The View From Section 241 (or QQ) — BC | Page 3 | The Boneyard

The View From Section 241 (or QQ) — BC

In the next evolution of conferences(10years? more?) you’ve got to wonder if there may be a provision implemented regarding performance by a School in the conference. The promotion and demotion of teams in the Premier league in Europe has been brought up more than once on the yard. Schools commitment to competitiveness ebbs and flows. In relation to athletic resources commitment, BC is not the same as it was 20 years ago.(maybe it is and has just not kept up). If there were a competitiveness clause, swapping UConn in and BC out would be a no-brainer.
 
coachcap said:
FWIW, Maryland won't be jettisoned for basically the same reason that Oregon won't be. While the Ducks are underwritten by Nike, the Terps major donor is Under Armor.
Watching the BC game, we see that New Balance funds the Thunder chickens.
Expand ...
I can't believe New Balance is giving BCU all that much money. Under Armor gives a ton of dough to MD because the owner is an alum and likes to see his name in the paper. NB doesn't have that personal connection to BCU that I know of.
 
Waquoit said:
I can't believe New Balance is giving BCU all that much money. Under Armor gives a ton of dough to MD because the owner is an alum and likes to see his name in the paper. NB doesn't have that personal connection to BCU that I know of.
Expand ...

Maybe not money, but some clothing for the football team: New Balance and Boston College Expand Their Historic Sponsorship - Boston College Athletics

New Balance is based in Boston so they probably want to make sure the local teams don't go on the field naked.
 
pj said:
Maybe not money, but some clothing for the football team: New Balance and Boston College Expand Their Historic Sponsorship - Boston College Athletics

New Balance is based in Boston so they probably want to make sure the local teams don't go on the field naked.
Expand ...

List of Teams with NB Sponsorship


NCAA
Soccer
[th]
Leagues/Sport​
[/th][th]
Teams​
[/th]​
 
pj said:
UConn has passed BC in basketball, that much is obvious to everyone. But that UConn's passing of BC is permanent is speculative. It's surely proper to say that UConn's passing of BC seems to be permanent, but eternity is a long time, so it's reasonable to avoid the prediction that it is permanent.
Expand ...
nothing is permanent. the pain of watching basketball wither away in the AAC, is proof of that.
we did what we had to do in 2020, to keep the brand alive.

Everyone else is doing the same, but in the P2 era, they are ALSO doing what they can to keep others out.

That's where we differ. I don't think UConn has spent efforts keeping others out of basketball prominence, for our pockets' sake. We just rule on the court and then go home with our hardware. Oregon football has literally no hardware yet they rule the boardroom, cuz to them it's not about hardware; they found another way to make the money they want.

And same story with other "top" football schools who will never win a title but don't need to anymore. As long as they keep UConn and the other poverty schools out.
 
Last edited:
uconndogs said:
I think the bigger and more relevant question is how does BC fix a broken athletic department. You keep on losing in the major sports like they are and you won't have much of a following. Are they committed to major college athletics? The ACC money is great, but to what end?
Expand ...
Based on BC results it looks like they are just cashing the checks.
 
.-.
uconndogs said:
I think the bigger and more relevant question is how does BC fix a broken athletic department. You keep on losing in the major sports like they are and you won't have much of a following. Are they committed to major college athletics? The ACC money is great, but to what end?
Expand ...
BC needs to drop to FCS. Maybe even DII level. And no one in Boston will care, except hockey fans.
 
AllHusky said:
In the next evolution of conferences(10years? more?) you’ve got to wonder if there may be a provision implemented regarding performance by a School in the conference. The promotion and demotion of teams in the Premier league in Europe has been brought up more than once on the yard. Schools commitment to competitiveness ebbs and flows. In relation to athletic resources commitment, BC is not the same as it was 20 years ago.(maybe it is and has just not kept up). If there were a competitiveness clause, swapping UConn in and BC out would be a no-brainer.
Expand ...
Or, alternatively, there may be a consolidation of the teams that consistently perform well in the sports that matter (and right now that's just football). I think that's easier to do.

Every school will look after its own interests. Among the power conferences, there are the top teams that drive the bulk of conference media value, but they're also are the teams that do not but enjoy the benefits generated by the top teams because of history or geography. I would suggest that even among the top conferences the latter group is likely to be the majority. Assuming that's correct, it is very unlikely that those schools would support any change which would allow them to be "relegated". So if the top performing schools want to optimize their revenue stream, probably the best way to do it would be to leave their existing conferences and join smaller conferences made up of similarly performing schools.

An alternative to this would be to have dramatically different distributions within a conference based upon performance. It is interesting to see what those performance statistics might look like. I suppose it could be rankings or end of season success, but maybe it makes more sense if it were solely based upon media value, ratings, etc. The under performing schools might well agree to that in order to keep their conferences together, for at least a while longer, but, inevitably, that becomes a death spiral for them since unequal revenue would likely create an environment in which they could not compete at a higher level.

So where does that leave our Huskies? Probably on the outside, looking in unless the breakaway schools decide to monetize, March Madness, in which case our value skyrockets.
 
CL82 said:
inevitably, that becomes a death spiral for them since unequal revenue would likely create an environment in which they could not compete at a higher level.

So where does that leave our Huskies? Probably on the outside, looking in unless the breakaway schools decide to monetize, March Madness, in which case our value skyrockets.
Expand ...

I think this scenario puts UConn in a good place. The Huskies would be on a level with the P4 teams that have suffered a death spiral. That's an upgrade from where we stand now.

The reality is that the top teams will need a supply of second-tier teams to inflate their records. They can't just play each other and all end up 5-5 all the time, or have an arms race purchasing billion dollar teams to win like the Yankees did for a while. And if you need cannon fodder to let you have your 11-1 record, then you don't want all the games to be 70-0 blowouts, you want to give the cannon fodder enough resources to make the games interesting. So I think the second tier is not a very bad place to be.

The upheaval you are describing should create openings for UConn to make its case that it belongs in the second tier. As the top New England team and representative of a large untapped market with a record of athletic excellence and fan support, I think it will be a strong case.
 
pj said:
I think this scenario puts UConn in a good place. The Huskies would be on a level with the P4 teams that have suffered a death spiral. That's an upgrade from where we stand now.

The reality is that the top teams will need a supply of second-tier teams to inflate their records. They can't just play each other and all end up 5-5 all the time, or have an arms race purchasing billion dollar teams to win like the Yankees did for a while. And if you need cannon fodder to let you have your 11-1 record, then you don't want all the games to be 70-0 blowouts, you want to give the cannon fodder enough resources to make the games interesting. So I think the second tier is not a very bad place to be.

The upheaval you are describing should create openings for UConn to make its case that it belongs in the second tier. As the top New England team and representative of a large untapped market with a record of athletic excellence and fan support, I think it will be a strong case.
Expand ...
I hope you're right that this will create opportunities for Connecticut. It's a possibility, but I'm not convinced of it.

I think the model that makes the most sense is to cluster high producing teams together and pay them at a higher rate. Yes, you need what I've described in other threads as "the Washington Senators", but you don't have to pay them a premium to lose. This model would allow the high producing teams to get paid without subsidizing the lower producing teams Who would essentially be providing buy games to the top teams.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
Every school will look after its own interests. Among the power conferences, there are the top teams that drive the bulk of conference media value, but they're also are the teams that do not but enjoy the benefits generated by the top teams because of history or geography. I would suggest that even among the top conferences the latter group is likely to be the majority. Assuming that's correct, it is very unlikely that those schools would support any change which would allow them to be "relegated". So if the top performing schools want to optimize their revenue stream, probably the best way to do it would be to leave their existing conferences and join smaller conferences made up of similarly performing schools.

An alternative to this would be to have dramatically different distributions within a conference based upon performance. It is interesting to see what those performance statistics might look like. I suppose it could be rankings or end of season success, but maybe it makes more sense if it were solely based upon media value, ratings, etc. The under performing schools might well agree to that in order to keep their conferences together, for at least a while longer, but, inevitably, that becomes a death spiral for them since unequal revenue would likely create an environment in which they could not compete at a higher level.
Expand ...
I think the Big 10 and the SEC are the consolidation. And, there may be room for a third similar conference made up of schools from the ACC/Big12/other. Or, we'll still have 2 P2 light conferences. I think the biggest flaw in the P2 model is that name brand schools that historically have won, can't consistently do that anymore. Look at Oklahoma. They were 1st in the division or conference 15 times from 2000 and 2020 in the Big 12. I just don't think that can happen in the SEC. How will the fans feel if Oklahoma is a middle of the pack SEC school? We all know the correlation between attendance and winning.

But, if you look at the NFL, the top teams could generate more revenues than the lesser teams, but they have pooled their media rights and the league is very successful. I think the biggest flaw in the P2 is that name brand schools that historically have won, can't do that anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,146
Messages
4,554,767
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom