmony.

 

[06029]

I don't think anyone here is making the case that BC blocked UConn by itself. I mean, even in my post, I mentioned FSU first. BC's constant obstructionism is definitely a factor.

I don't buy any of the arguments regarding eyeballs and Cuse/Pitt etc. Why? We already know BC obstructed UConn 2 years ago and one of the 2 others was PLAN B. You say it's as simple as incremental revenue, and yet we see schools go to war over these issues. The public comments from UNC/FSU were acrimonious in the extreme. There is no harmony.

Plan B happens when Plan A does not work. I do not believe Uconn was Plan A at any time but was one of the 4 schools under consideration. They fit the BB side of the equation well but probably lacked in all other parts of the revenue equation. Uconn was not head and shoulders above Pitt or Cuse or Lville when it came to revenue enhancement for the ACC . If Uconn was, they would be in the ACC. Money is the only thing that matters in all of this to all of the conferences and the schools. The conferences have all of the data and all of their consultants that tell them the better economic choices. Right now for FB, Uconn is not a good economic choice in terms of total revenue enhancement. Same basic equation went into the B1G expansion. If Uconn had a better revenue profile, then the AAU and contiguous state crap would have magically disappeared.

So it leaves the school where it is today. Time to stop waiting and hoping. Time to stop blaming everyone else. None of those are a solid business plan. Time to start being, leading and acting for the reality of now. Uconn can and will be okay.

16-20 team super conferences will have a finite life span. If you think UNC/FSU was acrimonious, watch GA, FL, Auburn, LSU and TN fight over TV appearances that are going to USC, Miss, Vandy and KY. Same with OSU, Michigan, MSU and PSU (once their too short post season ban disappears) fighting over the Purdue, NW, MD and RU TV games. The top guys will resent the bottom feeders (see BE BB for exhibit A on this) for weakening their schedule and taking all the money while adding nothing. Bring a real playoff to FB and the super conference model will start to fall apart.

 

[UCFBfan]

I don't think anyone here is making the case that BC blocked UConn by itself. I mean, even in my post, I mentioned FSU first. BC's constant obstructionism is definitely a factor.

I don't buy any of the arguments regarding eyeballs and Cuse/Pitt etc. Why? We already know BC obstructed UConn 2 years ago and one of the 2 others was PLAN B. You say it's as simple as incremental revenue, and yet we see schools go to war over these issues. The public comments from UNC/FSU were acrimonious in the extreme. There is no harmony.

While BC probably couldn't block UConn by itself, I think the opposite would have been much more powerful. Had BC SUPPORTED UConn and played the argument that adding UConn would all but lock up New England, something BC hasn't been able to do, I believe the ACC would have been more likely to add them during the Syracuse/Pitt round of expansion. I think you'd be seeing UConn/Syracuse going to the ACC. So we can complain all we want about BC and likely they cannot block UConn by itself. However, if they had only supportd UConn, I think that's all we would have needed to get into the ACC a year ago. Instead, we are stuck with little hope right now. Guess we just need to ride it out and hope for the best. Don't know how that will turn out but there's really nothing else that can be done right now...

 

[RMoore1999]

While BC probably couldn't block UConn by itself, I think the opposite would have been much more powerful. Had BC SUPPORTED UConn and played the argument that adding UConn would all but lock up New England, something BC hasn't been able to do, I believe the ACC would have been more likely to add them during the Syracuse/Pitt round of expansion. I think you'd be seeing UConn/Syracuse going to the ACC. So we can complain all we want about BC and likely they cannot block UConn by itself. However, if they had only supportd UConn, I think that's all we would have needed to get into the ACC a year ago. Instead, we are stuck with little hope right now. Guess we just need to ride it out and hope for the best. Don't know how that will turn out but there's really nothing else that can be done right now...

Do we have evidence (quotes for example) that bc did in fact block Connecticut this last time around? I'm not saying they didn't, but just because BC may have supported LSVL doesn't necessarily mean they didn't support Connecticut.

 

[upstater]

Plan B happens when Plan A does not work. I do not believe Uconn was Plan A at any time but was one of the 4 schools under consideration. They fit the BB side of the equation well but probably lacked in all other parts of the revenue equation. Uconn was not head and shoulders above Pitt or Cuse or Lville when it came to revenue enhancement for the ACC . If Uconn was, they would be in the ACC. Money is the only thing that matters in all of this to all of the conferences and the schools. The conferences have all of the data and all of their consultants that tell them the better economic choices. Right now for FB, Uconn is not a good economic choice in terms of total revenue enhancement. Same basic equation went into the B1G expansion. If Uconn had a better revenue profile, then the AAU and contiguous state crap would have magically disappeared.

So it leaves the school where it is today. Time to stop waiting and hoping. Time to stop blaming everyone else. None of those are a solid business plan. Time to start being, leading and acting for the reality of now. Uconn can and will be okay.

16-20 team super conferences will have a finite life span. If you think UNC/FSU was acrimonious, watch GA, FL, Auburn, LSU and TN fight over TV appearances that are going to USC, Miss, Vandy and KY. Same with OSU, Michigan, MSU and PSU (once their too short post season ban disappears) fighting over the Purdue, NW, MD and RU TV games. The top guys will resent the bottom feeders (see BE BB for exhibit A on this) for weakening their schedule and taking all the money while adding nothing. Bring a real playoff to FB and the super conference model will start to fall apart.

I disagree with you on a number of items. It was reported that UConn was indeed first, PLAN A. So how can you dismiss it outright? Maybe the reporter was making it up? The report was literally that UConn was PLAN A. I also don't believe there is no difference i money/eyeballs between these teams. There is. And most importantly, I disagree that these schools were listening to economic consultants. if that were the case, you wouldn't have open acrimony in the media. There is a nasty blood war going on between FSU and UNC. In such cases, throw logic out the window.

 

[upstater]

Do we have evidence (quotes for example) that bc did in fact block Connecticut this last time around? I'm not saying they didn't, but just because BC may have supported LSVL doesn't necessarily mean they didn't support Connecticut.

Didn't Jacobs just write that BC opposed UConn?

 

[RMoore1999]

Didn't Jacobs just write that BC opposed UConn?

He recently wrote: "After much talk of new relations with the BC folks, they backed Louisville, not UConn, for the ACC opening left by Maryland."

I didn't read that to mean he had sources that confirmed BC voted against Connecticut. But what do i know, maybe he did have a source. Seemed to me more like his personal deduction of what happened since ville got in and we didn't.

 

[06029]

I disagree with you on a number of items. It was reported that UConn was indeed first, PLAN A. So how can you dismiss it outright? Maybe the reporter was making it up? The report was literally that UConn was PLAN A. I also don't believe there is no difference i money/eyeballs between these teams. There is. And most importantly, I disagree that these schools were listening to economic consultants. if that were the case, you wouldn't have open acrimony in the media. There is a nasty blood war going on between FSU and UNC. In such cases, throw logic out the window.

The reporters were all CT based and they were reporting on posts in blogs, tweets and message boards. I can find nothing from the ACC press with a Google search. The only person who claimed Uconn was high on a list and blocked was a loud mouthed blowhard who is currently unemployed (or should I say retired) and who liked to make himself way more important than he could have ever been. I find it hard to believe that you would believe him in this case when you probably never believed him in the past. So I have no faith in any report about the 2011 ACC expansion and Uconn. And you believe that money and economics play no role? If there is a difference between the teams and schools in terms of money and eyeballs, are you suggesting that the ACC passed on a team that would make them more on purpose? Wow. I guess the conspiracy kitty was right all along. It is all about screwing 2 or 3 schools. Please show me one example where money and the potential for even more money has not influenced any expansion decision by a conference or a school. Just one and I will never post about expansion again.

I am well aware of the history of UNC/FSU. The UNC/FSU feud goes way back. It goes back to before Clemson was added to the ACC. And it became worse with the 2002 expansion which UNC opposed (along with Duke and NC State, thanks to some pressure applied to NC State by everyone's favorite Notre Dame). UNC believes (like the BE did) that BB is the #1 sport and that it should have priority. FSU is like an SEC school, BB is a nice diversion between the end of the bowls and spring ball. The schools that can not compete in FB can at least be good in BB. Both schools are seeing the balance of power move out of NC and away from BB. This makes FSU happy and UNC is not (NC State, Duke and Wake are pretty much pissed about this too). They will never see eye to eye on this. Will it lead to a massive break up like the BE? Who knows. But my personal opinion is that UNC leaving the ACC is the slimmest of all possibilities. UVA, FSU, Va Tech or Clemson are all way higher than that.

 

[Danzz]

We just went through a period of easy money. UConn Football, in parallel, was riding a nice momentum from 2004-2008. At the same time - with less advantages than us - Rutgers & Louisville ramped up & pushed ahead Stadium expansion plans. We also stood stagnant during that perid in Gifts & Fundraising. RU & UL did not.

The Stadium issue hurts us. We look less Bigtime. We lacked the leadership & vision that both those other schools - PLUS Cincinnati - had. I think we have a great football future. But, we are stumbling around now. The Stadium enhanced that perception.

I don't know Pudge but I'm not sure the stadium is a big issue. I think we may have looked less big time if we had a 65,000 seat stadium with 30,000 fans. The Rent is expanable and the conferences would stipulate expansion.

 

[upstater]

The reporters were all CT based and they were reporting on posts in blogs, tweets and message boards. I can find nothing from the ACC press with a Google search. The only person who claimed Uconn was high on a list and blocked was a loud mouthed blowhard who is currently unemployed (or should I say retired) and who liked to make himself way more important than he could have ever been. I find it hard to believe that you would believe him in this case when you probably never believed him in the past. So I have no faith in any report about the 2011 ACC expansion and Uconn. And you believe that money and economics play no role? If there is a difference between the teams and schools in terms of money and eyeballs, are you suggesting that the ACC passed on a team that would make them more on purpose? Wow. I guess the conspiracy kitty was right all along. It is all about screwing 2 or 3 schools. Please show me one example where money and the potential for even more money has not influenced any expansion decision by a conference or a school. Just one and I will never post about expansion again.

I am well aware of the history of UNC/FSU. The UNC/FSU feud goes way back. It goes back to before Clemson was added to the ACC. And it became worse with the 2002 expansion which UNC opposed (along with Duke and NC State, thanks to some pressure applied to NC State by everyone's favorite Notre Dame). UNC believes (like the BE did) that BB is the #1 sport and that it should have priority. FSU is like an SEC school, BB is a nice diversion between the end of the bowls and spring ball. The schools that can not compete in FB can at least be good in BB. Both schools are seeing the balance of power move out of NC and away from BB. This makes FSU happy and UNC is not (NC State, Duke and Wake are pretty much pissed about this too). They will never see eye to eye on this. Will it lead to a massive break up like the BE? Who knows. But my personal opinion is that UNC leaving the ACC is the slimmest of all possibilities. UVA, FSU, Va Tech or Clemson are all way higher than that.

What a bizarre post.

The loudmouth blowhard was right and first several times this month.

The loudmouth blowhard quoted Gene DeFilippo directly.

Gene DeFilippo copped to what he said later on.

This isn't a mystery.

I'm stunned that you think this is all under wraps.

 

[06029]

What a bizarre post.

The loudmouth blowhard was right and first several times this month.

The loudmouth blowhard quoted Gene DeFilippo directly.

Gene DeFilippo copped to what he said later on.

This isn't a mystery.

I'm stunned that you think this is all under wraps.

the loud mouthed blow hard was defilipo. Not exactly the most reliable source.

I'm stunned that you think the ACC turned down a superior economic alternative because of BC. To me, the reality is that Uconn does not provide the economic return the other 3 schools do. If Uconn did, this board would not be here.

 

[upstater]

the loud mouthed blow hard was defilipo. Not exactly the most reliable source.

I'm stunned that you think the ACC turned down a superior economic alternative because of BC. To me, the reality is that Uconn does not provide the economic return the other 3 schools do. If Uconn did, this board would not be here.

It doesn't provide the economic return the other 3 do. It provides MORE. FSU wanting to stick it to UNC ws reason #1 they chose Ville. Had nothing to do with $$$. Last time, it was BC's intransigence.

Why would DeFilippo go on record as blackballing UConn? What does he gain? You're actually saying here and now that he was lying about it? Lying about something he had to take back soon afterward because of too much said about ESPN/ACC backroom dealing?

 

[06029]

It doesn't provide the economic return the other 3 do. It provides MORE. FSU wanting to stick it to UNC ws reason #1 they chose Ville. Had nothing to do with $$$. Last time, it was BC's intransigence.

Why would DeFilippo go on record as blackballing UConn? What does he gain? You're actually saying here and now that he was lying about it? Lying about something he had to take back soon afterward because of too much said about ESPN/ACC backroom dealing?

There is no proof that Uconn offers more in return to the ACC. Other than the analysis of the geniuses on this board. I do no believe that in this game of survival a more valuable product is left behind. And I can discount his bragging as much as you discount that he said that the conference knows how much each school brings to the conference from TV. BTW, he gained nothing and lost his job in large part because of it.

Somehow you are stuck on a belief that single schools can over ride the best return for a conference. FSU does not have that power. BC does not have that power. Therefore, I come to the only reasonable option that remains. The value proposition from Uconn is not there. If it was there, Uconn would not be fighting for its life.

 

[upstater]

There is no proof that Uconn offers more in return to the ACC. Other than the analysis of the geniuses on this board. I do no believe that in this game of survival a more valuable product is left behind. And I can discount his bragging as much as you discount that he said that the conference knows how much each school brings to the conference from TV. BTW, he gained nothing and lost his job in large part because of it.

Somehow you are stuck on a belief that single schools can over ride the best return for a conference. FSU does not have that power. BC does not have that power. Therefore, I come to the only reasonable option that remains. The value proposition from Uconn is not there. If it was there, Uconn would not be fighting for its life.

FSU does have the power. FSU blasted UNC prior to Maryland even leaving. FSU threatening the rest of the schools with destroying the conference sure as hell worked. I don't blame the other schools with falling into line.

As for your saying there is no proof, didn't you just mention consultants in your previous post? There are industry people on this board. But regardless, cable households, TV markets, TV ratings, licensing rights, etc. These things aren't mysteries. UConn does have a captive audience in a wealthy state.