Toldedo newspaper: UConn success Clouds B1G pick | Page 3 | The Boneyard
.

Toldedo newspaper: UConn success Clouds B1G pick

Status
Not open for further replies.
blitz8ru said:
LOL we didn't start putting real money into athletics until 2000. From 1980-2000 we were playing D1 with D1AA funding for 32 sports. Since then we cut 5 sports (men's and women's fencing, men's swimming & diving, men's rowing, men's tennis, ironically rowing and fencing were our most accomplished sports) funding for FB has increased but has increased only marginally for the rest of the sports.
Expand ...

You are proud of this? Am I reading your response wrong?
 
“But it’s at least a foot in the door in that market and it was the best available option. Even with a program like UConn being the basketball power it is, the Big Ten would still pick Rutgers for the long term.”
Expand ...
I had to stop myself from laughing out loud from this ending line....in what world do these people live in to think that RU is a long term success??? What have they done to even warrant this type of thinking? If anything, they are going to do worse for awhile because they won't be playing anything close to a Big East/AAC schedule. It's going to be much harder. In basketball, well I won't even waste my time with that line of thought....

In the end, either the ACC or the B1G will win the war by signing us up. The ACC would be widely successful at locking up the East Coast with the addition of UConn and would ward off the B1G's attempt to penetrate this region. The B1G would solidify the NYC market by adding UConn. I don't care what sport drives the bus. UConn is a brand across the board and both those conferences are kicking themselves for not taking us. It will be interesting to see what occurs in the next few years. I think with the addition of Diaco, our FB team is going to add to that buyers remorse that those two conferences are having after our 2nd dual NC.
 
Stinger92860 said:
Where would all of the other acc teams go? Same for xii. That's over 20 schools and we would be down to 3 conferences. There is too much demand for regional content to have only 3 conferences left.
Expand ...

In my opinion, the ACC or the XII will not survive next round of conference realignment and it will be driven by UNC or Texas's decision. That would leave 4 major conferences with 16 to 20 schools each. If I had to bet, I would pick to ACC as the survivor.
 
Mr. Conehead said:
In my opinion, the ACC or the XII will not survive next round of conference realignment and it will be driven by UNC or Texas's decision. That would leave 4 major conferences with 16 to 20 schools each. If I had to bet, I would pick to ACC as the survivor.
Expand ...
I agree that the ACC is in a better position....The Big 12 will fall apart once Texas and OU pick up and move. Okie St will likely tag along with OU and someone will join Texas. If they go Pac-12 look for Kansas to go to B1G, WVU maybe to ACC(??? The ACC swallowed a big one academically for Louisville), leaving Baylor, K-State, TCU, Texas Tech, and Iowa St scrambling....The ACC has too many schools that have no where to go that losing FSU, UNC, and probably Clemson won't be the death knell that losing Texas and OU would be for the Big 12.
 
freescooter said:
When it comes down to it, the Big argument is very similar to what you see politicians say when they screw up. They are realizing that adding Rutgers was a mistake, but they are stuck with the Rutties so what can they say except "we still support our pick," and"We are looking long term." To call Rutgers a dumpster fire is an insult to dumpster fires. There's an old Irish saying, Too cute by half. That describes Jim Delany's Rutgers move. I will say, though, that saying Rutgers was a disaster isn't the same as saying they should have picked UConn. I still believe that the ACC is the most logical and appropriate home for the Huskies. Similar institutions, traditional rivals as well as some not exactly traditional one but rivals none the less. If you don't think Duke and North Carolina care what UConn basketball does, you haven't met a Duke or UNC fan.
Expand ...
I've met a lot of both and they don't. The only thing Duke fans KNOW is that Langdon was fouled.
 
This guy just said the B1G did make the right decision in taking RU over Uconn. http://www.landgrantholyland.com/20...ig-ten-shouldnt-have-added-uconn-over-rutgers
This quote is a classic "in terms of pure, New York City, ahem, footprint, if the Nate Silver study is to be believed, there are four times as many Rutgers fans in the area, and given the terrible performance of UConn on the football field as of late, there is little reason to suggest that has dramatically changed. Given that football revenue vastly outpaces that of basketball, the Huskies' domination in basketball wouldn't be enough to justify a bump up in league. By virtually every other metric, the Huskies lag behind."
 
I don't see this as being really complicated. The B1G took Rutgers over UCONN because of market size and POTENTIAL share. If Rutgers uses the B1G affiliation to improve its abysmal athletic programs then it is logical to assume that given its huge market POTENTIAL, Rutgers will grow its following significantly.

I see one major obstacle to realizing on all this POTENTIAL. To grow their following and market share Rutgers will need on field and court performance. They will need to win. The big problem there of course is that they never do. In fact, whenever a little success comes their way they always manage to screw up and take multiple steps backwards. And sure, football is a lot more important than basketball, but when you can't put 1,000 fannies in your gym for a men's hoops game I think that is pretty symptomatic of something very, very wrong.

And do not mistake growing one's market share for big draws from Michigan and Ohio fans. That's market share the B1G already has from the great traveling fan base of those programs. You could play those games in New Jersey or Wyoming, doesn't matter, those folks are coming no matter what.

Bottom line. UCONN wins and football, even with the debacle under Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum, has been a dramatic success given it's recent entry into big-time football.

UCONN will continue to win....it always does. Rutgers will continue to lose.....it always does.
 
Sea Goat said:
Rutroh's continual missteps help IMO. The B1G hasn't accomplished what it set out to do and, thus, UConn is necessary to penetrate the NYC market. The ACC, a distant second choice for me, sees an opening to thwart the B1G's strategy in NYC by taking the only team left that matters in the market. Something is going to happen sooner than later, IMO. I just hope it's the B1G.
Expand ...


I am not sure change is imminent, I think we don;t get a sniff until our football team shows some marketed improvement… next year is key. I like to be wrong on this though!
 
message to Rutgers - if you feel the need to argue that you're successful then you're not very successful afterall...
 
Limbo Land said:
I am not sure change is imminent, I think we don;t get a sniff until our football team shows some marketed improvement… next year is key. I like to be wrong on this though!
Expand ...

Our next opportunity will come when there is another shake-up. Athletic performance matters only to the extent it drives and sustains market share. Again, if performance and academics mattered in the least, UCONN would already be in the ACC or B1G. Put another way, we could go undefeated this coming football season and play in a major bowl, we will not be going anywhere unless someone believes we bring incremental market share resulting in incremental dollars PER member.
 
2014 Spring - UConn, PATH billboard.jpg


Some one is trying, saw this on the PATH from Hoboken to Midtown the night of the Final.
 
uconndogs said:
Our next opportunity will come when there is another shake-up. Athletic performance matters only to the extent it drives and sustains market share. Again, if performance and academics mattered in the least, UCONN would already be in the ACC or B1G. Put another way, we could go undefeated this coming football season and play in a major bowl, we will not be going anywhere unless someone believes we bring incremental market share resulting in incremental dollars PER member.
Expand ...

This.

What matters is that any potential new members must add to the pie for the conference's current members, not deduct from it. Rutgers and UMD, with their larger population bases, were apparently able to demonstrate this potential. If Delany is truly serious about planting a B1G Flag in NYC, he will go after UCONN and another school to reach 16, before negotiating the next Tier 1 media deal. AAU is a desired status, not a required one.
 
This quote from article pretty well sums up what I had been thinking about New York...


“There’s a skewed perspective of college sports in the New York marketplace,” said Lee Berke, a New York-based sports media consultant who advises more than 30 pro and college teams.

“The reality is that if you take a look at television ratings for sports properties in New York, by far it’s the local teams that drive the agenda, and that’s the pro teams. They dominate the headlines, the back pages of the tabloids year-round.

“There’s certain instances where college basketball can grab attention for a while. You look at St. John’s in the 80s, UConn right now. But the reality is it’s still a pro sports town.”

Read more at http://www.toledoblade.com/College/...-clouds-Big-Ten-pick.html#8W4zVVuvmfMA1UBv.99
 
buggsy said:
If RU's success is only periodic, what is UCONN's... since RU has had more overall wins, and a better winning percentage than UCONN...and less losing seasons than UCONN? Please answer that. You talk as if UCONN has had a more successful history than Rutgers, and that is flat out false.

RU has not historically played major college football. For the first 100 years or so, our biggest rivals were the IVY's , Colgate, Lehigh, Swarthmore, etc. Only in 1980 did we go full scholarship.
Expand ...
When was the last time Rutgers had a parade? Never? Whoops.
 
I know it's a football centric world, but the Rutgers just don't seem to realize how sick the athletic department is. When you can't put 1,000 fannies in the seats at a men's hoops game you have a problem that goes beyond football and CR.
 
TRest said:
I think we can all stipulate that Rutgers has been half-assing its attempts at big time college athletics for years.
Expand ...
True. You don't only have 1 NCAA NC to your name in school athletics history unless you really just don't care about athletics. Thankfully we've started to get more serious about all sports over the past 5yrs (FB since 2000) but the changes will be slow due to no real capital to invest from donors (we really need a couple $100mill to turn things around in all sports). Thankfully we'll slowly accumulate the needed amount from big ten revenue and donor revenue over the next decade. We can only go up from here. Good thing about the big ten invite is that our school admin can't renege on athletic spending/focus (read, we can't half-ass it anymore).
 
Stinger92860 said:
You are proud of this? Am I reading your response wrong?
Expand ...
No, I'm not proud of it. Just stating a fact. It is what it is. Spending or focusing on athletics was looked down upon for many decades. That kind of thinking has only started to change as new admin come in and the old ones retire.

Still there is a lot of backlash from faculty as I'm sure you have read from star ledger and NY Times articles on athletic spending. We've got to start spending and investing sometime and the initial money has to come from somewhere (the state isn't going to pitch in as they do in Connecticut, btw NJ gives RU about 18% of it's annual operating budget of around $2billion). We're decades behind where we should be in regards to athletics right now. So we're stuck playing the catchup game. I expect us to be an athletic power (across most sports) within 20yrs with our admin and AD on the same page with pursuing athletic success and with big ten and donor revenue flowing in.
 
New York is a pro sports town. So is Boston and there is no denying it. However, there is no doubt that UConn fans will invade both those cities on a moment's notice to support our teams.

UConn's football value, re: NYC is that we can help bracket it with Rutgers for the B1G or help the ACC keep a strong presence in NYC along with ND.

Admittedly, the Pasqualoni years damaged our growth and recent reputation as a FB fast riser and it will take a while to rehab that slide. We can't count on a boost from football for a while, IMO. Diaco must be successful immediately and give us 3 years of steady success. Then, when inevitable poachers appear he either has to stay or, if he leaves, the next coach must continue that success. I figure 5-6 years of success must occur to offset the damage done by Pasqualoni.

OK, from a FB standpoint, it looks bleak. But don't give up hope. For a conference with it's own network UConn should be a near no brainer for the discerning commish. Why? Content.

UConn's women's team are regional favorites with fans in western Mass, Vermont, New Hampshire and into Maine. And while NE fans wouldn't warm up to Calhoun the way CT fans did who is not going to want to root for Kevin Ollie? Add in Field Hockey, Soccer, Baseball, Hockey and other emerging Olympic sports and UConn can be positioned as "New England's Team". If UConn were to build on it academic growth by culling the best and the brightest New England students we become "New England's Flagship Institution."

A certain conference commish would love to be able to extend his conference's footprint to all of New England and effectively lock up the entire eastern seaboard from Maine to DC and all the way back to the Midwest. Imagine the value of adding 6 entire states for the BTN?

How could Delany not wonder what could be? UConn to the B1G is a no brainer for the master conference builder. It could cement the B1G as the premier conference in the country.
 
blitz8ru said:
No, I'm not proud of it. Just stating a fact. It is what it is. Spending or focusing on athletics was looked down upon for many decades. That kind of thinking has only started to change as new admin come in and the old ones retire.

Still there is a lot of backlash from faculty as I'm sure you have read from star ledger and NY Times articles on athletic spending. We've got to start spending and investing sometime and the initial money has to come from somewhere (the state isn't going to pitch in as they do in Connecticut, btw NJ gives RU about 18% of it's annual operating budget of around $2billion). We're decades behind where we should be in regards to athletics right now. So we're stuck playing the catchup game. I expect us to be an athletic power (across most sports) within 20yrs with our admin and AD on the same page with pursuing athletic success and with big ten and donor revenue flowing in.
Expand ...
Are there any plans for demolishing/replacing the RAC? You guys upgraded the football stadium when you couldn't originally fill it so I was just wondering if there were plans to do the same to the RAC even though you guys don't fill that either. (Those remarks sound like jabs towards your attendance but I know you guys have increased FB attendance numbers and will continue to do so now that your in the B1G. The same might happen in bball?) Also, how long until you guys get full revenue from the B1G? This will obviously impact how quickly you guys can turn it around.
 
UCFBfan said:
Are there any plans for demolishing/replacing the RAC? You guys upgraded the football stadium when you couldn't originally fill it so I was just wondering if there were plans to do the same to the RAC even though you guys don't fill that either. (Those remarks sound like jabs towards your attendance but I know you guys have increased FB attendance numbers and will continue to do so now that your in the B1G. The same might happen in bball?) Also, how long until you guys get full revenue from the B1G? This will obviously impact how quickly you guys can turn it around.
Expand ...
The problem with the "B1G will solve all our attendance issues" thinking is that RU was in the best basketball conference for years and never sniffed the tourney. The fan base has atrophied as a result. I doubt they show up now to see Michigan State or Indiana basketball, when they weren't showing up for UConn and Cuse.
 
TRest said:
The problem with the "B1G will solve all our attendance issues" thinking is that RU was in the best basketball conference for years and never sniffed the tourney. The fan base has atrophied as a result. I doubt they show up now to see Michigan State or Indiana basketball, when they weren't showing up for UConn and Cuse.
Expand ...
Good point. I'd still be curious if they plan on replacing the RAC with all their new found money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
3,571
Total visitors
3,715
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,546
Messages
4,400,864
Members
10,214
Latest member
illini2013


.
..
Top Bottom