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

[specialisthusky]

I'd love to see a link for this.

 

[ZooCougar]

Swofford, the Commish of the AC, is on record that he got an inquiry from Perkins, the AD of Uconn, about the interest of the ACC with UCONN once he got news that Miami was leaving for the ACC. Its even found in the defendant court documents in the BE lawsuit. Now, you are entitled to disbelieve this. This is your perogative. But if you disbelieve this, then you might want to ask yourself " why WOULDN'T Perkins do his best due diligence on behalf of his school to try to get UCONN into the ACC at that juncture, or at least pick up the phone and make a pitch and an inquiry about Uconn to the ACC, once Miami bolted ? ". Thats because if you don't accept the info as valid that Perkins tried to get Uconn into the ACC once Miami left, then that begs the question for UCONN football fans : " well...why didn't he " ?

News to me.

 

[Yawkey Way]

News to me.

This is why I believe its helpful to have civil dialogue with people outside of their own bubble, insular world to see how the other half thinks. This of course pertains to some in the BC fan base too that have accepted as truth things that simply defy logic, natural human behaviors, and events as they occur. When people are angry, its not their best moments for thinking clearly and sensibly... and that leads sometimes to the potentialfor all manner of inconvenient truths to give way to things we hear or read that under normal circumstances we'd conclude that these things can't possibly be true.

 

[ZooCougar]

This is why I believe its helpful to have civil dialogue with people outside of their own bubble, insular world to see how the other half thinks. This of course pertains to some in the BC fan base too that have accepted as truth things that simply defy logic, natural human behaviors, and events as they occur. When people are angry, its not their best moments for thinking clearly and sensibly... and that leads sometimes to the potentialfor all manner of inconvenient truths to give way to things we hear or read that under normal circumstances we'd conclude that these things can't possibly be true.

If it is true, I wouldn't equate what Lew Perkins did to what BC did. For UConn we never got to that stage, if we did and we ended up misleading current partners then it would.

But like I said before, all of the principle players are gone. If BC feels like they still need to do everything in their power to punish UConn for that then it is pretty small. And in the order of backstabbing in college sports, what BC did was pretty small when you compare it to something lik Phil Fulmer ratting out Alabama 10 or so years ago.

When the old WAC died, the former commish walked into his office one day and found out half of his conference was leaving.

So, at the end of the day, should current day UConn (not the fans the institution) harbor ill will against BC for improving it's position? And should current day BC harbor ill will against UConn because the State AG sought to protect the state's investment? I really don't think so.

 

[Yawkey Way]

should current day BC harbor ill will against UConn because the State AG sought to protect the state's investment? I really don't think so.

BC probably didn't look at the lawsuit as " a state's AG seeking to protect its state's investment", ..they probably looked upon it as something quite different from their perspective, I'm sure, but I do get your central point here and its a valid one. BC was not the only, nor the central ,defendant in the lawsuit by Connecticut's Blumenthal, by the way. The other parties to the lawsuit were the other schools, and the ACC officials themselves... the very people UCONN is asking now to set aside the lawsuit, the comments in the press, etc and to accept them into the ACC. BC, as mentioned is only 1 vote in the ACC. I have no idea how the other ACC schools feel about the lawsuit now, nor how Commish Swofford now feels about that lawsuit that came out of the Ct. AG's office., nor if Uconn fans believe it is small of all of these officials and former BE partners that were the many defendants in that lawsuit not to set that lawsuit aside. I have no sensible and reaasonable explanation as to why the ACC, BIG leagues are currently uninterested in having Uconn as one of its members right now. Thats above my paygrade, and I'm not sure if Blumenthal's lawsuit and public comments still scares the other leagues off re. Uconn, or if there is still ill will out there re. UCONN and extends further out than Chestnut Hil, or something else entirely. I just don't know. They should be in it seems to me and look qualified on the surface to me. Perhaps UCONN fans on here have better insights on this than me... but no matter what BC might think.. if they even think this at all... they are not responsible today for UCONN in the AAC and instead of the ACC or the BIG,, or some other league.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Putting aside backdoor dealing, public posturing, and politically motivated lawsuits, UConn's AD never publicly stated he wanted to keep a rival school out of a conference because UConn is New England's school and had to protect its territory. BC 's AD did. Thus, the animosity.

 

[Yawkey Way]

Putting aside backdoor dealing, public posturing, and politically motivated lawsuits, UConn's AD never publicly stated he wanted to keep a rival school out of a conference because UConn is New England's school and had to protect its territory. BC 's AD did. Thus, the animosity.

If the animosity toward BC is chiefly generated from the remarks of a former BC AD, I will just remind you that he is no longer the BC AD. Likewise, I remind my BC fans that the UCONN Coach that once said that " Uconn will never schedule BC as long as I'm Coach at UCONN " is likewise no longer employed at Uconn and that such current animosity should now have no justifications, or at the very least, consider another source for such animosity. BC will play Uconn in football again. My hunch once ND finally decides if it wants to become a full football ACC partner or stay with one foot in, one foot out. I think if anything, its ND thats preventing Uconn to the ACC these days now. I just don't see BC with the power and leverage to keep Uconn out of the ACC that some Uconn fans believe they have.. But lets face it, ND has such power and influence with these leagues and are not afraid to use it when it benefits them.

 

[ZooCougar]

If the animosity toward BC is chiefly generated from the remarks of a former BC AD, I will just remind you that he is no longer the BC AD. Likewise, I remind my BC fans that the UCONN Coach that once said that " Uconn will never schedule BC as long as I'm Coach at UCONN " is likewise no longer employed at Uconn and that such current animosity should now have no justifications, or at the very least, consider another source for such animosity. BC will play Uconn in football again. My hunch once ND finally decides if it wants to become a full football ACC partner or stay with one foot in, one foot out. I think if anything, its ND thats preventing Uconn to the ACC these days now. I just don't see BC with the power and leverage to keep Uconn out of the ACC that some Uconn fans believe they have.. But lets face it, ND has such power and influence with these leagues and are not afraid to use it when it benefits them.

UConn never intentionally mislead its former partners. UConn also never went out of its way to damage another former partner. Honestly, the moral relativism on your part is just not working as an argument.

 

[Yawkey Way]

UConn never intentionally mislead its former partners. UConn also never went out of its way to damage another former partner. Honestly, the moral relativism on your part is just not working as an argument.

Sure they did. Publically, Uconn was stating fidelity and loyalty for the BE, while its AD ( Perkins ) was in contact with the ACC office immediately after Miami left to determine the ACC's interest in Uconn. Then as recently as 2 years ago, once again, UCONN was pledging fidelity to the reconstituted BE, while its President was on the phone to both the ACC ( again ) to determine the ACC's interest in Uconn. I assume you know this. If not, I don't know why. Its certainly known up in Boston and down in ACC headquarters,.... and is all part of the public record via court records in the Blumenthal lawsuit. But thats beside the point, The point is that it would be a failure of UCONN''S former AD Perkins to his school NOT to have pushed for Uconn's consideration by the ACC after Miami left. So of course he did, irrespective of his public posturing to the contrary..... finally, if you as a loyal and good worker leave your firm for another because you believe it is your future best interests, and the loss of your value to your former firm becomes evident, the fact that your former firm is " damaged " is a true statement. But did you really set out to " damage or destroy the firm " ? Or was that really incidental to your primary motive for moving to the new firm ? And remember, in this scenario, the firm ( BE ) was already " damaged " by the loss of its key employee ( Miami ) before you ( BC ) had a chance to move on. The fact that Harry ( Uconn ) is left in a " damaged" ( BE ) firm is most unfortunate for Harry ( Uconn ), but to blame the departed employee ( BC ) for this circumstance does not primarily rest with the departed employee. It rests primarily with the crappy, dysfunctional company ( BE ) that both Harry ( UCONN ) and the departed ( BC ) once inhabited.

 

[The Viking]

I gotta say I've never heard that Perkins story about contacting the ACC. Where are you getting your info?

Regarding Herbst, are you talking about when she was contacting the ACC after virtually all of our BE rivals have left? You're calling that the same as what BC did? Because that's simply prepostrous.

 

[Yawkey Way]

I gotta say I've never heard that Perkins story about contacting the ACC. Where are you getting your info?

quote]

Court records from the Defendant's side in the lawsuit. Swofford testified under oath that Uconn ( Perkins ) contacted his office to determine the ACC'S interest in Uconn within days of the receipt of information that Miami was leaving the BE for the ACC. And of course its true. Otherwise, it would be a dereliction of his duties to UCONN to not be proactive to determine the ACC's interest in Uconn, when just about every other BE school with a football program of any consequence was inquiring with the ACC immediately after Miami left. Just about every BE football school that was publically claiming fidelity to the collapsing BE, were all behind the scenes trying to determine the ACC's interest in them. Virginia, for heavens sake, was a plaintiff in Blumenthals lawsuit butwas working behind the scenes to get inrto the ACC before BC and Syracuse and well before Blumenthal included Virginia in his lawsuit. Swofford did not appreciate being sued out of Connecticut, when he knew that UCONN had contacted him earlier for the ACC's interest in Uconn after Miami left.

 

[The Viking]

Are these records available for public consumption?

 

[DarthGrumpy]

If the animosity toward BC is chiefly generated from the remarks of a former BC AD, I will just remind you that he is no longer the BC AD. Likewise, I remind my BC fans that the UCONN Coach that once said that " Uconn will never schedule BC as long as I'm Coach at UCONN " is likewise no longer employed at Uconn and that such current animosity should now have no justifications, or at the very least, consider another source for such animosity. BC will play Uconn in football again. My hunch once ND finally decides if it wants to become a full football ACC partner or stay with one foot in, one foot out. I think if anything, its ND thats preventing Uconn to the ACC these days now. I just don't see BC with the power and leverage to keep Uconn out of the ACC that some Uconn fans believe they have.. But lets face it, ND has such power and influence with these leagues and are not afraid to use it when it benefits them.

No argument about ND and I believe the ACC will learn quickly that a ‘special’ arrangement with the Domers will not benefit them in the end.

As for Calhoun, he was a great coach and, yes, an ornery SOB. In typical Boston fashion, he lashed out at BC after it appeared that BC stabbed UConn and the old Big E in the back. He did the same to the NCAA after the Nate Miles investigation by figuratively flipping them the bird while hosting his third national championship trophy, which is why most folks believe the NCAA went so hard after UConn. That said, Calhoun represented 1 UConn sports program. BC’s DeFilippo represented all of BC’s sports program.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2011/10/boston-college-athletic-director-gene-defilippo-espn/1

I also agree that the major players in this fiasco are now gone. But, the fact remains is that UConn is a state flagship university, has a larger alumni base (TV dollars), is a very good academic and athletic university, and represents a major local competitor for BC (and Syracuse). Unfortunately, while other regions of the country grow and celebrate local rivals as a way to boost both schools, BC (and Syracuse) appears to continue to believe in the opposite.

 

[BC1978]

Unfortunately, while other regions of the country grow and celebrate local rivals as a way to boost both schools, BC (and Syracuse) appears to continue to believe in the opposite.

Re: other regions...well...they really don't. Do you think South Carolina would support Clemson's admission into the SEC? How about Florida supporting FSU's entry into the SEC? How about Georgia supporting GT? The reality is that NO schools seem to support a regional rival's entry into their league. IMO, if the roles were reversed - with Uconn in the ACC and BC trying to get into the league, Uconn would be doing the same things that you claim BC and SU are doing.

I know its lousy to be the school on the outside looking in at the moment, but to suggest that BC and/or SU are acting in a manner different from most other schools in this type of situation is naive, IMO.

 

[Yawkey Way]

[quote="Mr. Conehead, post: 841809, member: 2141" Unfortunately, while other regions of the country grow and celebrate local rivals as a way to boost both schools, BC (and Syracuse) appears to continue to believe in the opposite.[/quote]

We should be able to agree that UCONN's desire to play BC in football is not motivated by any quest to ( as you said here ) " to boost both schools ". Com'on Man, thats not going to fly.

 

[Yawkey Way]

IMO, if the roles were reversed - with Uconn in the ACC and BC trying to get into the league, Uconn would be doing the same things that you claim BC and SU are doing.
.

What if BC ( and Syracuse ) declined their invite to the ACC, claiming loyalty and devotion to the BE.... so the ACC next went to UCONN and invited them. Does anybody on here really believe that UCONN would decline to go, stating to the ACC : " No, we are declining the invite because we want to boost college football interest in New England, and envision games with BC each year to accomplish such mission that an ACC league afiliation will not afford us, BC, and the fans of college football in New England ".

Of course not, Uconn would take the ACC invite in a heartbeat, despite their frequent public posturing of their supreme interest in college football boosting in New England, and they'd never look back...... N.E. college football be damned, that would be the case then. And who could blame them ? Not me anyway.

 

[Yonick]

r. But

What if BC ( and Syracuse ) declined their invite to the ACC, claiming loyalty and devotion to the BE.... so the ACC next went to UCONN and invited them. Does anybody on here really believe that UCONN would decline to go, stating to the ACC : " No, we are declining the invite because we want to boost college football interest in New England, and envision games with BC each year to accomplish such mission that an ACC league afiliation will not afford us, BC, and the fans of college football in New England ".

Of course not, Uconn would take the ACC invite in as heartbeat, despite their frequent public posturing of their supreme interest in college football boosting in New England, and never look back. N.E. college football be damned. And who could blame them ? Not me anyway.

I'm not getting involved in this UConn-BC matter, but, when you use your handle after a street named after Tom Yawkey, you are putting one of sports biggest losers within your handle.
For years after his death his will (regarding folks running the Sox) led to utter Sox frustration. (Let alone when he lived) Once Yawkey's influence ended (Harrington finally selling) the Sox win 3 Series in 10 years.
Boston should change that street name to the present ownership.

 

[Yawkey Way]

r. But

I'm not getting involved in this UConn-BC matter, but, when you use your handle after a street named after Tom Yawkey, you are putting one of sports biggest losers within your handle.
For years after his death his will (regarding folks running the Sox) led to utter Sox frustration. (Let alone when he lived) Once Yawkey's influence ended (Harrington finally selling) the Sox win 3 Series in 10 years.
Boston should change that street name to the present ownership.

Fair enough,... you won't get involved in this BC- Uconn matter. I'll respect that, and I won't get involved in this matter of my handle/ Red Sox, etc.

 

[ZooCougar]

Sure they did. Publically, Uconn was stating fidelity and loyalty for the BE, while its AD ( Perkins ) was in contact with the ACC office immediately after Miami left to determine the ACC's interest in Uconn. Then as recently as 2 years ago, once again, UCONN was pledging fidelity to the reconstituted BE, while its President was on the phone to both the ACC ( again ) to determine the ACC's interest in Uconn. I assume you know this. If not, I don't know why. Its certainly known up in Boston and down in ACC headquarters,.... and is all part of the public record via court records in the Blumenthal lawsuit. But thats beside the point, The point is that it would be a failure of UCONN''S former AD Perkins to his school NOT to have pushed for Uconn's consideration by the ACC after Miami left. So of course he did, irrespective of his public posturing to the contrary..... finally, if you as a loyal and good worker leave your firm for another because you believe it is your future best interests, and the loss of your value to your former firm becomes evident, the fact that your former firm is " damaged " is a true statement. But did you really set out to " damage or destroy the firm " ? Or was that really incidental to your primary motive for moving to the new firm ? And remember, in this scenario, the firm ( BE ) was already " damaged " by the loss of its key employee ( Miami ) before you ( BC ) had a chance to move on. The fact that Harry ( Uconn ) is left in a " damaged" ( BE ) firm is most unfortunate for Harry ( Uconn ), but to blame the departed employee ( BC ) for this circumstance does not primarily rest with the departed employee. It rests primarily with the crappy, dysfunctional company ( BE ) that both Harry ( UCONN ) and the departed ( BC ) once inhabited.

It's just complete intellectual dishonesty and revisionist history to assert that Perkins' actions were equal. We don't even know that this event actually even occurred. We do know that BC did what it did. There really is no point in discussing this further. You just think that it's ok to not act in a way that isn't completely above board as long as it's in a school's best interest. BC played both sides and was publicly deceptive over lengthy period of time. It's ancient history now, but it is what it is.

 

[Yawkey Way]

It's just complete intellectual dishonesty and revisionist history to assert that Perkins' actions were equal. We don't even know that this event actually even occurred. We do know that BC did what it did. There really is no point in discussing this further. You just think that it's ok to not act in a way that isn't completely above board as long as it's in a school's best interest. BC played both sides and was publicly deceptive over lengthy period of time. It's ancient history now, but it is what it is.

Its been ( on the whole ) a civil dialogue here in my opinion on this thread where it did not devolve into name calling ( for the most part ). We just disagree on the events, its motivations, and characterizations of school's actions and behaviors during that whole sorry saga of the lawsuit, accusations back and forth and so forth. So its best to move forward now....... Bottom line, UCONN'S ultimate goal is to attain a higher level of national stature. And I get that. If Uconn takes care of its own business by winning the AAC, over the level of teams it should be quite capable of doing, then they will increase that level of national stature its seeks, and with that, it really won't matter if they play BC or not, nor matter at all what happens at Chestnut Hill. Thats how I assess all this anyway. Good luck.

 

[buddy]

Its been ( on the whole ) a civil dialogue here in my opinion on this thread where it did not devolve into name calling ( for the most part ). We just disagree on the events, its motivations, and characterizations of school's actions and behaviors during that whole sorry saga of the lawsuit, accusations back and forth and so forth. So its best to move forward now.. Bottom line, UCONN'S ultimate goal is to attain a higher level of national stature. And I get that. If Uconn takes care of its own business by winning the AAC, over the level of teams it should be quite capable of doing, then they will increase that level of national stature its seeks, and with that, it really won't matter if they play BC or not, nor matter at all what happens at Chestnut Hill. Thats how I assess all this anyway. Good luck.

You have your perception of events but you are incorrect in absolving BC. Furthermore, you have regressed to UConn winning in the AAC will help. Winning or losing doesn't matter. Look at BC for heaven's sake. They suck in everything(except hockey for now.) Look at Rutgers, another example where winning makes no difference. Academics make no difference (Louisville). Politics and money make a difference. Nothing else.

 

[BC1978]

You have your perception of events but you are incorrect in absolving BC. Furthermore, you have regressed to UConn winning in the AAC will help. Winning or losing doesn't matter. Look at BC for heaven's sake. They suck in everything(except hockey for now.) Look at Rutgers, another example where winning makes no difference. Academics make no difference (Louisville). Politics and money make a difference. Nothing else.

BC and Uconn fans are just not going to agree on this so rather than just go on with a "point-counter point", it might make sense for all of us to just agree to disagree.

I will take issue with your characterization of BC [athletics] as "sucking at everything (except hockey, for now)".

The fact is that BC football (and FB drives the realignment bus, as we all know) is the #28 team in the BCS era (see attached). Look at the teams immediately ahead of BC, and look at the teams behind them. Sure, #28 is not "Alabama good", but good nontheless. Your implication that BC hockey does not "suck" "for now" ignores the fact that they have been an elite team for 15 years! Hardly a flash in the pan.

To compare BC to Rutgers is laughable, IMO.

As Ronald Reagan once said: "facts are stubborn things."

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...lahoma-texas-oregon-virginia-tech-usc/slide/4

 

[CL82]

Actually I think that quote goes: "Facts are stupid things." John Adams said "facts are stubborn things."

A more appropriate Reagan quote might be "Don't be afraid to see what you see." It's the eye test that leads many here to believe that BC's best are behind them.

 

[BC1978]

Actually I think that quote goes: "Facts are stupid things." John Adams said "facts are stubborn things."

A more appropriate Reagan quote might be "Don't be afraid to see what you see." It's the eye test that leads many here to believe that BC's best are behind them.

Kudos to you, CL82. You are correct. It was Adams. I stand corrected.

As far as the rest of your statement, well, what I said above holds; we will just have to agree to disagree; although I think you should pay attention to what SA is doing. BC just hauled in what many BC fans believe to be the best BC recruiting class in a long, long time (especially since most of these recruits pledged before the season when BC was coming off 2 wins!). This guy wants to be in New England and knows how to market the program. We see big things ahead.

Sure, you will probably disagree, but at least can we agree that the characterization of BC "sucking at everything, except hockey (for now)" is not borne out by the facts?

 

[Yawkey Way]

the characterization of BC "sucking at everything, except hockey (for now)" is not borne out by the facts?

Of course its not borne out by the facts. BC is ranked #28 of all the college football programs during the BCS era. So this comment of " BC sucking at everything, except hockey " is just silly and borne out out of bitterness and frustration, and you need to understand that such feelings can indeed understandably obscure reality when such emotion based thinking its allowed to take hold of a person's more rational, fact based, thought processes. So if you view such comments from this perspective you can understand the emotion behind such faulty observation skills, if nothing else. The facts are that BC went to a Bowl Game last year but were not very competitive in that Bowl Game against a PAC- 12 opponent and frankly they do have a ways to go to get back to being one of the top 25 or so football programs in the Country. BC has not been to the ACC Football Championship Game in 5 years ( since doing it back to back in 2007, 2008 ), and has not been back to the ACC Championship Game in Basketball since 2006 ( losing to Duke 78-76 ). These are just the the facts as well. It seems that most Uconn fans on this site apparently believe BC won't be competitive again. They could be right.... (or they could be wrong). Similarly, Uconn football is looking to get back to having a winning season football team after sharing the BE regular season reconstituted title with Pitt and WVU in 2010..Uconn football might turn it around quickly. Many here seem to believe they will. Who knows if this assessment is accurate or not. Their optimism may very well be merited in this regard, and I see nothing inappropriate for a football fan base with a new head coach not to a have an optimistic sense that a return to a winning season football team... and who knows, perhaps something much, much more substantial in national stature and accomplishments possibly as well... is right around the corner. Thats how I assess this anyway.