OT: BC football to renew historic rivarly...with Holy Cross

[huskymedic]

Ass;t Commissioner for 2003 McElroy confirms that Uconn tried to secure a ACC spot for themselves in 2003. This part is inarguable it seems to me by now.

Anyway.. here's just the most recent source cite of UCONN's quest for ACC membership in 2003 ( and before the lawsuit was launced by Blumenthal ) ; Ass't BE Commish Tom McElroy under section " 2011 ACC expansion ": http://blog.syracuse.com/sports/2013/06/syracuse_acc_sports_change_con.html

I'm promised myself I would just keep ignoring this thread but you're still making schlit up as you go along - I've read the "cite/source" Syracuse.com article many times and still don't see where you are pulling the Perkin's claim above from?? Show me/quote the statement you are referring to exactly? Exactly when did Perkins have this discussion w/ Swofford?

You keep ignoring the questions regarding Swofford's depo as well.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I'm promised myself I would just keep ignoring this thread but you're still making schlit up as you go along - quote]

Response :...This is BE Ass't Big East Commissioner for 2003, Tom Mcelroy stating quite clearly in this 6/25/ 2013 printed newspaper article that ( quote )" Boston College blocked Connecticut the first time( to the ACC ) in 2003. They'd probably do it again ( after 2003 )." Surely you can understand that nothing can" be blocked " nor need to " be blocked " if there is not the quest to secure entry that would require an attempt at " a block ". While true that in this article that former BE Ass't Commissioner McElroy does not mention Lew Perkins by name in this article, it is undeniable that he is telling us unmistakably that UCONN sought entry in 2003, bu were being ( his words ) " being blocked " in 2003. Also, it would be a dereliction of the duties of the UCONN AD ( or Uconn School President ) NOT to have been in contact with the ACC ( despite their public posturing to the contrary ) in 2003 when the first dominos began to fall in the BE with the announcement that Miami was heading off to the ACC. Every other BE football schooli n 2003 was making inquiries after Miami left, so why wouldn't UCONN be expected too as well ? Heck, Virginia Tech, that was a party to Blumenthals lawsuit was suing as a plaintiff, while behind the scenes negotiating privately to get into the ACC.....and did, before the Defendant BC did. So of course, UCONN was in contact in 2003 with the ACC. I'd be disappointed as heck if I am a UCONN fan and found out that UCONN didn't try in 2003.. but its all mute, as McElroy confirms they did in 2003, but " were blocked ".

 

[huskymedic]

I'm promised myself I would just keep ignoring this thread but you're still making schlit up as you go along - I've read the "cite/source" Syracuse.com article many times and still don't see where you are pulling the Perkin's claim above from?? Show me/quote the statement you are referring to exactly? Exactly when did Perkins have this discussion w/ Swofford?

You keep ignoring the questions regarding Swofford's depo as well.

Response :...This is BE Ass't Big East Commissioner for 2003, Tom Mcelroy stating quite clearly in this 6/25/ 2013 printed newspaper article that ( quote )" Boston College blocked Connecticut the first time( to the ACC ) in 2003. They'd probably do it again ( after 2003 )." Surely you can understand that nothing can" be blocked " nor need to " be blocked " if there is not the quest to secure entry that would require an attempt at " a block ". While true that in this article that former BE Ass't Commissioner McElroy does not mention Lew Perkins by name in this article, it is undeniable that he is telling us unmistakably that UCONN sought entry in 2003, bu were being ( his words ) " being blocked " in 2003. Also, it would be a dereliction of the duties of the UCONN AD ( or Uconn School President ) NOT to have been in contact with the ACC ( despite their public posturing to the contrary ) in 2003 when the first dominos began to fall in the BE with the announcement that Miami was heading off to the ACC. Every other BE football schooli n 2003 was making inquiries after Miami left, so why wouldn't UCONN be expected too as well ? Heck, Virginia Tech, that was a party to Blumenthals lawsuit was suing as a plaintiff, while behind the scenes negotiating privately to get into the ACC.....and did, before the Defendant BC did. So of course, UCONN was in contact in 2003 with the ACC. I'd be disappointed as heck if I am a UCONN fan and found out that UCONN didn't try in 2003.. but its all mute, as McElroy confirms they did in 2003, but " were blocked ".

McElroy confirms nothing with that statement. You have supplied no evidence that Perkins contacted the ACC. Just how you interpret an article. The "BC blocking" could just have as easily been as a result of say NC, UVA and Duke attempting to bring UConn into the fold (without any alleged inquiry by Lew Perkins) and BC throwing a hissy fit. Makes just as much sense as your fable.

So in other words - it's your "undeniable" "unmistakable" assumptions and opinions that are not backed up by verifiable facts. Thought so all along...

How about you addressing the Swofford depo that you keep referencing as gospel and conveniently refuse to provide link to despite numerous requests by poster to do so...

You can continue weaving your tale - I thought I was missing something.

 

[The Viking]

Yeah at this point Yawkey is pretty clearly just making s** up. I had a feeling if we kept pressing him we would see what we're dealing with.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Yeah at this point Yawkey is pretty clearly just making s* up. I had a feeling if we kept pressing him we would see what we're dealing with.

what am I " making up " ? I come here with no hate, no vitriol, no name calling, no anger toward anyone here. I am seeking civil discussion. If that disinterests you , or you have a need to pick a fight for some reason with me, then I'm not interested in any of that, frankly, so maybe its best for yourself if you avoid my posts if they offend you in some manner. I have no interest in making people here upset, mad, angry or whatever. And people who are angry, profane, into name calling or whatever, do not interest me either. One easy read of my posts on this thread here should have one easily determine that I have been critical of BC, its AD, its actions and behaviors in the past. I have told posters on here that I support a BC- Uconn football game, and that I have family and friends in Connecticut that are disappointed in the state of affairs between UCONN and BC and would like to see a better relationship. I believe there are enough civil and respectful Uconn fans on here to learn some things from one another that can help bridge the discord.... that coincidentally, just might help UCONN get what they seek, ACC admittance, a game with BC and so forth. I believe all my posts here to be respectful of all posters on here , even when we might have disagreed on a point or two.But if I am wrong on this attempt to bridge the discord, then I will be happy to leave, and people can do as they please on here. It is afterall your Uconn fan website. You people decide if you want to discuss things only amongst yourselves ( which is fine if thats the choice too by the way ), or you would like to have civil and respectful discussions with people that are from New England that are not UCONN football fans, but are not hateful, nor disrespectful toward UCONN, nor its football fans, and if you want to hear what they think, know, observe.. and either accept their input or reject them, both acceptable choices too in my view.. It really is your choice should you decide to be dismissive and or disrespectful to a guest that I am on here... or to match the respect that I believe that I have so far shown to you ( and all others on here ) with respectful equanimity.

 

[noeynox]

what am I " making up " ? I come here with no hate, no vitriol, no name calling, no anger toward anyone here. I am seeking civil discussion. If that disinterests you , or you have a need to pick a fight for some reason with, then I'm not interested in any of that, frankly, so maybe its best for yourself if you avoid my posts if they offend you.

Your citing some blog with kind of an ambiguous line that doesn't say at all that Perkins contacted Swofford. I'm telling you, Tranghese stated on the Mike Francessa show when the C7, decided to seperate from the FB schools, that on one than more occassion UConn President Austin, saved the conference from imploding by bringing the football and basketball schools back to the table. The relationship between the two sides was at times acrimonious.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Your citing some blog with kind of an ambiguous line that doesn't say at all that Perkins contacted Swofford. I'm telling you, Tranghese stated on the Mike Francessa show when the C7, decided to seperate from the FB schools, that on one than more occassion UConn President Austin, saved the conference from imploding by bringing the football and basketball schools back to the table. The relationship between the two sides was at times acrimonious.

I will accept the belief that UCONN President Austin tried.. but unsuccessfully... to bring the BE football and BE Basketball schools back to the table. It sounds plausable and believable to me. However, you are asking me to cross a bridge to far to accept much of anything that Michael Tranghese says about anything. I think most UCONN fans know that Michael Tranghese was not very credible especially whenever he began to talk anything at all about BE football, BE football plans, Uconn football, etc and any of that.

 

[SAMCRO]

Yawkey, in one of your 70+ posts I thought you stated that you read a quote from Swofford saying Perkins reached out to the ACC in 2003. I have no idea if he did or didn't, but I think that's the quote people have been asking and waiting for you to post.

As for the SU blog, that's about as valid as the boneyard or bc interruption (translation, not valid at all).

 

[Yawkey Way]

My only question is: Did BC try to block UConn going into the ACC? .

It appears so, Stray_ Dog,... and as far back as 2003, BC tried to block Uconn to the ACC, if BE Ass't Commisioner McElroy anyway is to be believed.

BC's former AD Gene DeFilippo is on record as attempting to block Uconn to the ACC as recently as 2011, 2012, 2013 as well. So this much seems clear anyway. I disliked the guy, never trusted him, and he has a vengeful personality in my view. So all the accusations made about him certainly fit the profile of the guy that I've met on a few occasions. I'm glad he's gone. His hires of Coaches were awful in my view..... All that said, I've never seen him with the power and influence in the ACC that a few in some quarters seem to think he had. The belief that he could single handedly keep Uconn out of the ACC always seemed silly to me. My belief is that if ACC Commish John Swofford, the ACC Board, and the other ACC School Presidents wanted UCONN in the ACC, they wern't going to stop this because of BC's DeFilippo... whether it was in 2003, or 2013, or any other year for that matter. That never seemed plausable to me. To think so, would mean that BC was chock full of power and influence down in Tobacco Road on decisions made there by the entire ACC, but really now... how likely is that ?

 

[The Viking]

You keep referring to an incredibly vague line in a Cuse blog that doesn't specifically say or expand on the idea that UConn was trying to get into the ACC at the time you say they were and you're using that as your crutch, along with your comments that only you apparently know of during Swofford's testimony.

Maybe you can understand why you're getting some artillery back at you.

And IF you are correct anyway, I won't put Perkins in the same boat as BC as Perkins was merely reacting to defections rather than being the school that really opened the door to the idea that geography didn't matter in conference realignment.

 

[Yawkey Way]

And IF you are correct anyway, I won't put Perkins in the same boat as BC as Perkins was merely reacting to defections rather than being the school that really opened the door to the idea that geography didn't matter in conference realignment.

I don't think much of either Perkins or DeFilippo, as neither was very credible,in my view. DeFilippo we are already familiar with on here, and Perkins left Uconn rather abruptly after it was clear that Uconn would not being going to the ACC under his watch. He went to the Big12 Kansas, but as I'm sure you are aware, he was made to resign under a cloud of scandal and corruption in his Athletic office there that he supervised.. Perkins is originally from Chelsea Ma. He is cut from the same cloth as De Filippo. I'm met them both... 'wouldn't trust either one of them frankly. I told you about Perkins contacting Swofford immediately after Miami lefti n 2003. It was told to me by someone with intimate knowledge of the Court documents afidavits, depositions, sworn testimony under oath. It is in the Court filed records. I have no desire to go get the documents under the Freedom of Information Act at this juncture, but they are there for others to secure to read and verify for themselves. Since I'm not motivated now to seek those documents, and have not really established my credibility here, I'm prepared to accept that UCONN fans will not be prepared to accept what I am telling them on this, and forfeit my right to be believed on this point. That said, the BE Ass't Commissioner did make it clear in the cited source, provided here that Uconn was blocked in their quest to secure an ACC invite in 2003. If his word is also not persuadable, then thats unfortunate, as its pretty clear that he is saying that UCONN quest in 2003 " was blocked ". Also, common sense would add weight to this even without my words or the BE Ass't Commish words, as why wouldn't Uconn make an inquiry with the ACC on behalf of their school, as just about every other BE football school was in contact with the ACC in 2003 immediately after Miami left, despite their public posturing to the contrary ? Any UCONN school official that did not contact the ACC immediately after Miami left would not be serving their school in its best interests. They would owe it to their school and their fans. And they did. Lew Perkins did do his due diligence. He did try his best to personally determine the ACC's interest in Uconn immediately after Miami left. And the Ass't BE Commish acknowledges that " UCONN was blocked by BC in 2003 ". I don't blame Perkins one bit... nor his keeping it silent, once it was made clear to him by Swofford that the ACC was not prepared to offer Uconn an invite in 2003. Nor do I take issue with Perkins taking a public posuture of fidelity and loyalty to the BE, despite what was taking place in private.(but later revealed ) I have no knowledge if Blumenthal was made aware of Perkins contact with Swofford, but its clear this info came out in testimony and that Blumenthal and Perkins were not happy with one another, but by that time, Perkins had moved about as far away as he could from it all.. the N. E. born and raised guy went abruptly all the way out to Kansas. So thats the chronology.. and I can understand if some on here are not prepared to accept all of this, some of this, or frankly none of this. Its ok, no matter what. I'm just sharing what I know, and citing the BE Ass't Commish Tom McElroy as a backup source, but its not my place to determine for others what they read. learn, know, etc and come to accept or reject.

 

[uconndogs]

Its common knowledge up in Boston that follow this stuff that Uconn AD Lew Perkins tried in 2003 within days days of learning that Miami was bolting the ACC to determine the ACC's interest in UCONN in becoming a member, so he contacted Commissioner John Swofford himself personally ( and who could blame him for doing so ? ).

LOL! I mean honest to god, whatever pops into some folk's head just comes out their mouth or onto their keyboard.

 

[John Greene]

You keep referring to an incredibly vague line in a Cuse blog that doesn't specifically say or expand on the idea that UConn was trying to get into the ACC at the time you say they were and you're using that as your crutch, along with your comments that only you apparently know of during Swofford's testimony.

Maybe you can understand why you're getting some artillery back at you.

And IF you are correct anyway, I won't put Perkins in the same boat as BC as Perkins was merely reacting to defections rather than being the school that really opened the door to the idea that geography didn't matter in conference realignment.

Since I am stuck at home after a snow storm I finally read this thread. Some interesting points on both sides. One point of correction however. The idea that geography did not matter was not as a result of anything BC did, it was the BE taking Miami years before that established that precedent. Not only did geography not matter in that move, but it also, in my opinion, set up the eventual fall of the BE.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Since I am stuck at home after a snow storm I finally read this thread. Some interesting points on both sides. One point of correction however. The idea that geography did not matter was not as a result of anything BC did, it was the BE taking Miami years before that established that precedent. Not only did geography not matter in that move, but it also, in my opinion, set up the eventual fall of the BE.

Why are you so obsessed with posting stuff about BC?

 

[06029]

Since I am stuck at home after a snow storm I finally read this thread. Some interesting points on both sides. One point of correction however. The idea that geography did not matter was not as a result of anything BC did, it was the BE taking Miami years before that established that precedent. Not only did geography not matter in that move, but it also, in my opinion, set up the eventual fall of the BE.

What Miami did was ensure itself a steady revenue stream in down years when it moved to the ACC. Miami had the original sweetheart deal with BE. They received a larger % of the FB revenue pie because of their football success. They were the marquee program. If they made the BCS, they got to keep a lot of that revenue. It was the same in BB with better schools keeping NCAA credits (part of the argument of not splitting from the BB schools when this whole thing started). When they left with VT, the BE revenue formula changed, I believe, to a more even distribution of the FB pie and I think they changed BB too.

Did Miami know they were going to become irrelevant relative to the NC in FB when they moved? Who knows, but they may have sensed there was the distinct possibility of sanctions because when they were successful they always played close to the edge as far as recruiting and maintaining player eligibility. In any event, the move to the ACC did give them revenue stability and a chance to come thru a period of really sucking. I think Golden will have them in the ACC CG next season and they will be strong for a number of years going forward once again.

It is somewhat apparent to me that Uconn made an overture to the ACC right after BC was turned down the first time and again when the NCAA said an 11 team league could not have a championship game. Go back and read the Calhoun quotes about Uconn being the best fit. Add in some of ACC BB coaches comments and you can deduce that it was going on. No public statements were ever made about teams and expansion after the first ACC expansion until it was after the fact and Perkins certainly was not dumb enough to open his mouth on the record.

Geography was always a secondary consideration after cash even for the BE. The BE also showed that when they added FB only schools or when they booted Temple. In many respects, the BE through its actions and expansion over its history did really set the stage for what has happened over the last decade. They added, and booted, schools solely to strengthen the league without caring about what it did to other conferences. They offered schools a step up in the major sports. Not much different than what has happened in the last 10 years. Not that the business strategy is wrong, it was just being done in a hybrid league that was destined to fail.

 

[Carl Spackler]

What Miami did was ensure itself a steady revenue stream in down years when it moved to the ACC. Miami had the original sweetheart deal with BE. They received a larger % of the FB revenue pie because of their football success. They were the marquee program. If they made the BCS, they got to keep a lot of that revenue. It was the same in BB with better schools keeping NCAA credits (part of the argument of not splitting from the BB schools when this whole thing started). When they left with VT, the BE revenue formula changed, I believe, to a more even distribution of the FB pie and I think they changed BB too.

Did Miami know they were going to become irrelevant relative to the NC in FB when they moved? Who knows, but they may have sensed there was the distinct possibility of sanctions because when they were successful they always played close to the edge as far as recruiting and maintaining player eligibility. In any event, the move to the ACC did give them revenue stability and a chance to come thru a period of really sucking. I think Golden will have them in the ACC CG next season and they will be strong for a number of years going forward once again.

It is somewhat apparent to me that Uconn made an overture to the ACC right after BC was turned down the first time and again when the NCAA said an 11 team league could not have a championship game. Go back and read the Calhoun quotes about Uconn being the best fit. Add in some of ACC BB coaches comments and you can deduce that it was going on. No public statements were ever made about teams and expansion after the first ACC expansion until it was after the fact and Perkins certainly was not dumb enough to open his mouth on the record.

Geography was always a secondary consideration after cash even for the BE. The BE also showed that when they added FB only schools or when they booted Temple. In many respects, the BE through its actions and expansion over its history did really set the stage for what has happened over the last decade. They added, and booted, schools solely to strengthen the league without caring about what it did to other conferences. They offered schools a step up in the major sports. Not much different than what has happened in the last 10 years. Not that the business strategy is wrong, it was just being done in a hybrid league that was destined to fail.

IF...Miami made the BCS? I believe you're old enough to remember college football in the late 1980s - early 1990s. Am I wrong? You seem like it.

BCS didn't start until 1998. They were just figuring out how to separate the packs of conferences via the post season bowl arrangments in the early 1990s. Prior to 1990, there were some 28 or so division 1A independents. When the Big East football conference formed on paper in 1991, the U was the equivalent in football to the rest of the Big East, as to what UCONN hoops last night was to USF hoops.

Miami was looking for the best deal it good get going from independent to conference affiliation, and the Big East turned out to be it. 1990-1991 was the first time, of MANY times, that the Big East almost fractured along football/basketball lines. Syracuse, PItt, BCU were going to join a bunch of of independants and the Metro Conference as the original 16 team superfconference in 1991, until the Big East ---- RELUCTANTLY -- agreed to start a football conference. That 16 team conference back then would have included among others Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and most of the programs that we are currently in conference with.

The thing is - Toner, a proponent of division 1-AA cost containment theoretical football, had agreed that UCONN would be 1-AA, from 1978 on, and had not the Big EAst conference done what it did, and we had our relationship with it, we'd still be playing football regularly in the CAA, and most likely, hockey and basketball would be dominant at UCONN by now.

UCONN, historically, and in the present, really is a unique program among the 125 or so now division 1A football athletic departments across the country. I don't think there is a single program anywhere out there, that has quite the rocky and yet successful, story that we've got.

The sooner that people realize exactly what we are, and where we are, and why, the better. THe conference we are in now, is what the evolution of college football and intercollegiate athletics has led to, after the flood gates opened around television revenue in the mid 1980s. We have a hell of a lot more in common with the athletic departments we are associated with now, than we did before.

Unlike many, many other institutions around the country though, UCONN, has the potential to grow immensely, and become much more like the other large state institutions in the north, east and central footprint of the United States that are aligned through athleticis. Until then, we just keep plugging along and winning.

 

[John Greene]

Why are you so obsessed with posting stuff about BC?

Good question. I must have picked up some virus here on the BY. I come here a couple of times a week and darned if more often than not I see the two magic letters on the first page of one of the boards. I am trying to break the fever by now referring to "magic letters" or "school that must not be named". Hopefully that will help with the cure. If that does not help I may have to see if there is a 12 step program for the condition.

 

[06029]

IF...Miami made the BCS? I believe you're old enough to remember college football in the late 1980s - early 1990s. Am I wrong? You seem like it.

BCS didn't start until 1998. They were just figuring out how to separate the packs of conferences via the post season bowl arrangments in the early 1990s. Prior to 1990, there were some 28 or so division 1A independents. When the Big East football conference formed on paper in 1991, the U was the equivalent in football to the rest of the Big East, as to what UCONN hoops last night was to USF hoops.

Miami was looking for the best deal it good get going from independent to conference affiliation, and the Big East turned out to be it. 1990-1991 was the first time, of MANY times, that the Big East almost fractured along football/basketball lines. Syracuse, PItt, BCU were going to join a bunch of of independants and the Metro Conference as the original 16 team superfconference in 1991, until the Big East ---- RELUCTANTLY -- agreed to start a football conference. That 16 team conference back then would have included among others Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and most of the programs that we are currently in conference with.

The thing is - Toner, a proponent of division 1-AA cost containment theoretical football, had agreed that UCONN would be 1-AA, from 1978 on, and had not the Big EAst conference done what it did, and we had our relationship with it, we'd still be playing football regularly in the CAA, and most likely, hockey and basketball would be dominant at UCONN by now.

UCONN, historically, and in the present, really is a unique program among the 125 or so now division 1A football athletic departments across the country. I don't think there is a single program anywhere out there, that has quite the rocky and yet successful, story that we've got.

The sooner that people realize exactly what we are, and where we are, and why, the better. THe conference we are in now, is what the evolution of college football and intercollegiate athletics has led to, after the flood gates opened around television revenue in the mid 1980s. We have a hell of a lot more in common with the athletic departments we are associated with now, than we did before.

Unlike many, many other institutions around the country though, UCONN, has the potential to grow immensely, and become much more like the other large state institutions in the north, east and central footprint of the United States that are aligned through athleticis. Until then, we just keep plugging along and winning.

I used BCS but you know what I meant. Miami always got the "good" BE bowl and they got to keep the revenue from it. Every other conference has always had the equal share principal. The BE was the exception to that rule.

Your key point is that the BE was reluctant to start a FB conference. They were reluctant to everything except expansion during their history. The East Indies (which was the old loose FB confederation) also included Penn State. The BE could have had Penn State (I assume you know all of the ugly details of that chapter of the BE) but they went down a path with Miami instead. Uconn's entrance into FB was so late in the BE history that the self destruct sequence had already commenced. Uconn got caught as the last guest to the party.

Uconn has the potential to grow immensely in your view and you may be right. I see that growth does have limitations. Uconn's undergraduate population will never be close to MI, PSU, FL, FSU, UGA, etc. The infrastructure can not support that base and the demographics of the population are declining regionally. In order to grow the fan base, you need to have a huge alumni base that treats FB as an obligation not a diversion. A fan base that treats the fall as the best season of the year. A fan base that buys tickets even when the team sucks. The schools you want Uconn to aspire to be, they have it in their DNA.

Reality, the AAC is where Uconn is and where they will be until someone throws the entire thing into motion again. They received the best home schedule they could have asked for next season. They have a new coach that is breathing some life into the core fan base. Embrace it.

 

[4BostonEagle]

However, some of BC's fans (not you!!) do love to tell us that we aren't in a P5 conference. We know we aren't, but CR isn't done yet. Some of BC's fans hate UConn - and if it is due to the lawsuit, as I said I DID NOT support it. I would love to know why other BC fans troll here (and even Rutgers fans, too). Isn't the BC's sites as good as 'The-Boneyard'?

For the pure comedy gold on here. This thread is full of unintentional laughs. I can only imagine the cockiness if UCONN actually had a winning season in the last 3. Or if they had actually been ranked in their college football history at the end of any season?!

This board would be saying UCONN should be dictating terms going in to the SEC with an option to leave for the Big 10 if they weren't happy after a couple of years. The delusional posts are truly hilarious.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

For the pure comedy gold on here. This thread is full of unintentional laughs. I can only imagine the cockiness if UCONN actually had a winning season in the last 3. Or if they had actually been ranked in their college football history at the end of any season?!

This board would be saying UCONN should be dictating terms going in to the SEC with an option to leave for the Big 10 if they weren't happy after a couple of years. The delusional posts are truly hilarious.

You're a loser.

 

[uconndogs]

For the pure comedy gold on here. This thread is full of unintentional laughs. I can only imagine the cockiness if UCONN actually had a winning season in the last 3. Or if they had actually been ranked in their college football history at the end of any season?!

This board would be saying UCONN should be dictating terms going in to the SEC with an option to leave for the Big 10 if they weren't happy after a couple of years. The delusional posts are truly hilarious.

Little man post......

 

[Carl Spackler]

I used BCS but you know what I meant. Miami always got the "good" BE bowl and they got to keep the revenue from it. Every other conference has always had the equal share principal. The BE was the exception to that rule.

Your key point is that the BE was reluctant to start a FB conference. They were reluctant to everything except expansion during their history. The East Indies (which was the old loose FB confederation) also included Penn State. The BE could have had Penn State (I assume you know all of the ugly details of that chapter of the BE) but they went down a path with Miami instead. Uconn's entrance into FB was so late in the BE history that the self destruct sequence had already commenced. Uconn got caught as the last guest to the party.

Uconn has the potential to grow immensely in your view and you may be right. I see that growth does have limitations. Uconn's undergraduate population will never be close to MI, PSU, FL, FSU, UGA, etc. The infrastructure can not support that base and the demographics of the population are declining regionally. In order to grow the fan base, you need to have a huge alumni base that treats FB as an obligation not a diversion. A fan base that treats the fall as the best season of the year. A fan base that buys tickets even when the team sucks. The schools you want Uconn to aspire to be, they have it in their DNA.

Reality, the AAC is where Uconn is and where they will be until someone throws the entire thing into motion again. They received the best home schedule they could have asked for next season. They have a new coach that is breathing some life into the core fan base. Embrace it.

I know the history. I disagree with the fanbase thing though and buying tickets. It's unrealistic to think that the stadium is going to be sold out for a crappy program. That's just not the culture we live in. As far as a huge alumni base that treats FB as an obligation, I think we are on the same page, but just a different paragraph.

I think that with each class that graduates, having had a football program at this level, the obligation of the alumni fan base that you talk of grows in understanding what UCONN is and can be. What needs to change at UCONN, and his hard to do, is the entitlement culture that exists in this region. Connecticut is what it is. It's not just buying tickets and going to the games. Most people that graduate cannot do that, but they need to remain part of the school and program anyway. There is a different, and more important way to do that.

I personally give back to the university every year, as should every graduate give back a little bit every year. IMNSHO. But the culture of "not a dime back", and the general entitlement culture that exists in the region socio-economically needs to be overcome. (I know that will ruffle feathers - but whatever) it exists - and needs to change, and I believe it is slowly changing, as the current administration has made it basically priority #1 to grow the financial base of the university. If the 120,000 or so alumni in the region were all giving back only a $100 a year.......you get the picture.

This is really the difference IMO, between where we are at, as compared to other regions of the country. The young alumni need to be taught that when you graduate, and use your education to get a job, it's pretty much a decent and expected thing to give back. As that kind of pride and dedication to the university grows - everyone feels invested, and things get done.