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

[BC1978]

They must have only begun offering courses in logic up there in 1979.

Sore Eagles!

Hey, you could be right. Maybe there is no answer right now. In the absence of of an answer, you can dispute the theory, but it is hard to fully discredit it. If over the next few years Umass is not scheduled in either FB or BB, I think we would begin to have an answer, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Hey, you could be right. Maybe there is no answer right now. In the absence of of an answer, you can dispute the theory, but it is hard to fully discredit it. If over the next few years Umass is not scheduled in either FB or BB, I think we would begin to have an answer, wouldn't you agree?

No, I don't agree. It's all speculation on the part of fans who are not "in the know" with these kind of things. Again, given our history of how we scheduled, I doubt that we are avoiding UMass at all.

 

[BC1978]

That is it, and I agree BC. On this board I hear almost every BC posters stating it has to do with every reason from lawsuit (which did bite UConn in the arse) to the "juice" you referenced, to UConn being not a big time enough, to hurting their SOS, to one time nearly 10 years ago a drunk group of fans did something stupid and inapporpriate to the BC buses, etc... I think your and my opinions are aligned that it predominantly has to do with BC trying to keep seperation between their nearest competition. Where you and I disagree is on if this approach makes sense. I think it is a backwards and small time thinking, and that in fact a regular series between the two would benefit both programs (I'm not talking about national appeal, but definitely more local and asolutely would energize fan bases).

Also, agreed none of this is personal. I don't see anything wrong with how your posting/conducting yourself on this board, just happen to disagree with a lot of what you're posting. It's all good.

Thanks Samco. I agree. Whenever possible, I try to take the emotion out of issues and see them for what I believe these things are - namely business decisions. When people can mange to see it that way, they may disagree, but at least they can be civil with one another and at least understand each other's persepctive. That understanding often can lead to breakthroughs and compromise as parties find common benefits through increased meaningful dialog.

I can never understand why people feel the need to launch into personal invectives (calling someone an idiot, insulting the academic integrity of a poster's school because they disagree with them, etc.). All that does is disrupt what should be a fun intellectual discussion, polarize the parties in the discussion, and inhibit breakthroughs in understanding! Just my 2 cents!

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Guy it's an internet message board where a bunch of idiots banter about their opinions and occassionally insult others. Nobody is winning a Nobel Peace Prize or curing cancer here.

 

[Carl Spackler]

That is it, and I agree BC. On this board I hear almost every BC posters stating it has to do with every reason from lawsuit (which did bite UConn in the arse) to the "juice" you referenced, to UConn being not a big time enough, to hurting their SOS, to one time nearly 10 years ago a drunk group of fans did something stupid and inapporpriate to the BC buses, etc... I think your and my opinions are aligned that it predominantly has to do with BC trying to keep seperation between their nearest competition. Where you and I disagree is on if this approach makes sense. I think it is a backwards and small time thinking, and that in fact a regular series between the two would benefit both programs (I'm not talking about national appeal, but definitely more local and asolutely would energize fan bases).

Also, agreed none of this is personal. I don't see anything wrong with how your posting/conducting yourself on this board, just happen to disagree with a lot of what you're posting. It's all good.

There is a big difference between avoiding competition or confrontation because of being fearful of the consequences, and avoiding competition for beneficial business reasons. Boston College University would have people believe that some kind of careful risk/benefit calculation has been made over the years regarding competition with UCONN on gridiron, but the reality is that they are very much fearful of losing to UCONN and their fans and administrators have acted irrationally because of it.

 

[BC1978]

Guy it's an internet message board where a bunch of idiots banter about their opinions and occassionally insult others. Nobody is winning a Nobel Peace Prize or curing cancer here.

Well, agree that what is posted here is not going to be read by anybody in Stockholm! Agree that people here occasionally insult others. Just think it is unfortunate when it happens; that's all.

 

[BC1978]

There is a big difference between avoiding competition or confrontation because of being fearful of the consequences, and avoiding competition for beneficial business reasons. Boston College University would have people believe that some kind of careful risk/benefit calculation has been made over the years regarding competition with UCONN on gridiron, but the reality is that they are very much fearful of losing to UCONN and their fans and administrators have acted irrationally because of it.

Well, Carl, their view is most likely that playing Uconn AT THIS TIME benefits Uconn more than BC; and BC obviously wants to schedule games that benefit BC equally or more than the other team. Pretty much the philosophy of every team when they schedule. You can disagree with their decisions, of course, but, IMO, it is hardly based on an irrational view. It will ultimately prove to be correct or in error; but the logic is hardly irrational, IMO.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Well, agree that what is posted here is not going to be read by anybody in Stockholm! Agree that people here occasionally insult others. Just think it is unfortunate when it happens; that's all.

Then you must really stay away from the BC boards, because what goes on here pales in comparison to that cesspool.

 

[BC1978]

Then you must really stay away from the BC boards, because what goes on here pales in comparison to that cesspool.

No, I actually don't post on their open boards, for this very reason. I do post on the BC premium board as the discussion there tends to be more civil. Also post on the csnbbs boards as they tend to be civil as well.

 

[HuskyDogArt]

I really do think that ultimately Uconn will get to play BC in football once again down the road something most casual college football fans in Greater Boston would probaby support and in which there is ongoing heightened interest here anong UConn football fans. I think it will happen probably after the retirement of the current school president, Fr. William Leahy. He's really not a football fan, and really not even a sports fan. Reports are, rightly or wrongly,that he did not want his name attached to the lawsuit generated out of Connecticut by Blumenthal, as he felt, rightly or wrongly, that the accusations made in the legal briefs about his actions were false. Now maybe they were all true, who knows, but thats not the point, the point is that the lawsuit left in his mind that he would prefer that BC no longer play Uconn. This became reinforced when students and cheerleaders in the BC bus were subjected to some bad stuff at the last football game in Hartford. This is all regrettable, as BC was one of the BE Schools as you probably are aware that voted " yes " for Uconn's admittance to the BE, and lately,under their new AD Bates, have reinstated the playing of basketball with Uconn even though Uconn has dominated BC in basketball for decades. So its not like BC " is scared "of athletic competition with Uconn in my view.. Leahy's decision has nothing at all to do with football competition and being scared of Uconn football. The same with Syracuse, and the same with the other ACC schools. Its frankly got nothing to do with UConn football at all, imo. UConn will get their need to play BC in football again fulfilled in time. And it probably will be when the defendants in the lawsuit all all fully retired. They are all getting on in years, so they'll be retiring, the same as Blumenthal, Calhoun, etc... then it will happen, imo. Just be patient, thats all.

With Blumenthal as Senator (for life), I doubt BCU will play us until he retires. I think maybe in 15 years UConn-BC will have a game.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Its hard to keep up with the reasoning and logic here sometimes. I've read that BC should never leave the BE for the ACC because " " they'll never be able to compete there, they'll have no influence there with the Tobacco Roaders", etc and all that. Ok, for the sake of discussion lets accept the comments, ie " BC will have no influence on decision making there if they go to the ACC ". If true, then BC had no ability to keep UCONN out of the ACC even if they wanted too. Or did I miss something here in the reasoning and logic ? Just asking mind you and trying to understand the thought process here, thats all... no more, no less.

 

[Yawkey Way]

[quote="SAMCRO, post: 837780, member: 543", BC and UConn could have helped eachother by having a series, insteead BCcan have 30-35K come watch them play UCF or Kent St or whoever they bring in year to year, and UConn can have 30-35K watch them play Buffalo. Makes no sense to me.[/quote]

While I would prefer a Uconn- BC football game, the reality is that from most Greater Boston area college football fans perspective ( the few that there are ) would prefer to see a BC- Umass football game than a BC- Uconn game, for the simple reason that there are more graduates of the state college system of Massachusetts in the Boston area and will generate more revenue and will draw more of an attendance ( or similar attendance ) than a BC - Uconn game. The appetite is not that strong for BC itself in Greater Boston, so if you think that bringing in UConn football does anything for " New England College Football ", then I don 't think you realize how blaze such a match up is from the non BC alums perspective that live near Alumni Stadium. It doesn't do what you think it will do. Adding Holy Cross has little to do with UCONN as its a renewal of a Catholic school football game by 2 Massachusetts colleges that goes back to pre WW2. There are more Holy Cross grads living in the Greater Boston to Worcester 128, 495, Mass Pike Corridor than Uconn grads in this local Boston area corridor, so BC won't lose anything re. attendance compared to if these were BC- Uconn games.

 

[SAMCRO]

[quote="SAMCRO, post: 837780, member: 543", BC and UConn could have helped eachother by having a series, insteead BCcan have 30-35K come watch them play UCF or Kent St or whoever they bring in year to year, and UConn can have 30-35K watch them play Buffalo. Makes no sense to me.

While I would prefer a Uconn- BC football game, the reality is that from most Greater Boston area college football fans perspective ( the few that there are ) would prefer to see a BC- Umass football game than a BC- Uconn game, for the simple reason that there are more graduates of the state college system of Massachusetts in the Boston area and will generates more revenue and will draw more of an attendance ( or similar attendance ) than a BC - Uconn game. The appetite is not that strong for BC itself in Greater Boston, so if you think that bringing in UConn football does anything for " New England College Football ", then I don 't think you realize how blaze such a match up is from the non BC alums perspective that live near Alumni Stadium. It doesn't do what you think it will do. Adding Holy Cross has little to do with UCONN as its a renewal of a Catholic school football game by 2 Massachusetts that goes back to pre WW2.[/quote]
Agree to disagree I guess. I'm sure those future home games v. New Mexico St and Colorado St will be big draws.

 

[Yawkey Way]

While I would prefer a Uconn
Agree to disagree I guess. I'm sure those future home games v. New Mexico St and Colorado St will be big draws.

This seems to me like a false equivalency however. Colorado State vs. BC will probably draw less at Alumni than the BC- Umass game, and perhaps even less than the BC- Holy Cross game. Its hard to know. ( BC has no future games scheduled with New Mexico State, and has never brought them to Alumni, so its sort of irrelevant to the discussion as to BC's home schedule and whats good for " New England College football ".

This notion that BC and Uconn playing a football game every 5 or 6 years or so, will be " good boost for New England College Football " is being assessed from a southern New England ( Connecticut ) perspective, which is all well and good. But it will not have the overall New England regional impact that you ( and others) hope that it will have... not insofar as the metro Boston area is concerned anyway.

 

[buddy]

I really do think that ultimately Uconn will get to play BC in football once again down the road something most casual college football fans in Greater Boston would probaby support and in which there is ongoing heightened interest here anong UConn football fans. I think it will happen probably after the retirement of the current school president, Fr. William Leahy. He's really not a football fan, and really not even a sports fan. Reports are, rightly or wrongly,that he did not want his name attached to the lawsuit generated out of Connecticut by Blumenthal, as he felt, rightly or wrongly, that the accusations made in the legal briefs about his actions were false. Now maybe they were all true, who knows, but thats not the point, the point is that the lawsuit left in his mind that he would prefer that BC no longer play Uconn. This became reinforced when students and cheerleaders in the BC bus were subjected to some bad stuff at the last football game in Hartford. This is all regrettable, as BC was one of the BE Schools as you probably are aware that voted " yes " for Uconn's admittance to the BE, and lately,under their new AD Bates, have reinstated the playing of basketball with Uconn even though Uconn has dominated BC in basketball for decades. So its not like BC " is scared "of athletic competition with Uconn in my view.. Leahy's decision has nothing at all to do with football competition and being scared of Uconn football. The same with Syracuse, and the same with the other ACC schools. Its frankly got nothing to do with UConn football at all, imo. UConn will get their need to play BC in football again fulfilled in time. And it probably will be when the defendants in the lawsuit all all fully retired. They are all getting on in years, so they'll be retiring, the same as Blumenthal, Calhoun, etc... then it will happen, imo. Just be patient, thats all.

.
The prior AD stated way back when that he was afraid of UConn and his actions and statements confirmed that. As far as a lawsuit is concerned, everyone is always named in a lawsuit whether they are a part of it or not. When the trial comes, then, those who are not involved are usually released. Maybe Fr. Leahy was too sensitive or concerned that other information might come out. Who knows. Needless to say, BC has shown that it cannot be trusted and that cannot be corrected.

 

[Yawkey Way]

The inferiority complex at BCU to UCONN in football, is so deeply ingrained that it's hard to fathom.

.
. Needless to say, BC has shown that it cannot be trusted and that cannot be corrected.

.

If your next door neighbor is so evil, so mistrusting, so vile, so evil,, can not be corrected, has complexes of some sort etc, why then do you want to go to their house as soon as its possible ? I don't get this. I'm just trying to figure out this thinking thats all.

And conversely, if your neighbor in your neighborhood inititiated a lawsuit against you, ( forget for a moment if the lawsuit is valid or not ) and you have to get a lawyer to defend yourself against the charges, do you later want to go over to their yard to toss the ball around ? In both these scenarios, wouldn't your natural instincts be to stay away from your neighbor for as long as humanely possible ? Just asking mind you, and be truthful with yourself... isn't it much better for you not to want to have anything at all to do with such a neighbor ? What am I missing here in the logic of the thought process ?

 

[Yawkey Way]

this is not equivalent to UConn and UMass.
this is about two former conference partners trying to extinguish UConn football. .

BC ( Syracuse ) have this enormous influence and power " to extinquish UCONN football " ? Why is Uconn's football future predicated on anything that BC does or does not do off the field ? I think you give BC too much credit in their ability to keep UCONN from doing great things. BC has no unilateral ability to prevent the Big 10 or the ACC , or any other league for that matter ,from an invitation if these leagues want UCONN.

 

[HuskyPete]

I can't wait for Hockey East UConn/BC match-ups. Maybe Hockey will bring the two teams back for football and basketball games. BC could use a boost in basketball and UConn could use a boost in football. Lets make a deal.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I can't wait for Hockey East UConn/BC match-ups. Maybe Hockey will bring the two teams back for football and basketball games. BC could use a boost in basketball and UConn could use a boost in football. Lets make a deal.

Agree. When UConn first came up for consideration for the BE, BC was one of the schools that voted " yes " to invite them in. Uconn has usually beaten BC in basketball, but when Bates replaced Defillippo, he scheduled UConn in basketball again, and when Uconn made application for Hockey East, BC apparently didn't feel threatened that " UCONN will supplant BC as the dominent program in N.E. " and all that. BC voted " yes " to invite UCONN into Hockey East. Uconn will get to play BC in football down the road. Its inevitable. All the various parties publically hammering the other a few years ago that :"we will never play ( BC/ UConn ) if I have anything to do with it "( Calhoun, DeFilippo, etc ) will be long gone, and bitterness subsides so that each fan base can go to a home and away game every few years between the 2 teams and not fear for their lives or those with the others apparel colors on. I've been to Morgantown, Tallahassee, Clemson, Blacksburg, the Carrier Dome, Notre Dame, Pitt, Maryland, Penn State, and many other national venues and never once felt uncomfortable for my safety and that of my wife in another's home stadium.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Well, you have beaten Umass Lowell, Northeastern, et al, lots of times too, yet you still play them. The fact is Uconn no longer play Umass Amherst. The timing is interesting. To Umass' credit, they have become the #2 program in New England. One might think that it would make sense that Uconn resume playing them. But, again, Uconn doesn't; and I am left with the question: why? Nobody has answered that yet. My hypothesis: it is not in Uconn's best interest at this point, which I completely understand and is central to my main point.

Just as a FYI, in hoops, UConn played UMass-Lowell for recruiting purposes, most basketball teams have a game or two like that scheduled to make a star recruit happy by having all of his/her friends and family involved. UConn has played Northeastern a lot simply because that's Calhoun's old stomping ground. UConn played UMass a bunch of times; but, the series ended primarily due to the bad blood between Calhoun and Calipari according to everything I read and not any issues between the two schools overall.

In non-revenue sports, it makes perfect sense for UConn and BC to play each other in field hockey, soccer, etc. because it puts two nationally strong programs together and keeps travel costs low.

 

[The Viking]

BC ( Syracuse ) have this enormous influence and power " to extinquish UCONN football " ? Why is Uconn's football future predicated on anything that BC does or does not do off the field ? I think you give BC too much credit in their ability to keep UCONN from doing great things. BC has no unilateral ability to prevent the Big 10 or the ACC , or any other league for that matter ,from an invitation if these leagues want UCONN.

A unique set of circumstances arose that allowed BC and later Cuse to flex muscle to keep UConn out and keep them fromg getting 22 million per year in TV money compared to 2 mil in TV money.
Money matters, especially when you're trying to fund a very expensive sport. The longer you're making 2 mil a year in TV money, the more likely that your football program will become a dinosaur.

I'm not gonna spend 1000 words re-hashing the reasons that everything went against, UConn but they did. Trust me on this. You can search it on any number of threads in this site if you really want to.

Hey, good for BC they scheduled Holy Cross. I have no problem with that. But if you don't think Boston College is legitimately afraid of UConn's football potential, I'm not sure what to tell you. it's not a UConn vs. UMass situation. It is about a football program in UConn that has ALREADY put together better football seasons than BC while in its infancy that has BC very concerned and trying like hell to keep the financial cord snipped for UConn athletics.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

[quote="SAMCRO, post: 837780, member: 543", BC and UConn could have helped eachother by having a series, insteead BCcan have 30-35K come watch them play UCF or Kent St or whoever they bring in year to year, and UConn can have 30-35K watch them play Buffalo. Makes no sense to me.

While I would prefer a Uconn- BC football game, the reality is that from most Greater Boston area college football fans perspective ( the few that there are ) would prefer to see a BC- Umass football game than a BC- Uconn game, for the simple reason that there are more graduates of the state college system of Massachusetts in the Boston area and will generate more revenue and will draw more of an attendance ( or similar attendance ) than a BC - Uconn game. The appetite is not that strong for BC itself in Greater Boston, so if you think that bringing in UConn football does anything for " New England College Football ", then I don 't think you realize how blaze such a match up is from the non BC alums perspective that live near Alumni Stadium. It doesn't do what you think it will do. Adding Holy Cross has little to do with UCONN as its a renewal of a Catholic school football game by 2 Massachusetts colleges that goes back to pre WW2. There are more Holy Cross grads living in the Greater Boston to Worcester 128, 495, Mass Pike Corridor than Uconn grads in this local Boston area corridor, so BC won't lose anything re. attendance compared to if these were BC- Uconn games.[/quote]

Just a quick couple of on the HC game and Boston in general.

First, regarding UMass-Amherst, Massachusetts residents, especially around Boston, for better or worse believe that UMass is a safety school (many in CT viewed UConn the same way until the mid to late 90’s) for those who could not get into BC, BU, Tufts, etc. Hence, its support is lukewarm at best from both Alumni and the folks on Beacon Hill. UMass’s core fan support is the Pioneer Valley area, not Boston. Thus, I am not sure what benefit that UMass gains by playing BC outside of the money.

Second, I agree that a BC/HC football game may make some of the old time alumni in Boston excited; but, it will do nothing to expand and promote college football on the national football level for BC. We are not talking about ND/USC or Army/Navy here.

Third, while UMass-Amherst is in Massachusetts, it is about 90 miles to Alumni Stadium in Chestnut Hill. UConn is only 80 miles. I used to listen to WAAF in my college dorm room taping Aerosmith’s new releases onto cassettes while studying.

Lastly, Holy Cross has roughly 3,000 undergraduates. That works out to 750 graduates per year. UConn today has about 18,000 (about 13,000 in the 90’s and projected to be mid 20’s next decade). That works out to 4,500 graduates per year. Boston is the third largest UConn alumni network after CT and NYC. I have seen stats that roughly 10% to 15% of UConn grads per year move to the Boston area. That means between 450 and 675 UConn Alumni move to the Hub annually, which is comparable HC which puts about 560 (75%) in the Boston area. 10 years from now, UConn is projected to have 26,000 undergraduates, which is 6,500 graduates per year. Keeping the same trend, 10% to 15%, that puts between 650 and 975 UConn alumni in metro Boston per year. At that rate, UConn will have more alumni than HC in Boston within the next 10/20 years (depends on morality rates). By the way, BC current has about 9,100 undergraduates or 2,300 graduates per year.

 

[Yawkey Way]

A unique set of circumstances arose that allowed BC and later Cuse to flex muscle to keep UConn out

. You can search it on any number of threads in this site if you really want to.

.

Something was posted on an internet site that BC alone ( or in conjunction with Syracuse... not in the ACC at the time ) had the " muscle" down in Tobacco Road to " keep UCONN out of the ACC" ? I'm new here, but I frankly never heard of this one. Why do people here apparently uncritically believe the idea that BC has this enormous power and influence down in Tobacco Road ? Where did this alleged muscle power that BC has to apparently single handedly keep another school out of a college sports league derive from ? Thats like saying that Rutgers ( and/ or Maryland ) could single handedly keep Uconn out of the Big 10 if the Big 10 wanted Uconn as a new member. Nobody here would believe that silliness if it was posted here or elsewhere on the internet.............. or would they ? I'm just curious to understand the thinking here, thats all.

 

[buddy]

If your next door neighbor is so evil, so mistrusting, so vile, so evil,, can not be corrected, has complexes of some sort etc, why then do you want to go to their house as soon as its possible ? I don't get this. I'm just trying to figure out this thinking thats all.

And conversely, if your neighbor in your neighborhood inititiated a lawsuit against you, ( forget for a moment if the lawsuit is valid or not ) and you have to get a lawyer to defend yourself against the charges, do you later want to go over to their yard to toss the ball around ? In both these scenarios, wouldn't your natural instincts be to stay away from your neighbor for as long as humanely possible ? Just asking mind you, and be truthful with yourself... isn't it much better for you not to want to have anything at all to do with such a neighbor ? What am I missing here in the logic of the thought process ?

I agree with you, but when the neighbor is an underhanded, deceitful liar operating in a stealthy undermining manner, they deserve and lawsuit and much much more. I frankly don't understand why UConn would ever seek out BC. They are the cause of the problems here, not vise versa. GDF and Leahy were likely key conspirators.

 

[BC1978]

I agree with you, but when the neighbor is an underhanded, deceitful liar operating in a stealthy undermining manner, they deserve and lawsuit and much much more. I frankly don't understand why UConn would ever seek out BC. They are the cause of the problems here, not vise versa. GDF and Leahy were likely key conspirators.

"Key conspirators"? Really? What exactly did BC do in leaving the BE that Rutgers, SU, Pitt, or Maryland did not do?

Look, I understand the motivation and reasoning of Uconn and the other plaintiffs in filing the lawsuit. However, can we dispense with the absurd insinuations of criminality?